|
Post by dianep on Dec 21, 2012 14:33:16 GMT 1
Nick Thanks we will be taking as much adivce as we cn get. No proiblem getting the fit note, you're right the doctoer is fed up with the dwp. we recieved 3 letters today, one stating he needs to be refered for a medical with atos again, one stating the firt note from 11/12 to 17/12 has run out and we need to send a new one, thats complete rubbish as there was no fit note from 11/12-17/12! And the medical questionairre. The situation is mad, he is not hopefull of pass ing the medical as they have recently failed him. We also had a similar situation last year when the medical was failed in april and then the tribunal overturned the desicion in october and reinsataed the benefit. As the new failed medical was in june is the timing correct of should they have waited until 12 months after the dtae of the tribunal decision in our favour?
|
|
|
Post by jetsetwilly on Dec 21, 2012 14:47:03 GMT 1
I might just be tempted to get as much info as I can then have a go as a LIP I might try for, say �1 million to cover lost opportunities etc then settle for half that ?? HAHA I live in hope Then again my case would be 'in the public interest' ? N'est ce pas ?? I tried the Public Law project but the didnt even respond or acknowledge my email Ive just Emailed the 'Public Interest Lawyers' to ask their opinion
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 15, 2013 21:27:53 GMT 1
In answer to a question by Emma Lou Cook (Aka 'Chugger') over the number of Disability Living Allowance claims in the Birmingham area Number of DLA claims (Birmingham) 890 ----- Up to 3 months 1,090 ----- 3 to 6 months 2,090 ----- 6 months to 1 year 3,880 ----- 1 to 2 years 10,750 ----- 2 to 5 years 45,950 ----- 5 years and over 64,650 ----- Total number of claims The above are all live DLA claims as of February 2012 (the latest date available) recorded by DWP on claims data tables. Now compared with February 2011880 ----- Up to 3 months 970 ----- 3 to 6 months 2,070 ----- 6 months to 1 year 4,110 ----- 1 to 2 years 10,990 ----- 2 to 5 years 44,420 ----- 5 years and over 63,440 ----- Total number of claims Mobility awards (working age claimants) as of February 2012 16,010 ----- Higher rate 16,570 ----- Lower rate 4,850 ----- Nil awards (where award made but no payment) 37,430 ----- Total Care awards (working age) as of February 2012 8,220 ----- Higher rate 12,020 ----- Middle rate 13,360 ----- Lower rate 3,830 ----- Nil awards (where award made but no payment) 37,430 ----- Total Source DWP longitudinal data tables 83.244.183.180/100pc/dla/ccla/carepay/ccclient/a_carate_r_ccla_c_carepay_p_ccclient_working_age_feb12.htmlEmma: You can also work out average value of award by using the following link to table (just search for Birmingham). If you want to vary date just back space and re-input. 83.244.183.180/100pc/dla/ccla/cnage/a_cawklyamt_r_ccla_c_cnage_feb12.html Numbers on incapacity benefits & Severe Disablement Allowance (Birmingham)31,980 -- Total 0,020 -- IB ST(L) 0.030 -- IB ST(H) 13,780 -- IB LT 14,320 -- IB Credits 3,840 -- SDA Link here to ib caseload 83.244.183.180/100pc/ibsda/ccla/ccbencod/a_carate_r_ccla_c_ccbencod_feb12.htmlESA Case load (Birmingham)17, 100 -- Total 990 -- Unknown 9,570 -- Assessment phase 3,900 -- Wrag 2,640 -- Support Group Link here: 83.244.183.180/100pc/esa/ccla/esa_phase/ib_mig/a_carate_r_ccla_c_esa_phase_p_ib_mig_non_ib_reassessed_claim_feb12.htmlPension Credit (Guarantee & Savings) (Birmingham)20,010 - 83.244.183.180/100pc/pc/ccla/cnage/pctype/a_carate_r_ccla_c_cnage_p_pctype_both_guarantee_and_savings_credit_feb12.htmlState Pension (all graduations)152,540 - with majority being CAT 'A' 83.244.183.180/100pc/sp/ccla/cat/a_carate_r_ccla_c_cat_feb12.htmlJobseeker's Allowance 51,510 - of which 500 have five or more children 83.244.183.180/100pc/jsa/ccla/deps/a_carate_r_ccla_c_deps_feb12.htmlIncome Support39,750 83.244.183.180/100pc/is/ccla/cnage/a_carate_r_ccla_c_cnage_feb12.html
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 20, 2013 19:01:30 GMT 1
