Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Atos Medicals - Questions, Answers and Support

equationgirl said:
Most have reported they are somewhat farcical. At least it is over for now. Be kind to yourself over the next few days.
Click to expand...
Thanks

I'm assuming the whole "you need to be seen by a specific assessor" is an insurance thing: it's for their own benefit. I'd foolishly assumed it meant seeing someone with some expertise in optometry, who would at least ask me more about my sight. But I think it's just so they can cover their arses if something weird happens during the interview or rising from it.

Laughable really.
 
Rivendelboy said:
Thanks

I'm assuming the whole "you need to be seen by a specific assessor" is an insurance thing: it's for their own benefit. I'd foolishly assumed it meant seeing someone with some expertise in optometry, who would at least ask me more about my sight. But I think it's just so they can cover their arses if something weird happens during the interview or rising from it.

Laughable really.
Click to expand...
It used to be the case that certain conditions required a specialist, but I think the last time I looked that had been done away with, at least for some conditions. It was a process requirement rather than a liability issue as best I could tell..

There's a ton of reports from claimants that have been seen by podiatrists or chiropractors for complex conditions, you're right about it being a joke, but if you're denied anything you have grounds for appeal that the doctor didn't do even cursory eye checks.
 
equationgirl said:
It used to be the case that certain conditions required a specialist, but I think the last time I looked that had been done away with, at least for some conditions. It was a process requirement rather than a liability issue as best I could tell..

There's a ton of reports from claimants that have been seen by podiatrists or chiropractors for complex conditions, you're right about it being a joke, but if you're denied anything you have grounds for appeal that the doctor didn't do even cursory eye checks.
Click to expand...
That's what I mean, it's just a tick box/clerical thing. Not anything meaningful.

Of course, I can't prove that they did no cursory eye checks, despite there being two eye charts on the wall and, on the desk in front of me, there was a laminated sheet of phrases repeated with increasinly smaller text. I had assumed he was going to have me read from them. He did not. During my first WCA years ago (ah, memories) I was given something like that to read. Didn't make any difference of course.
 
So their consolatory payment/pittance didn't go through because they misread one of the numbers on my account number. ANother two days to wait for that. I guess it's better than £0 which is what many people end up with. Shouldn't have to be this way.

Apparently the whole thing with the specialist isn't to do with the assessment itself, it's that the assessor has to have the right "government training", whatever that is. This has completely blown my mind: even though the assessment is exactly the same and necessitates no deeper examination of the issue involved, the process still requires the presence of a trained specialist. Even though they will not employ that specialisatoin in any capacity. In other words, I could have been seen by the person two years ago with no difference in the process whatsoever. It's just she 'wasn't trained' and the guy yesterday was. You might be forgiven for thinking every assessor should be trained given the variety of conditionality they'd have to assess all day long.

I don't know whether to laugh or cry at all this, it's just so fantastically shit
 
Rivendelboy said:
That's what I mean, it's just a tick box/clerical thing. Not anything meaningful.

Of course, I can't prove that they did no cursory eye checks, despite there being two eye charts on the wall and, on the desk in front of me, there was a laminated sheet of phrases repeated with increasinly smaller text. I had assumed he was going to have me read from them. He did not. During my first WCA years ago (ah, memories) I was given something like that to read. Didn't make any difference of course.
Click to expand...

That reminds me of first time my husband was assessed for DLA or IB (can’t remember which) after a traumatic situation of being signed off from work as psychiatric nurse due to the NHS not making reasonable adjustments.
The “assessor” came out to our house and pulled out a screwed up snellen chart from his pocket and held it at a cursory distance. He also said why don’t you find a job this DLA is not for young healthy people like you. He was registered partially sighted with a degenerative eye condition.
Looking back we should’ve thrown him out of the house but you don’t want to rock the boat.
 
Rivendelboy said:
That's what I mean, it's just a tick box/clerical thing. Not anything meaningful.

Of course, I can't prove that they did no cursory eye checks, despite there being two eye charts on the wall and, on the desk in front of me, there was a laminated sheet of phrases repeated with increasinly smaller text. I had assumed he was going to have me read from them. He did not. During my first WCA years ago (ah, memories) I was given something like that to read. Didn't make any difference of course.
Click to expand...

