DWP

[Headhurts]

Thank you Steve. I have my long suffering dad to take me there, bless him.

More info.
Here is an actual, statement for one of the reasons for my refusal, and I quote. "He wasn't rocking back and forth in his chair or sweating, which are symptoms of anxiety, which brings me to the conclusion that he doesn't suffer from it". WTF? So I was meant to be rocking back and forth in my chair, sweating like feck and gibbering like a lunatic before they believe I suffer from anxiety?

Also there were utter lies. "He could look me straight in the eyes,showing he could converse perfectly". No I couldn't. I can glance at people as I talk to them but eye to eye contact is very hard and uncomfortable for me.
"I tried to call him to talk about his claim but could never get an answer."
No she didn't. I had no calls from her or anyone else. She could have used the answer machine to leave a message for me to contact them. No message was left. We also check for any missed calls via BT 1471, and no missed calls came from them. I could go on.

It’s a sad thing to read but I guess they have advice sheets on what to look for, you went in there honestly and apparently penalised for this.

I cannot guarantee it but I suspect on appeal you will win but be prepared and as I said in an earlier post they are not your friend or there to help you.

I was in a previous job a welfare officer and used to visit and help people who were ill or going through tribunals etc.

I was accompanying a lady to an assessment and walking a few yards ahead was a man and he was striding along quite well but carrying a walking stick but not using it, just before the turn into the DHSS building he started using the stick and you would have thought he was in total agony, all this was for his act in the assessment, I bet he got his benefits.

I wish you well with your appeal and if I can help PM me.

Robin

 

[brucemillar]

I am trying hard to remain positive here and add something that helps. The comments about "rocking" and other supposed traits make me want to weep. Do they buy "Anxiety For Dummies" in soft copy?

This is outrageous stuff, that shows zero understanding or empathy, let alone any knowledge, skill or training? Who lets these people out among us? I despair of this kind of thing. It is worth a letter to your local MP. Kept brief, but asking for their involvement and support. State the facts (as you have here). I wish you well and and do hope that you get the support that you are entitled to and should not be having to ask for let alone act out somebody's fantasy picture of what things should look like.

 

[sturgeon]

This is outrageous stuff, that shows zero understanding or empathy, let alone any knowledge, skill or training? Who lets these people out among us? I despair of this kind of thing.

I agree 100%

Please stay positive and focused stwat! You will get a positive outcome if you keep going, you deserve it!

Someone really needs to sort these real DWP Ftwats out!

 

[Deleted96908]

Here is an actual, statement for one of the reasons for my refusal, and I quote. "He wasn't rocking back and forth in his chair or sweating, which are symptoms of anxiety

I am trying hard to remain positive here and add something that helps. The comments about "rocking" and other supposed traits make me want to weep. Do they buy "Anxiety For Dummies" in soft copy?

People suffering from severe anxiety often complain of a feeling of dread and Mind.Org (and others) describes it like this:

You know that feeling when you’re rocking on the back legs of your chair and suddenly for just a split second you think you’re about to fall; that feeling in your chest? Imagine that split second feeling being frozen in time and lodged in your chest for minutes/hours/days, and imagine with it that sense of impending doom and dread sticking around too, but sometimes you don’t even know why.​

So, I reckon the assessor was looking for the symptom, rather than understanding, as we sufferers do, that it's:

ONLY IN OUR BLOODY MINDS!!

FFS!

 

[bob6600]

Thank you Steve. I have my long suffering dad to take me there, bless him.

More info.
Here is an actual, statement for one of the reasons for my refusal, and I quote. "He wasn't rocking back and forth in his chair or sweating, which are symptoms of anxiety, which brings me to the conclusion that he doesn't suffer from it". WTF? So I was meant to be rocking back and forth in my chair, sweating like feck and gibbering like a lunatic before they believe I suffer from anxiety?

Also there were utter lies. "He could look me straight in the eyes,showing he could converse perfectly". No I couldn't. I can glance at people as I talk to them but eye to eye contact is very hard and uncomfortable for me.
"I tried to call him to talk about his claim but could never get an answer."
No she didn't. I had no calls from her or anyone else. She could have used the answer machine to leave a message for me to contact them. No message was left. We also check for any missed calls via BT 1471, and no missed calls came from them. I could go on.

Make a note of each point and present them to CAB. I'm sure on the first instance you can ask them to 'look at it again' but I can't remember if you can present any new evidence. Keep it all anyway, will come handy for an appeal. Sounds like you had a right b*tch

 

[John]

Does sound like that individual evaluating don't know jack sheet about anxiety.

Good luck on Tuesday - keep us posted on what happens.

I understand the temptation to play things down, but whilst I am sure no one would doubt your issues, you sometimes need to ham them up to help yourself in the long term.

Certainly something I've done in the past.

You shouldn't feel guilty because you are stoical - just remember the lazy sheets who have nothing wrong with them taking money!

 

[oldguy57]

Yep - as well as the scammers there are plenty of claimants around who play things down. I remember one elderly chap who was turned down for what was then DLA. The form he completed asked whether he could get up and down stairs without difficulty. He had replied "YES", but when I asked him further it transpired that he could only manage stairs at home going up and down by sitting on each step one at a time. Took him 15 minutes to negotiate his stairs. Dla appeal was successful of course.