hi again. sorry if this is in the wrong place. i'm filling in the ESA 50 and am not sure which boxes to tick for the various descriptors. for example in descriptor 1 there are several boxes for distances i can walk and one for going up steps. do i tick all the distances because all score some points. eg, if i tick 1(A) cannot walk 50 metres, do i also need to tick 200 metres? or, do i choose one distance only or one distance for walking plus one for steps? i've read oodles of guides and this is not specifically addressed. now, i understand that i could be being extremely dense and that the answer is obvious to everyone else but, it isn't to me and it's driving me mad! on the IB form it told you to either 'tick one box only' or 'tick all that apply' but, it doesn't on ESA 50. maybe a clue can be gleaned from the ESA 85 where the HCP is advised to select one box only but, let's say i selected only box A (50 metres) and she disagreed with this but, agrees that i cannot walk 200 metres, would the fact that i didn't tick this box mean that i have denied myself the 6 points available for that distance by not ticking it? the same applies to ' 'picking up and moving things', one box or all three? again there are different points available for them. basically, i suppose i'm asking do you tick one box per descriptor or all that apply to that descriptor
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 20, 2013 19:25:12 GMT 1
It's one box only floydpink per descriptor :-)
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 20, 2013 19:36:49 GMT 1
Thanks, you've saved my sanity! so, i choose the descriptor i think most appropriate and they agree or disagree and choose another or the big fat zero? plus, you have to choose between steps or 'walking' (mobilising a certain distance)? that's a bit of a con isn't it? this was the descriptor that started me panicking in the first place. i thought i was ready to print off the final draft and noticed for the first time that mobilising and steps were both descriptor one! basically, it's the same as IB50 without saying so, then?
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 20, 2013 20:54:10 GMT 1
Choose the highest scoring descriptor between walking and steps but make it clear in the comments box (if applicable) that you have a problem with both. The whole things a con I hate to say it but it's true!
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 20, 2013 21:14:10 GMT 1
thanks again
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 20, 2013 22:43:25 GMT 1
thanks again hi again. i've just had somebody on another site tell me it's one box per question. descriptor one involves two questions (walking and steps) so, it requires two answers. just to be doubly sure, i only need to tick just one box for descriptor one?
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 0:35:01 GMT 1
i'm sorry to be a pest but, i'm panicking again now. for each descriptor,, i just tick one box- including 'picking up and moving things'?
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 21, 2013 2:08:49 GMT 1
Try not to panic and never leave things till too late at night (like I do!)
Calm is needed...
Can you move around and use steps without difficulty?
Answer Yes or No. - if ANY of the below answers apply tick the box.
If you answered 'Yes' you have indicated no problem and you are asked to go to the next question in the form. If you answered 'No' the form asks you three sub questions which you can answer each one a choice of 'No' 'Yes' or 'It Varies'.
For question 1 the three sub questions are:
Then choose which of the following applies... You can indicate (a) or (b) and then indicate (c) as well (they are within the same descriptor but different sub questions. However you couldn't indicate both (a) and (b) because they both relate to walking.
Remember the form is there for you, it's not a test of your ability to complete forms, it is there for you to state what your problems are, so use the boxes to your advantage and use the comment section to make things clear.
OK? Take your time and don't rush it, maybe best to sleep on it and come back to it in the morning? :-)
(a) Can you move at least 50 metres (about 54 yards) before you need to stop?
(b) Can you move at least 200 metres (about 220 yards) before you need to stop?
Going up or down two steps
(c) Can you go up or down two steps without help from another person, if there is a rail to hold on to?
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 2:37:34 GMT 1
thanks again. i'm only filling four functional categories in. could i please PM you about these?
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 14:29:50 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 21, 2013 21:20:39 GMT 1
Excellent video, is there any way we can catch this I wonder?
