ATOS Medical Assessment .

[chaotic_russ]

Always amazes me that so many people, particularly those who dislike the current system, apparently know so many fraudsters, but never report them.

they are the one's that pass the atos test though , I know of some who have been reported and been tested again by atos and found unfit for work and then run the half marithon .
they the same person who retested them found a women dieing of cancer fit for work , while on appeal the said women died while waiting .
it seems after these reforms that the system is still broken , I for one am still waiting for a home visit from an atos doctor while finding out I may have cancer and may loose a toe/foot or 2 .

[TheAnimus]

Firstly; Please respect the rules on swearing.

Secondly; Disabled people pay in too, that was the point. Many while doing the jobs that left them disabled. It's called National Insurance for a reason. It's not your money it's ours, the taxpayers, the same people who decided they'd like a social safety net, just in case, badly enough to pay for it. If you could would you opt out? I doubt it.

Didn't Gordon Brown do away with the distinction between NI for social insurance and instead made it general taxation straight to the treasury? IIRC at the time it was due to the chronic shortfalls they had.

Thirdly; The detected fraud rate is 0.5%, despite dedicated departments for detection and constant financial monitoring by Experian.

I thought that was the rate that they had proved in a court of law?

The detected crime rate against me as a cyclist is 100%, the prosecuted is 0%. I've not cycled for 5 months now (despite being very keen before, the last summer insanely so). I was knocked off by a hit and run, I had a partial plate and witnesses. I was stationary at the time in a cycle escape box at traffic lights, I couldn't have possibly been doing anything wrong, wearing best high vis and lights that wiggle has reviews of. Because I wasn't injured requiring hospital treatment (I refused an ambulance because I knew I was fine, parachute training is something everyone should learn!) the police didn't give two hoots. It was reported to them by 3 different 999 calls, it was a busy street. I have no idea how many people gave me their names n number, a lady wrote them all down for me, we're talking double digits. One person even wrote down a description of the driver.

Due to the lack of injury, the fact the only damage was to my clothes and helmet it wasn't counted as a serious offense. I didn't even get a proper crime number from the police until 3 days later.

This might sound off topic, but it illustrates the point when you compare statistics like that. What we have is an un-known, that anecdotally is higher than official. I snitched on someone who was subletting a room cash in hand to an employe of mine after I found out they were getting housing benefit. That was 2 years ago. I'll let you know when something happens.

The main thing here is to not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need to reduce costs, prioritising it so only the very worst, the most in need, get the limited amount of support we can offer appears to me, to be the thing to do. I will admit to finding the media reaction to this somewhat exasperating at times, the growth we've had over the last 10 years can not continue. We are borrowing money to fund this as is, its not nice, but its the only reality. Watching some peoples reaction to the death of Thatcher I think is rather telling of how they view their politics as a war, rather than something to create and maintain a better society. Did Thatcher screw the pooch dropping the industry subsidies as fast and as hard as she did, in retrospect undoubtedly yes, would it have been worse if she had continued to let inflation continue, to keep the subsidy for these select few, yes. Sometimes the best interests result in difficult decisions, run a company which is struggling to make a profit, you don't want to get rid of staff, but if you don't everyone loses. It's really hard, but you have to make these choices. I would love to hear a credible suggestion to avoid having to do these assessments, but how else can you curtail that growth?

[wasabi]

Firstly; Please respect the rules on swearing.

I didn't swear. Given that somebody earlier called ATOS 'lying scumbag murderers' on this thread and my reporting of the post got ignored.... bias much?

Secondly; Disabled people pay in too, that was the point. Many while doing the jobs that left them disabled. It's called National Insurance for a reason. It's not your money it's ours, the taxpayers, the same people who decided they'd like a social safety net, just in case, badly enough to pay for it. If you could would you opt out? I doubt it.

I'd opt out of NI in a flash. the problem is precisely that it isn't insurance - it doens't protect those who paid in. It has become a right. The NHS is appalling, and huge amounts of welfare goes to people who don't put much in while it goves virtually no protection to someone like me who has worked hard and has savings. By saving for my retirement, I won't qualify for anything.

I've reported someone for illegally subletting a council house. They got booted out, but they got reallocated to a nice new ecohome a few months later with a different social housing outfit nearby. Waste of my time.

Lesson. The system isn't prepared to cut these people loose.

[chuckskull]

Didn't Gordon Brown do away with the distinction between NI for social insurance and instead made it general taxation straight to the treasury? IIRC at the time it was due to the chronic shortfalls they had.

Sounds like something he'd do, but even so that's just changing the system not the concept.

I thought that was the rate that they had proved in a court of law?

