I wrote in block capitals at the top and bottom of every page of my last ESA50 I WANT MY ASSESSMENT RECORDED. It was, and I was migrated into support group.

When UC was in it's infancy, it was mentioned that part time DWP staff might well have to claim it. I remember laughing like a drain at the time.

Oh the irony!

Every WCA I've had has been conducted at least one hour after the appointment time.

Perhaps it's no coincidence that the waiting room is covered by CCTV cameras, It's a convenient tool to monitor the behaviour of claimants while they get more and more aggravated at the wait.

Gobsmacked!

Received the brown envelope from the DWP this morning, not only did I pass the WCA, they've transferred me to support group. I am literally scratching my head at this decision, I felt I met the descriptors for WRAG and would have been happy with a decision that reflected that, but support group?

The GP (it was a GP, I checked later), did say he needed to phone a colleague at the end of the assessment for a 'second opinion', perhaps that influenced the final outcome.

This WCA with Maximus was so at odds with the one I had with ATOS five years ago, I don't know where to start with comparisons.

It's a start though, isn't it - I agree still miles to go, but I for one never thought the Tories would backtrack on anything - there is light down that long, long tunnel.

Theresa May is regarded as a liberal conservative, she's got one toe firmly in the water, and a finger tentatively on the pulse.

The spin doctors will dismiss terms like 'backtrack' and 'u-turn' and substitute them with 'policy change'.

May ostensibly seems like an even handed person, but one must always bear in mind that she's a Tory, and we know what their track record is like.

The Devil is in the detail, no one knows what chronic illnesses will be included, or excluded.

I'm not holding my breath at the mo.

Hi antone.

Does it make any difference to my likely entitlement?

Not sure if I know how to answer that. I'm reasonably confident that the outcome of the WCA under my existing conditions would have been a fit for work decision; I was only awarded ESA WRAG by Tribunal following an appeal, I fully expected to have to go down the same route this time around.

I assumed that a significant arm injury would trigger at least a postponement of the WCA until I got the 'all clear'.

Hi all.

Long time no post I know but I've been occupied elsewhere!

I have a WCA booked for 7th September, however I had a nasty fall on the 29th July and fractured my upper right arm. I know an injury like this would trigger an automatic ESA claim, but as I'm already on ESA (WRAG) due to other conditions I'm wondering if there is any procedure in place to cover a situation like this?

I'm guessing the answer from the DWP will be attend the WCA anyway. Can anyone shed some light? I used to be pretty well read on benefits issues but I'm well and truly rusty and I know some things have changed since I last locked horns with the DWP and ATOS, Maximus taking over the WCA's being just one example.

Any help greatly appreciated.

i dont think it actuly matters as seetec will just ignore any rules , just be warned i am beging to find out just how evil they are , i cant even complain because i do they bring me into there office but dont give me a writen responce and the DWP wont look at my complaint untill seetec have and they know that ,

So acquaint yourself with the rules and regulations, print out anything pertaining to your situation or complaint, and remind Seetec of their obligations at every opportunity. If your Seetec office is anything like the one I dealt with they will try to fob you off and obfuscate the facts, present them with the paperwork and they have nowhere to go.

Use their own rules against them. Above all, stand your ground, these people rely on claimants folding because they are either too afraid to say anything, or they don't know the regulations.

Read the guidance in the link Mr P posted - it quite clearly explains how those in the WRAG with a 12 month prognosis are affected. Participation in the WP is not mandatory for such claimants. That guidance was updated Dec 2014.

 

Edit: No, rereading, I think the 12 months might only apply to carers or those with young children.

 

Edit again: Hmm. I think now that I do read it the way Mr P did - ESA(RI) claimants with a 12+ month prognosis are Mandatory Participants from the point they optionally choose to enter the WP. Who makes this **** up?

See page 5 of the provider guidance, it states that ESA(IR)WRAG with a new12 month prognosis are mandatory participants after 12th Nov 2012.

I scraped in before this cut off date, and it was this that was pivotal with regard to my battle with Seetec. Seetec insisted that I had been mandated to the programe, I argued that as my award pre dated the 12th Nov 2012 the (in my case) 24 month prognosis held and I had declined to participate with the programe.

The regs are confusing, and it looks like the provider guidance PDF has been altered, I'll try to find my original copy because I'm sure it has extra information regarding claimants with a 12+month prognosis. However it looks very much like the DWP have closed the 12+month 'loophole'.