It's all too clear that these HCP's are open to deep question over their suitability to conduct mental health assessments.
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 22:00:47 GMT 1
realplayer used to have a facility for recording videos from youtube. so, i suppose it would record this too. if you download realplayer (or possibly google if it still has that facility) and look through the settings, you should be able to get it saved.
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 22:03:31 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 21, 2013 22:09:23 GMT 1
Many thanks :-)
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 21, 2013 23:03:13 GMT 1
is the man in the video right? if you don't give consent, you can't be thrown off?
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Jan 21, 2013 23:52:00 GMT 1
It would be up to the DWP as to whether to impose a sanction by disallowing the claimant their ESA for failing to participate in the medical. The decision would be one against which you could appeal but the problem is you may lose your assessment rate unless they overturn the decisions. I think it reasonable to question the qualification of the HCP and I don't see why Atos shouldn't be answerable on this. They always have the option of referring to one of their beloved 'mental health champions'.
People should be very careful over refusing to participate and it may be better to agree to undergo the test but to insist that the HCP annotates the ESA 85 medical report in the section for 'customer's statements' to the effect that they (the claimant) wants it noted that they asked a question over the depth of knowledge of the HCP's mental health experience and were not happy with the answer. Something along the lines of....
"I would like it noted that during the assessment I asked the HCP about their qualifications in mental health as I have a complex mental health problem and I am concerned over the accuracy of any report about me. The HCP replied that she was qualified by having a 'generalised' knowledge. I deem this insufficient but agreed not to withhold my consent because of the risk of losing my benefits. I reserve the right to challenge the qualification of the HCP in any legal proceedings over determining my benefits"
The answer 'generalised' (in the video) is one where I think I would be inclined in an appeal to make an application to the Tribunal for the HCP to be summonsed to attend as a witness and asked about his/her specific experience. The Tribunal has the power to challenge the credibility of ANY witness in its 'inquisitorial function'.
How on earth will these challenges be made when legal aid for us specialists is withdrawn?
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 22, 2013 0:32:58 GMT 1
after april, the demand for your services will be restricted to those in WRAG because they are stopping assessment rate while awaiting appeal. catch 22, if you're appealling, you can't claim JSA and if you're on JSA, you're fit for work. game, set, match!
|
|
|
Post by qinteq on Jan 31, 2013 2:39:25 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by floydpink on Jan 31, 2013 14:27:14 GMT 1
It would be up to the DWP as to whether to impose a sanction by disallowing the claimant their ESA for failing to participate in the medical. The decision would be one against which you could appeal but the problem is you may lose your assessment rate unless they overturn the decisions. I think it reasonable to question the qualification of the HCP and I don't see why Atos shouldn't be answerable on this. They always have the option of referring to one of their beloved 'mental health champions'. People should be very careful over refusing to participate and it may be better to agree to undergo the test but to insist that the HCP annotates the ESA 85 medical report in the section for 'customer's statements' to the effect that they (the claimant) wants it noted that they asked a question over the depth of knowledge of the HCP's mental health experience and were not happy with the answer. Something along the lines of.... "I would like it noted that during the assessment I asked the HCP about their qualifications in mental health as I have a complex mental health problem and I am concerned over the accuracy of any report about me. The HCP replied that she was qualified by having a 'generalised' knowledge. I deem this insufficient but agreed not to withhold my consent because of the risk of losing my benefits. I reserve the right to challenge the qualification of the HCP in any legal proceedings over determining my benefits" The answer 'generalised' (in the video) is one where I think I would be inclined in an appeal to make an application to the Tribunal for the HCP to be summonsed to attend as a witness and asked about his/her specific experience. The Tribunal has the power to challenge the credibility of ANY witness in its 'inquisitorial function'. How on earth will these challenges be made when legal aid for us specialists is withdrawn?
|
|
|
Post by fibrography on Feb 2, 2013 17:23:07 GMT 1
Hi Nick, here is an update to my issue. Today I have had a letter from the appeals team telling me that they have reconsidered the evidence and a decision has been made in my favour. However, it doesn't actually mention the words "Support Group" but as I was appealing against being in WRAG I can only assume at this point that they are moving me to support. However, it also says to allow TEN WEEKS for the paperwork to be processed and any outstanding monies to be paid. Is there any difference in benefit levels between ESA WRAG and ESA SUPPORT? Im still confused and cant ring anyone until Monday but thought I would keep you updated on progress.