In police lingo a detection is a solved crime.

This might sound off topic, but it illustrates the point when you compare statistics like that. What we have is an un-known, that anecdotally is higher than official. I snitched on someone who was subletting a room cash in hand to an employe of mine after I found out they were getting housing benefit. That was 2 years ago. I'll let you know when something happens.

Report them again, it will give them an excuse to check again and disprove any "oh it's just temporary" excuse, but remember they may legally be considered a lodger, not a subtenant and might be acting perfectly legally. It's a pointlessly complicated area of the law.

The main thing here is to not throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need to reduce costs, prioritising it so only the very worst, the most in need, get the limited amount of support we can offer appears to me, to be the thing to do. I will admit to finding the media reaction to this somewhat exasperating at times, the growth we've had over the last 10 years can not continue. We are borrowing money to fund this as is, its not nice, but its the only reality. Watching some peoples reaction to the death of Thatcher I think is rather telling of how they view their politics as a war, rather than something to create and maintain a better society. Did Thatcher screw the pooch dropping the industry subsidies as fast and as hard as she did, in retrospect undoubtedly yes, would it have been worse if she had continued to let inflation continue, to keep the subsidy for these select few, yes. Sometimes the best interests result in difficult decisions, run a company which is struggling to make a profit, you don't want to get rid of staff, but if you don't everyone loses. It's really hard, but you have to make these choices. I would love to hear a credible suggestion to avoid having to do these assessments, but how else can you curtail that growth?

When approached in those terms, then the problem isn't disability or NEETs but pensioners, who account for 2/3rs of the welfare budget and are the fastest growing demographic due to our ageing population, but they're politically almost untouchable, in fact pensions were just increased by 2.5% and increasing the state pension age, despite the large increase in life expectancy is equally taboo. Depending on which survey you read public perception of disability fraud is 50 to 100+ times greater than the detected rate, which is a big part of the problem, with the public discourse. The media has a lot to answer for on that front.

[chuckskull]

I didn't swear. Given that somebody earlier called ATOS 'lying scumbag murderers' on this thread and my reporting of the post got ignored.... bias much?

Yes you did, that's why it says "Edited by Chuckskull" on your post, I removed it. "Lying murdering scumbags", while a very strong opinion does contravene any HEXUS rules, swearing does.

I'd opt out of NI in a flash. the problem is precisely that it isn't insurance - it doens't protect those who paid in. It has become a right. The NHS is appalling, and huge amounts of welfare goes to people who don't put much in while it goves virtually no protection to someone like me who has worked hard and has savings. By saving for my retirement, I won't qualify for anything.

I've reported someone for illegally subletting a council house. They got booted out, but they got reallocated to a nice new ecohome a few months later with a different social housing outfit nearby. Waste of my time.

Lesson. The system isn't prepared to cut these people loose.

You'd really opt out of all aspects of the social safety net? No NHS, free education, guarantee of not starving to death etc. Should I assume then that you've paid every penny of expense for all your social needs since you were born, a birth that was likely at taxpayers expense btw. Can I also assume that should something utterly terrible happen to you tomorrow, for example getting hit by a bus and left severely disabled you have already made plans to pay for your own care and expenses for your and all your dependants for the rest of your life? Because I think that is extremely unlikely about as likely as you never having benefited, directly or indirectly at all from these programs. Not all benefits are means tested, disability benefits in particular aren't. Your savings do not affect your entitlement.

It does protect you and you know it. Also the whole point of insurance is that the payout will be greater than the pay in. Why would anyone bother if it wasn't? It's the collectivisation of risk.

They breached their tenancy and were evicted, likely fined and barred from council housing too, were you expecting a firing squad? Also that's one report, not "several". You don't get to complain about criminals you don't report getting away with it, regardless of your opinion of the criminal justice system, you're abetting their crime by turning a blind a eye.

[TheAnimus]

Sounds like something he'd do, but even so that's just changing the system not the concept.

Not really, because it changes the idea about it been something that you've put aside with the sole intent of caring for social insurance issues. Now your NI contributions can be used for olympic games.

In police lingo a detection is a solved crime.

Which I why i hate these kind of figures, it reminds me of brass eye, crime we know nothing about is going through the roof or the whole if we change the graph to foxes heads on sticks, the word cruel starts to flash.

