Quote:
Originally Posted by BB_Eye
Many (those on IB and ESA) are bricking themselves because they will be called to another degrading capability assessment (which are notorious for recording inaccurate information) and a needless application for Income Support only to win back their ESA/IB at the end of the appeal period. Others (those on DLA) because they will have mountains of paperwork to look forward to and an automatic cut to their benefit.
Whatever bogus claimants of disability benefit cost the taxpayer is dwarfed by the cost of these mandatory capability assessments (13 weeks after the initial claim) which treat genuine clients like benefit fraudsters. Plus those who fiddle the system get by by claiming provisional payments of their ESA up until their appeal. What do they do once the appeal is over and they've lost? Take it to appeal again and again and again. An immensely wasteful and unfair system.
As a matter of fact my workplace deals with people who have problems with the DWP on a daily basis. The tribunals worker is usually saddled with ESA and Incapacity spongers (as his clients are those who failed the appeal stage). Not one bogus claimant I observed has claimed IB or ESA on grounds of mental health problems. All were physical complaints such as arthritis or hypoglycaemia.
|
I know of a family whose Father started to get Dementia,he was aged 54,He had to go to one these assessments and fortunately someone went with him.
The questions overall were about what work he'd done and apparantly to one question he was asked did he use computers in his last job,he said Yes, he was asked did he get out,go for walks, he said Yes,he was asked if he went shopping,he said Yes.
The problem being he says Yes to almost everything,as I said fortunately someone was with him and eventually insisted on making their points which were, that this man always says Yes,and the friends fears were that the ?doctor?(I use the term doctor loosely) assessing him was merely ticking boxes based on his responses.
His friend pointed out that he did use a computer at work over 4 years ago but now would not be able to do anyhting much than look at the screen now,he did go out,yes he did go out, to the gate of his house and often stand there waiting ages for someone to come and take him back in the house,did he go shopping Yes with help and had to be stopped putting 4 cartons of 2litres of milk in the trolley and loads of other things he didn't need.
That's all I know of that scenario but had his friend not gone in with him for the assessment but waited outside I guess he would have likely from his answers been deemed fit for some work and had benefits stopped ( with the then process of an appeal to go though to try and get them back) without the expansion and further detail of his answers by someone who knew the real facts.
His friend said the interviewer was rather hostile to him and his presence there with him and really concentrated little on his health and only asked what medication he was on after his friends intervention.
That does not sound to me a correct or sensitive way to do these assessments.
It had taken a year to even get him to see his own Doctor due to his problems, the only thing is that because of his dementia the trauma of the assessment will be forgotten quickly by him but nonetheless it seems more sensitivity is needed but I would advise anyone going to these assessments to take someone with them and go in with them to the assessment too.