Moorfields eye hospital are even worse although now it’s clear from his notes that my husband wouldn’t be able to read a traditional snellen chart they always ask him to attempt it it’s quite humiliating.
 
ash said:
Moorfields eye hospital are even worse although now it’s clear from his notes that my husband wouldn’t be able to read a traditional snellen chart they always ask him to attempt it it’s quite humiliating.
Click to expand...
Of course it would be very easy to just have patients be tested a little nearer the chart than maybe they should which of course could have sigificant though unfair results.
For me my eyes just tire. A few seconds squinting at a line of text isn't representative of a full day on a computer for instance. Even not on a computer my eyes still tire. Just how they are.

I was sat looking at the charts while expecting at some point for them to be used. After all if someone presents with eyesight as an issue and you have these charts one might reasonably assume...
 
I phoned the muppets up yesterday to check that my WCA would be recorded only to be told the machine was broken. "That's alright" I said, "I'll record it myself with 2 identical tape recorders." I was told I can't do that it says so on the gov.uk website. I checked and it doesn't. It says 'recording equipment must record 2 copies simultaneously' which 2 tape recorders would. Apparently the reason you can't use 2 tape recorders is that if 1 breaks down you will lose a copy. Whereas if their machine breaks down you lose both copies.:facepalm:. They are going to rearrange the WCA when a recorder is available.
 
WouldBe said:
I phoned the muppets up yesterday to check that my WCA would be recorded only to be told the machine was broken. "That's alright" I said, "I'll record it myself with 2 identical tape recorders." I was told I can't do that it says so on the gov.uk website. I checked and it doesn't. It says 'recording equipment must record 2 copies simultaneously' which 2 tape recorders would. Apparently the reason you can't use 2 tape recorders is that if 1 breaks down you will lose a copy. Whereas if their machine breaks down you lose both copies.:facepalm:. They are going to rearrange the WCA when a recorder is available.
Click to expand...
Bear in mind they have about 10 machines for the entire country, and they get broken as they spend a lot of time in transit. Why they couldn't supply 1 per centre I have no idea.
 
equationgirl said:
Bear in mind they have about 10 machines for the entire country, and they get broken as they spend a lot of time in transit. Why they couldn't supply 1 per centre I have no idea.
Click to expand...
So chances are that they have one in little Chesterfield are pretty slim. So I guess they are lying about that as well. :facepalm::mad:
 
equationgirl said:
Bear in mind they have about 10 machines for the entire country, and they get broken as they spend a lot of time in transit. Why they couldn't supply 1 per centre I have no idea.
Click to expand...
Because not having any machines available is an excellent way of making life that bit more awkward for claimants, perhaps? As we know, DWP (or their supplier of plausible deniability) do like to make sure that the whole process is as oppressive as possible, and "we can't do a home assessment as there isn't any equipment" is certainly a line they've trotted out before now...
 
WouldBe said:
So chances are that they have one in little Chesterfield are pretty slim. So I guess they are lying about that as well. :facepalm::mad:
Click to expand...
They might have one, I hope they do. You might want to phone up and check the week before, just in case. But if it is not working, it's their fault.
 
equationgirl said:
They might have one, I hope they do. You might want to phone up and check the week before, just in case. But if it is not working, it's their fault.
Click to expand...
They are supposed to be phoning me when they have the equipment available. So that will be on the 3rd blue moon of the 13th month of the next odd numbered leap year then. :eek:
 
If I were to contact Maximus and ask, would they reveal what qualifications my assessor possessed? I'm assuming not.

I ask because, as I have this 'potentially violent' marker, if they score me nothing then surely I can make a more stringent case against them. This marker was the reason the home visit never happened, they have admitted this. The person claimed she didn't eel safe attending such a person (so they say). So that alone is concrete evidence, surely, that I am unfit for work. That cannot be congruent with me being found it for work (assuming they do).
 
Rivendelboy said:
If I were to contact Maximus and ask, would they reveal what qualifications my assessor possessed? I'm assuming not.

I ask because, as I have this 'potentially violent' marker, if they score me nothing then surely I can make a more stringent case against them. This marker was the reason the home visit never happened, they have admitted this. The person claimed she didn't eel safe attending such a person (so they say). So that alone is concrete evidence, surely, that I am unfit for work. That cannot be congruent with me being found it for work (assuming they do).
Click to expand...

Catch ESA 50. [/flippancy]
 
Rivendelboy said:
If I were to contact Maximus and ask, would they reveal what qualifications my assessor possessed? I'm assuming not.