 

[Deleted96908]

I do like the idea of the Universal Basic Income, whereby every adult gets paid a regular sum by government, which is then reclaimed via taxes, if it's not needed, or deemed not to be needed. Apart from helping those like the OP who have to argue their case after the fact, there are lots of disenfranchised folks in this country who are financially inactive through no fault of their own, and who find the thought of navigating the benefits system, prohibitively off-putting.

 

[Dryce]

I do like the idea of the Universal Basic Income, whereby every adult gets paid a regular sum by government, which is then reclaimed via taxes, if it's not needed, or deemed not to be needed.

I think this has just moved the point of assessment in the system rather than actually replaced it.

That may make things simpler for those caught up in the complication of the existing system - but make things more complicated and impact another group.

A simple UBI system set at a level that makes it attractive to everyone has its own complications - probably the most significant is the unknown number of people who would re-engineer their lifestyles around it and any knock on in terms of their loss to the economy and as a source of taxation to pay for it.

 

[E53AMG]

This can happen when the genuine case on here is refused, makes my blood boil:-

Benefits fraudster caught pushing wife in a wheelchair | Daily Mail Online

Fraud who claimed £500K in benefits seen pushing wife in wheelchair Benefits fraudster caught pushing wife in a wheelchair | Daily Mail Online via http://dailym.ai/android

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

[Deleted member 113659]

I’m unaware of genuine recipients who’s benefits would amount to £500k.

What the hell do these fraudsters claim for???

 

[markjay]

I’m unaware of genuine recipients who’s benefits would amount to £500k.

What the hell do these fraudsters claim for???

a. That was over a 15 years period.

b. He was only convicted for fraudulently claiming £250,000 during this period. The £500,000 figure is an estimate of the total amount he conned, but the other charges remain 'on file' so not proven at this stage.

 

[clk320x]

a. That was over a 15 years period.

b. He was only convicted for fraudulently claiming £250,000 during this period. The £500,000 figure is an estimate of the total amount he conned, but the other charges remain 'on file' so not proven at this stage.

Typical Journalism

 

[markjay]

I do like the idea of the Universal Basic Income, whereby every adult gets paid a regular sum by government, which is then reclaimed via taxes, if it's not needed, or deemed not to be needed. Apart from helping those like the OP who have to argue their case after the fact, there are lots of disenfranchised folks in this country who are financially inactive through no fault of their own, and who find the thought of navigating the benefits system, prohibitively off-putting.

I think what we need is a system that benefits those with long-term illnesses or disabilities? Sounds a bit unfair giving everyone the same amount, including able-bodied men and women - or did I misunderstand how UBI works?

Also, Finland has a population of 5 million... that's like a major city in the UK. Not sure that this model can be simply scaled-up to a country with a population of 70 million?

 

[Dryce]

I think what we need is a system that benefits those with long-term illnesses or disabilities? Sounds a bit unfair giving everyone the same amount, including able-bodied men and women - or did I misunderstand how UBI works?

Also, Finland has a population of 5 million... that's like a major city in the UK. Not sure that this model can be simply scaled-up to a country with a population of 70 million?

In simple terms UBI is a bit like the personal allowance being given to all adults. You pay taxation on earnings - but at a higher rate. Somebody on UBI + average earnings would probably take home the same after tax as if they just got average earnings under the existing setup.

So people unable to work would still be at a disadvantage compared with those able to work.

There are some advantages to this in that it basically removes any need for means testing of the UBI.

AIUI the Finnish 'experiment' isn't really UBI. It's just a no strings unemployment benefit given to selected people who are already unemployed. The real test of UBI is to give it to people in employment and adjust their taxation on earnings. The other aspect is that if UBI is set at a low level then those dependent on it who are not earning may require top ups and allowances - which means assessments and complications.

 

[grimree]

So let me understand this UBI system, everyone who doesn't want to work gets a basic salary from the Government(read taxpayer, as the Government doesn't have money) and I get the benefit of being able to go out to work to pay for it?

 

[Deleted96908]

I think this has just moved the point of assessment in the system rather than actually replaced it.

Yes, it does move the point of assessment, but crucially also repositions citizens as coming before government, not after it. As Emerson and Thoreau maintained, government should be here to serve us, not control us.

 

[Deleted96908]

I think what we need is a system that benefits those with long-term illnesses or disabilities?

I believe we need a 'system' that first and foremost, provides without initial question, a basic set of living conditions that everybody is entitled to. These should be provided immaterial of an individual's circumstances and whether they've managed to leap the claim barriers that have arbitrarily been set out in front of them.

Sounds a bit unfair giving everyone the same amount, including able-bodied men and women - or did I misunderstand how UBI works?

Those that don't need it, will give it back in one form or another, but crucially after their need has been assessed. And besides, who's to say that those who have currently have, will still have tomorrow. This constant dread that folks feel about losing their job and not being able to put food on the table at the end of the week has no place in modern society.

Also, Finland has a population of 5 million... that's like a major city in the UK. Not sure that this model can be simply scaled-up to a country with a population of 70 million?

I quoted the article as a talking point, not as a prototype, for what would be a fundamental shift in how we view the rights of people and the role of a government that is meant to serve these people. Besides, where best to trial the concept than in a relatively small area, compared to the national, untried roll outs, that blight this country every few years.

 

[grober]

So for the sake of arguement lets consider two examples
1. where genuine claimants get their eligibility for benefit turned down
2. where fraudulent claimants get their benefits despite not being eligible.

Two very different outcomes. What's the common factor here? Both are the results of poor assessment.

 

[wu56Shoozz]

@Patagonian .. Yeeeeaaayyyy ....Robbie Williams is BACK!