I would see it as supporting a corrupt system that I was expected to put a 'gloss' on. I would foresee either huge pressure to paper over cracks, or worse, a job that meant I had no influence at all. I don't see how anyone who truly wants to help people can keep their sanity while working for such a system. A good person probably takes the job envisaging that they can help people, and I truly hope she can. A less good person would see such a job as political stepping stone - maybe even still hoping that in getting into politics they can then help people. A not so good person would see the job as a means to an end - furthering their own interests and wouldn't care much who they help. Personally I would rather just help as many individuals as I could through the system and work for policy change at the legislative level - maybe that's Sue Marsh's ultimate goal, who knows?

 

I don't know Sue Marsh, I don't know what type of person she is. Only time will tell.

My take on this?

Sue Marsh is paving the way to Westminster, she wants to be a career politician.

I cannot understand how someone so vehemently against the system would suddenly decide to be part of it. She is not so naive as to think she can actually make some kind of difference from within surely?

The road to hell is paved with good intent, but I'm not convinced Sue Marsh has any conviction left. I've accused her of selling out, taking thirty pieces of silver, because I'm so disappointed that someone could be bought so easily. Maybe she's fed up with tilting at windmills from the sidelines and the pen turned out to be not mightier than someone's chequebook?

 

Sorry but I think it utterly sucks that you have posted on multiple forums & are not giving her a chance

Multiple forums? Two to be precise, lets not get carried away.

It utterly sucks that she's sold her supporters down the river.

Maybe we just and wait and see what she does.

I've no doubt she'll be doing loads, choosing new colour schemes for assessment centres, designing brightly coloured eye catching posters. That's if she gets any spare time off from being IDS/McVey's new poster girl.

I note from her responses to comments on her blog she's already put a parting shot across the bows by stating (in her own defence) that she used £400 per month of her benefit entitlement to support her site, I expect a concerted campaign to get ESA benefits reduced forthwith.

She's improved markedly and entirely unexpectedly after a recent op

No doubt right after she opened the 'congratulations, you've got the job letter'.

She'll last a year in the role, maybe two before either her condition deteriorates or Maximus decide they've had enough playing silly buggers and send her on her way.

What then? Will she resume tilting at windmills whilst shoving in another claim for ESA? Start the blog up again and set up another Sue Marsh fund for new laptops and holidays?

Sue Marsh, the author of 'Diary of a Benefit Scrounger' is taking up the role of Head of Customer Experience with none other than Maximus, who for the tiny minority that don't know, are taking over administering WCA's from ATOS in March.

Salary details aren't on Sue Marsh's web site, but according to Johhny Void https://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/author/johnnyvoid/ it's £75k.

Is this the same Sue Marsh that has been fighting the current system of WCA's for years? Does she imagine that she's now well placed to make a difference from the inside?

Maximus have bought her off, plain and simple. Dangled £75 grands worth of carrots in front of her nose knowing full well it's an offer too good to turn down.

I've had just 3 weeks to think about all of this and come to terms with it. I've already done my worrying and wondering and weighing up. I've already had to decide to change absolutely every last thing about my life and take this step. My husband will give up work - he's already resigned to support me and care for us all, amazing man. I will be working full time, I will lose almost every bit of support I currently get from the social system, I will face criticism, I might hurt people who are disappointed. These are all huge considerations.

Someone is going to do it. I can do it

"someone's got to do it, it might just as well be me".

She's betrayed every benefits rights worker and campaigner across the board, a Judas taking her thirty pieces of silver in return for a gag on the back bench.

What does this say about those in Support Group? Offer enough money and it's get up off thy bed and work? She's just undermined every single ESA claim in the country.

Well I was asked

 

What is 100 - 25.

Spell - World

What is 96 minus 7

A coat was pointed to and I was asked what it was.

Remember these three things in the order I point to them in.

Chair

Table

Clock.

I suffer from depression and anxiety so perhaps they figure we are dumb.

Show me your 'right hand'

Show me your 'left hand'

Touch your nose with your right hand

Touch your nose with your left hand.

Touch your nose with your left and right hand at the same time.

Followed by most what has already been covered.

 

Humiliating all in all.

Sounds more like a sobriety test!

Does the member have irrefutable evidence of this bold statement ? My gf works for ATOS in a senior role and she confirms that "they" do not get paid for everyone they sign off as fit for work.

Irrelevant really because ATOS's remit is/was to find as many claimants fit for work as possible, and the DWP paid them handsomely to achieve that goal.

The evidence to support my statement is the huge amount of decisions overturned at appeal.