Saying that the detection is only 0.5% is stating the problem, most people think it considerably higher, now the problem is no one can definitely say that it is or isn't. What I will say is a quick walk around my parents village in Cornwall and you won't think its 0.5% there. Carrick has many social problems and so it would be unfair to say its suggestive of the whole population, but it would be easy to see that a lot of the people there are recieving a large amount of state support yet able to do activities such as surfing. Sometimes its easy to just jump to conclusions, I nearly ended in a fist fight when I parked in a disabled spot badly ran to my car, jumped in, then out of my car and ran fast, I was running with an epi-pen for the disabled person who needed it. The ambulance came for them in the end, but the same person had watched me "hog" the space for half an hour, trying to explain the situation to them was interesting. These things can look very bad, but have very honest underpinnings. But the issue here is that it isn't just a simple we cut fraudulent claims, many people will be who think they deserve and need the level of income support, yet at a pinch can work. They aren't claiming fraudulently, just the definition of being most needy is going to make them ineligible. They would still be viewed as a scrounger. It is this kind of shift of perception, people are bundling the honest opportunist with the willful defrauder.

Report them again, it will give them an excuse to check again and disprove any "oh it's just temporary" excuse, but remember they may legally be considered a lodger, not a subtenant and might be acting perfectly legally. It's a pointlessly complicated area of the law.

I'll do it again then, I promise I'll post back if I hear anything.

When approached in those terms, then the problem isn't disability or NEETs but pensioners, who account for 2/3rs of the welfare budget and are the fastest growing demographic due to our ageing population, but they're politically almost untouchable, in fact pensions were just increased by 2.5% and increasing the state pension age, despite the large increase in life expectancy is equally taboo. Depending on which survey you read public perception of disability fraud is 50 to 100+ times greater than the detected rate, which is a big part of the problem, with the public discourse. The media has a lot to answer for on that front.

It is going to be both. I'm not expected to get a penny of my pension until I'm 75. The thing that will be odd is my PHI ends at 65, which means if I ever have a ailment that prevents me from working I'll be uninsured.

However the care bill for disabilities has been rising higher than that of the basic pension. The elephant in the room is the 'blank cheque pensions' or defined benefit that the taxpayer is liable for. A friend of mine who's from Cyprus was telling me about his parents problems, they are set to retire next year, his father had a pension worth about 500k eur, that works out to about 25k eur a year. He has just been told that this pension pot is been taken away, he will have instead 8k. This was a private pension and so nothing to do with the state.

For a very select few state employees they get pensions effectively worth millions, an MP for instance would need an annuity worth (very roughly) about £1.4M, thank heavens we have so few women MPs! I believe for certain ones that qualify their pension annuity will cost about £2M.

[wasabi]

Yes you did, that's why it says "Edited by Chuckskull" on your post, I removed it. "Lying murdering scumbags", while a very strong opinion does contravene any HEXUS rules, swearing does.

I didn't as you well know, but you have the power and clearly are prepared to selectively use it.

You'd really opt out of all aspects of the social safety net? No NHS, free education, guarantee of not starving to death etc. Should I assume then that you've paid every penny of expense for all your social needs since you were born, a birth that was likely at taxpayers expense btw. Can I also assume that should something utterly terrible happen to you tomorrow, for example getting hit by a bus and left severely disabled you have already made plans to pay for your own care and expenses for your and all your dependants for the rest of your life? Because I think that is extremely unlikely about as likely as you never having benefited, directly or indirectly at all from these programs. Not all benefits are means tested, disability benefits in particular aren't. Your savings do not affect your entitlement.

I don't have an alternative in place at the moment because the government is already forcibly taking a large chunk of my money. If they weren't I would be able to choose my health provider. Many countries have compulsory medical insurance allowing indiviual to make a choice, not an awful NHS. German inlaws fear for my wife's health due to her being lumbered with the NHS here.

Education isn't part of NI so is an irrelevant argument.

It does protect you and you know it. Also the whole point of insurance is that the payout will be greater than the pay in. Why would anyone bother if it wasn't? It's the collectivisation of risk.

It protects me but not very well and takes more than it gives. And saying the 'payout will be greater than the pay in' is precisely the problem. We're paying out more than is being put in. Basic economics 101 says that does not work.

[chuckskull]

I really hope they don't moderate it.

I think you create a lot of problems when you let someone feel they are being oppressed when they are being offensive. So long as there is no incitement of violence it is a good thing to let someone work out their views and hopefully realise the blatant hypocrisy of them, realise that it is in fact they who are the monster and change.

Censoring it, not letting them air it, never helps achieve that aim.

^ This.

However, religion has nothing to do with this discussion. Thus I expect that line of conversation to end right now, or I'll just delete every post about it.

[chuckskull]

I didn't as you well know, but you have the power and clearly are prepared to selectively use it.