Thank you for all your help so far
Leigh
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Feb 2, 2013 18:03:53 GMT 1
Hi Leigh, Oh how typically inept of them! When you say appeals team do you mean the DWP or HMCTS Tribunal service? It sounds like a support group placement to me which they will refer to as having 'limited capability for work related activity' rather than limited capability for work (WRAG). There is a difference but it's not a lot, can't quite remember how much (can find out) but around £7 to £8? Of course the major difference is over not being subject to mandatory work participation. 10 weeks? What are they playing at. If they'd overpaid you they would be on to it like a shot! It's usually 6 weeks but I guess they're snowed under. Many thanks for the update and I'm very pleased with what seems to be good news! Keep me posted. Regards Nick
|
|
|
Post by fibrography on Feb 2, 2013 18:14:43 GMT 1
Sorry yes, the letter is from the DWP. It didnt reach the tribunal service. The letter says they have a huge backlog and to allow up to 10 weeks. I scanned the letter but couldnt see a way to post it on the forum. They are that incompetent they havent even put my NI number on the letter. The REF simply says <NINO> so someone forgot to complete the field. *sigh* I was already on a High rate IB before I was moved to ESA and apparently they matched the rate so Im unsure if I will actually be owed any additional money. Im just pleased I won appeal and as u say it stops all the hassel of the work focused stuff. However, I am due to have my 1st home visit from the Job Centre Advisor in 2 weeks time so I need to know for certain whats happening as there is no point in him wasting his or my time visiting me.
I want to THANK YOU so much for your help wording my appeal and subsequent letter. I believe your help with the wording made a significant difference to the response I received, rather than if I had just ranted at them.
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Feb 2, 2013 18:39:38 GMT 1
Excellent news and many thanks for your kind words! I cannot believe they neglected to put a NINO on the letter, it must have been clerical rather than computer generated.
I'm very pleased for you :-)
If you want to send it as an attachment just post a blank reply and it will prompt you for an attachment file. You'd need to scan it, blanking out any personal data and then upload it, making sure you click on the attachment agreement. I can then have a look at it but bear in mind so can anyone else who logs in.
Regards
Nick
|
|
|
Post by fibrography on Feb 2, 2013 18:56:33 GMT 1
I think im being a bit thick. cant see anywhere to attach a file. i have it all blanked out to protect my details but my brain isnt complying with me, lol - Did you mean I should post a new thread? or use the Reply> option at the bottom of the thread? (where is says reply, share, print) I can see an "Insert Image" button but no attach option. the Insert Image, wants a url link so that wont work.
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Feb 2, 2013 23:27:47 GMT 1
Go to post reply but don't put anything in box. You will then see blank modify box and above it 'choose file' - no file chosen. Click on this and upload your attachment; making sure you agree to the attachment agreement. Then 'post reply' and the link to your download will appear? The image is for inserting pictures and will only work with a url. Give it another try
|
|
|
Post by fibrography on Feb 4, 2013 12:42:32 GMT 1
nope, not seeing the choose file option. maybe its google chrome screwing it up.
Anyway.... I have confirmed today with Jobcentre that I have in fact been placed in the support group for 12 months. My advisor actually sounded happy for me, i could hear the smile in his voice. Im hoping its 12 months from this decision and not back dated to august last yr. But as they are talking about monies owed for the time period leading up to this decision Im guessing it means 12 months backdated. I have to wait for them to write to me with all the info. I refuse to ring the DWP.
Dreading doing this all over again but I know they have been sending out renewals within 6 months to some people.
Thank you again for al your help Nick.
|
|
|
Post by nickd on Feb 6, 2013 21:45:33 GMT 1
It's great new fibrography, I had a discussion with a senior minister the other day and am reassured the reassessment rate is being slowed down. Let's hope so :-)
|
|