I thought I had heard about some diabolical benefit assessments and assessors and that nothing could be worse thanthose I had aready heard about.
This just proves how wrong you can be. This particular assessor would appear to have some serious problems relating to his behaviour and I would question whether he is capabable and competent not only to do benefit assessments, but to do his sunstancial job in the NHS.
In this persons behaviour I would go on to say, that during this assessment some elements of criminal behaviour to place and this does question his ability to have conducted proper assessments with other benefit claimants.
The process is stressful enough for the benefit claimants and their families and they can do well not having to put up with the conduct of this particular assessor.
It also beggars the question of how many more like him are also conducting such assessments in the manner similar to him.
He appears to be assuming a position of power over the benefit assessees, which should not be so.
Staff working for a discredited benefit assessments contractor threatened to call the police after a claimant asked about the mental health qualifications of the nurse who was assessing his eligibility for personal independence payment (PIP).
Atos has now launched an investigation into what happened at the assessment centre in Leeds, which saw the nurse abandon Kris Weston’s assessment after just a couple of minutes.
She did not realise that Weston, a composer and trained sound engineer, had been recording the assessment.
Weston began the assessment last month by telling the nurse that he had stayed up all night because of the extreme anxiety he experiences when he has to deal with institutions.
He had spent three days putting together a 10-page description of his complex mental health problems – and what he says is the “continual failure to even listen to his problems by multiple institutions” – in the hope that the assessor would help him secure the financial and health support he needed.
He explained that he had been unfairly described in the past as “violent” by the NHS after a telephone argument, although she told him that Atos had no record of this.
She appears to have wrongly blamed the decision to refuse him a home assessment on the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), when such decisions are taken by the assessment companies, Atos and Capita.
Source: Atos threatens to call police after claimant questions PIP assessor’s mental health training | Govt Newspeak
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.
‘Hannah, from Peterborough, Cambridgeshire, told i: “I was made to feel like a liar when I asked for help. I want the Government to know what they’re doing to us, what they’re putting us through. They treat sick people like criminals.”’, which is not technically correct for Criminals are presumed innocent until the Justice system proves otherwise, whereas PIP claimants are assumed guilty until the claimant can prove otherwise.
So, in effect PIP claimants are being treated worse than criminals.
It’s good that these stories are coming to light at the same time as Parliament is publishing reports about the effect of PIP on disabled claimants.
Source: Woman with rare disease lost crucial disability payments ‘because she has a degree’ : Vox Political
This is a continuing trend and is anyone at the DWP listening as all they do is quote the statistics re claims submitted, those approved, those declined and those successful at appeal.
Unfortunately you can use statistics to prove virtually anything that you wish to and Government departments at Ace in this, if nothing else.
What they should be looking at is the standard of those claims that are declined to be then approved on appeal, to ensure whatever needs to be learned to achieve an even greater success rate of correctly dealing with claims instead of just juggling figures.
This would not only save money, as every case going to appeal costs more then a correctly assessed original claim. Is it that they are so focused on declining claims that accuracy takes a backseat and in doing so more money is required to the assessing process than should be if the claim had originally been assessed correctly.
This, if looked at logically, is a nonsensical approach and is purely down to shortsightedness and a refusal to learn from mistakes.
Not only is it costing more money within the finality of the process, but even more importantly is the distress and harm it is causing for the respected claimants, who in the longer term are causing more resources to be required within, not only with Social Care, but also the the health services to manage the health conditions that theses assessment processes are causing the respected claimants to suffer from.
For all concerned why can they not ensure that they get it right the first time.
Maybe, as many feel, the DWP just do not care how much suffering they are responsible for.