The Benefits and Work website have reported that a number of their members in recent weeks have been been made to go through a second Personal Independent Payment (PIP) assessment before a decision is made on their award, because there was a problem with the first assessment report.
One member faced a two hour assessment on Christmas Eve. In January they were contacted by Capita and told that the assessment was “incomplete” and that someone was to be “sent round to finish it.”
Capita have refused to say what information was missing and would not provide a copy of the report until it was complete.
Source: Disabled people forced to go through two disability benefit assessments : Welfare Weekly
There are so many stories showing the problems with assessors in every one of the welfare benefits assessment processes. In most of these instances there is an abundance of medical reports to prove what the assessors are trying to disprove, when the assessors are not experts in these medical fields.
Why are they doing this, yes there is some benefit fraud taking place, but not to the extent that requires, in many instances, inhumane treatment of benefit claimants.
It is as though every benefit claimant is believed to be committing benefit fraud, or is it the assessors receive extra payments should they reduce or or with-hold benefits completely.
From these stories it is the benefit assessors that are flawed not the benefit claimants.
It is said that the benefit system is being changed to ensure benefits are received by those you really need the benefits, but in these reported instances it would appear that the assessors are abusing benefit claimants, which should not be the intention of the process.
The whole process need to be held to scrutiny by all parties, which should include the benefit claimants.
The benefit process should not be feared by claimants unless they are committing fraud and these will be the minority not the majority.
If assessors are being abusive, then criminal actions should be taken against.
Appeals appear to have a substantial success rate, if this is so, after all this time, the assessment process should be being changed to minimise wrong initial assessment being conducted.
‘Lessons need to be learnt.
Yet another atrocity, why can’t the Welfare process be flexible as people do not fit into boxes, they are human beings, not objects and it is unlikely that 2 human being will be identical in their requirements, therefore it is extremely difficult to have set guidelines.
PIP procedures need to be flexible so that they can be able to cater for all claimants.
The whole process is geared to find claimants are not entitled to the benefits, as in many instances the assessors do not listen to the claimants, already have preconceived ideas about a claimants condition, the majority if not all of theses preconceived ideas being wrong and also blatant lying by some assessors.
The whole process is weighted against claimants.
Where incorrect decisions have been made, these should be investigated by an independent body to see if any illegal or dishonest actions have been undertaken by any assessors and where found these assessors should be prosecuted.