I ask because, as I have this 'potentially violent' marker, if they score me nothing then surely I can make a more stringent case against them. This marker was the reason the home visit never happened, they have admitted this. The person claimed she didn't eel safe attending such a person (so they say). So that alone is concrete evidence, surely, that I am unfit for work. That cannot be congruent with me being found it for work (assuming they do).
Click to expand...
You may be being a little too logical, here. Go and read some Kafka, or perhaps get a copy of "Catch 22" - it might help you with the mindset...
 
Not really ATOS related, but I've got a Work Focused Interview tomorrow morning. Does anyone know what they are allowed to force me to do. I'm really not feeling very confident about handling all this, hopefully the interviewer won't be a c**t, but that's a crapshoot. Can they influence the outcome of WCA decisions? Mine is still pending. Thanks
 
Got my data request through today, nice and timely :D It just confirms that this behavioural marker is because of the mental anxiety/frustration symptons I'd presented. It even says 'no home visit' on there. So Maximus were well aware of this, even when they twice agreed to it. Unfortunately no date is given for this decision so I assume it was when the ESA50 with that info on was processed.

Had my WFI yesterday. The guy was useless. He spent the whole time extolling the virtues of mindfulness (a little bit) and Universal Credit (a lot!). The JC environment now is weird. It's very intense; the walls are plastered with information I'd call it propaganda. Even the cubicle where I was sat had a sample 35 hour week jobsearch comprising 8-5.30pm days spent in 2 hour blocks: search online, newspapers, ring people up (because that works), with a small break granted for you to receive your protein pills. Mind blowing. It's so intense an environment as a result; I woulds struggle for sure on UC (and many do as we know). But he was adamant that any problems were either overstated or the result of under staffing and misrepresentation.

He then went on to imply that benefits shouldn't be used to fund mobile phone packages (before telling me using the bus service app would save me money) by way of bemoaning the amount a single mother customer with lots of kids he works with receives.

Then told me about some course that's just the usual 'character building' bollocks he claimed could make complex mental health diagnoses (it can't,I checked). That was it, see you in 6 months, I hope not. Though, I suspect that won't be an issue :/
 
Had my UC WCA today. Seems like they just want an extra bite at the apple while my ESA appeal winds it's way through the system.

Lots of loaded questions from the get go such as 'are you able to fill in this form?'. My sister brought me so I was asked 'If your sister hadn't been able to bring you in would you still have been able to come?'. Being as the alternative would be destitution I would have had to make myself come. Everything was twisted to emphasise what I might be capable of. Took copious notes, and had my own copy of the UC50 she had in front of her. This seemed to make her a bit wary.

Hoping for the best but expecting the worst.

Also hard to like people's posts here as it seems like I'm liking the shit things happening.
 
Sputwang said:
Had my UC WCA today. Seems like they just want an extra bite at the apple while my ESA appeal winds it's way through the system.

Lots of loaded questions from the get go such as 'are you able to fill in this form?'. My sister brought me so I was asked 'If your sister hadn't been able to bring you in would you still have been able to come?'. Being as the alternative would be destitution I would have had to make myself come. Everything was twisted to emphasise what I might be capable of. Took copious notes, and had my own copy of the UC50 she had in front of her. This seemed to make her a bit wary.

Hoping for the best but expecting the worst.

Also hard to like people's posts here as it seems like I'm liking the shit things happening.
Click to expand...
A lot of the likes are in solidarity, other posters 'like' so posters don't feel on their own, for example, or to say 'that happened to me'. Nobody likes the process or the toll it takes on people.
 
It seems like your WCA was a lot of "what ifs" Sputwang, maybe that's part of their new tactics so that they can autotype positive possibilities instead of realities.

I "like" a lot of posts in here more as a way of saying I've read what you put and as equationgirl has stated it's a show of solidarity and understanding. Its great that people,like yourself, share stuff on here as for one its a great place for yourself to get it off your chest and also for others to build up knowledge and confidence.

All the best in your fight for your entitlements, keep us posted.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ska invita
  • Poll
Do you support the UK increase in the military budget?
4 5 6 7 8
Replies
211
Views
7K
weltweit
weltweit
C
Protest outside Old Bailey in support of Constance Marten & Mark Gordon
9 10 11 12 13
Replies
369
Views
13K
krtek a houby
krtek a houby
Dystopiary
Hatred against people on disability benefits getting ramped up again
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
152
Views
9K
Orang Utan
Orang Utan
ash
Another Brexit benefit- using Wi-Fi in Europe
2
Replies
51
Views
2K
Elpenor
Elpenor
Bingoman
Sue Gray and therese Coffey nominated for a peerage
2 3 4
Replies
91
Views
2K
stavros
S
Back
Top Bottom