OK your gf will no doubt state that ATOS does not make decisions, the DWP does, but lets remember that DWP DM's routinely rubber stamp ATOS's assessments. And the vast majority of those assessments are a 0 point score.

Well guys I am not going to gave up just looking at human rights it says (( The law also protects you from forced labour – forcing you to work under the threat of punishment that you have not agreed to accept ))

and (No one shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour.) it does mention

 

(( Nor does it apply to work the government requires you to do in a state of emergency. Finally, it does not include normal civic obligations, such as maintaining a building if you are a landlord or deducting taxes from your employees’ wages if you are an employer.)))

 

I will do more research they other thing is if we withdraw concent for information to be sent then they cant contact the companys or pass your information on

 

might be worth a try

You are looking at article 4 of the ECHR, and as others have stated it's been tried as a defence against workfare already and failed.

HM Gov as embodied by the DWP and the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (Ian Duncan Smith) can and have (in the case of the Wilson Reilly ruling) retrospectively changed the law to suit the governments agenda. I would fully expect them to rigorously attack any attempt to subvert workfare by legal means, and most people just don't have the resources in terms of finance and legal assistance to mount a challenge to the government.

The best you can hope to do is as SabreSheep says, hold JCP/DWP to the rules, (or at least try to).

I believe workfare to be a a particularly nasty method of supplying free labour to companies and so-called charities, coupled with sanctions for non compliance of other JCP imposed Muppetry it's a cosh to bludgeon the unwilling into compliance.

 

If I'm thinking of the same person as Mr P, the guy was harassed by one of the WP providers for failing to participate in their appointments and whatever even though his participation had become voluntary after a change in his circumstances and he made it clear to them that he was not volunteering.

 

That poster would be me. My advice is to avoid the WP like the plague, it's bad enough when a claimant gets a mandatory referral and is stuck with the provider for two years, To volunteer is akin to Turkey's voting for Christmas IMO.

I'll be submitting my story, it'll be a bit difficult to contain it within 3,000 words though!

Very true, the assessment phase will be for at least 13 weeks, but given the current delays the average time to get an assessment is running at about 8 - 10 months.

The 13 week 'rule' no longer exists, the DWP have deemed the assessment phase is open ended. This came about as a result of welfare advisors successfully getting back dated payments of ESA from the end of week 13 at tribunal for claimants that had waited for months for the WCA.

Obviously the DWP were somewhat miffed over this, and as they cannot overturn tribunal decisions they decided to move the goalposts. The cash savings were on balance quite minimal, and the lengthy waiting times causing financial hardship to claimants overlooked, but we have come to expect nothing less from the DWP.

Work Programme providers, and this includes CWP providers, will not fund speculative training - To get any funding, you need to get a confirmed job offer subject to gaining the required certificate. Only then will a provider "consider" the possibility of funding.

 

This was the "official" line I got from one of Emma's harpies at A4e. The only "training" any provider will offer is if it at zero cost to them.

As with those wishing to get a CSCS card, the provider will say 'get the job first' to which the response is 'I can't even get onto site for an interview without a CSCS card' and the provider will say 'get the job first'..........

I think the legal aid issue is more about funding for an advocate from an advice centre than an actual solicitor.

Agree that you need to deal with this, otherwise it will drag on for ages. If the previous tenant had criminal fines unpaid, it might get to the stage where bailiffs are threatening to break in.

 

Perhaps the Housing Association can help you, by sending a letter to the people writing to you, saying that the tenants Mr X moved out of the property address on x date. It is then an official letter that might be taken more seriously.

Been there already, told them feck off on more than one occasion Rossendales are the worst, I emailed their CEO with proof of ID and a copy of the tenancy, they're still hassling me. Most (if not all) of these debt collectors have been sent proof of tenancy, and I even taped a copy of the agreement to the inside of the front window!

It seems that with every week that goes by I get another demand for money for the previous tenant, it's just getting on my nerves now. The HA won't send out any third party info, so no help from them.

I moved into a Housing Association property two years ago,

the previous tenant racked up a fair bit of debt,

parking fines etc and then did a moonlight flit.

I have been writing and e mailing the various DCA's and bailiff firms in a vain attempt to get the deluge of threatening letters stopped to no avail.

I've already e mailed/faxed copies of my tenancy agreement to all concerned but the letters keep coming.

What's the best course of action?

I'm seriously thinking of sending them all a final letter stating that I'll be charging for any further correspondence

and suggesting that if they can't (or won't) accept proof of who I am

the best course of action would be for them to proceed with legal action and let the county court sort it all out.