All moderator actions are logged. I can prove you evaded the swear filter, specifically the word I changed to "mick" in your post. I chose not only to go to the effort of rephrasing your post rather than deleting it, but also applied no sanction to your account. Hardly an abuse of power.

In fact, I'll send you a PM with a screenshot.

[wasabi]

All moderator actions are logged. I can prove you evaded the swear filter, specifically the word I changed to "mick" in your post. I chose not only to go to the effort of rephrasing your post rather than deleting it, but also applied no sanction to your account. Hardly an abuse of power.

In fact, I'll send you a PM with a screenshot.

OK. Go to the Hexus search box.

Type the 'offensive' word there.

Find the hundreds and hundreds of examples of precisely that word in precisely that context.

I accept your apology

[g8ina]

Actually, I am of the opinion that this thread has run its usefulness.

Anyone affected by ATOS is more than welcome to make their comments, but when a thread degenerates into racial / religious stuff, and Im not pointing any fingers, I think it's time to draw the line.

However as my fellow Mod chuckskull has already given fair warning I'll just add my voice to his.

Last chance.

[chuckskull]

OK. Go to the Hexus search box.

Type the 'offensive' word there.

Find the hundreds and hundreds of examples of precisely that word in precisely that context.

I accept your apology

Thank you for reporting these breaches of HEXUS rules. I'll address them now.

I do not owe you an apology and you'd do well to drop your antagonistic attitude toward moderators.

[jigger]

I didn't record it, I took someone with me though. Always take someone with you, everything you do has a meaning to them i.e. going alone = you know how successfully navigate to anywhere, you have no problems getting around, you have no problems being on your own. It doesn't matter if doing this a one off for the day used all your energy or put you on the verge of a panic attack, that doesn't count, the important details do no matter to these people.

You can request to have the medical report they compiled printed off and sent to you (don't ask ATOS, I think you ask DWP for it). The document should have the name of the person who saw you on it. Be prepared for the document to be full of lies.

I got 0 points the first time and I appealed. It took forever to get around to the tribunial as the system is totally hammered with appeals, I won though and it only took about 15 minutes! Of course that is when the cycle starts again and within a couple of months I was sent a letter asking me to come to another medical, which of course they gave me 0.
I kind of gave up as the stress from appealing nearly killed me, which is what they want really... they want you stop claiming or push you over the edge so you kill yourself (believe me they have pushed people to suicide).

If that's the case this ATOS firm and the DWP are over ruling the Law. Surly if they did this for a second time they would or at least should be in contempt of the court?

It seems we are paying for the assessment, they get it wrong, cause god knows what to happen to the people involved, we then pay for the appeal and pay again for another assessment after ATOS and the DWP have been over ruled.

[Ferral]

A discussion about current events and things that upset people are more than welcome at HEXUS, good debate etc.

However, old school flaming and directing abuse at another member is not allowed, regardless of your opinion you don't slur other members in any way shape or form. You can put valid points across without aiming specific abusive comments at someone else.

Secondly as a fair and friendly warning, it is not a good idea to be hurling abuse towards Admin or Mods, everyone knows this. It is the same on any forum on the net.

Please keep this on track everyone.

I myself or the Moderators don't want to have to start handing out warnings and infractions or even bans, I have done it in the past and will have to again no doubt in the future, hopefully not today though.

Thanks

[Smudger]

I wouldn't describe the NHS as awful. I think it's pretty great. I've used it many times, and not died once.

[TheAnimus]

I wouldn't describe the NHS as awful. I think it's pretty great. I've used it many times, and not died once.

A good example is an event that happened to a family member. I have limited medical knowledge, no formal training, but I've read a lot about different bits, I know what the best practice for many things should be so I was surprised they didn't get an MRI. Two years on the cost of not doing that small upfront expense has meant that the NHS will be paying hundreds of thousands of pounds. To the sufferer it means they will be in needless pain for the rest of their life.

I hate quoting specifics like this, but there is a lot that is messed up with the NHS. This is why I get so pissed off when people start harping on about it as if it is some fragile deity. It is slow, inefficient and cruel. If our only yardstick is that on mean-average its better than the USA, then frankly I don't want to play that game.

It wastes money left right and centre, whilst those responsible have no repercussions for their actions. We already see the middle class going for health holidays to India for surgery and Poland for orthodontics, rather than wait for surgery on the NHS. That is not a good trend, soon that will mean only the very poorest or conditions the most expensive have no option but to fall back on the NHS. If you'd paid the tax I had, you'd demand the best health care. We're not getting it, we need to look at what we can improve, we also need to abandon the new labour style we've just spent an extra £100000 on it, isn't that good! attitude and focus on quality care being value for money.