Hello, maybe I could add a little more insight into what could happen. This case, which incidentally was a close friend of mine, was strange at the time, and subsequent to it, the law changed which had it been in operation then, no offence would have been committed other than failing to notify but with no financial loss to the state. In the times before Income Support, Supplementary Benefit was the norm. The gist of it is that my friend started a small one man business from nothing in 1986 whilst claiming a means tested benefit along with mortgage interest relief and Rates Rebate (CTB) He literally earned nothing. What income he had coming in was exceeded by expenses. This went on for about 18 months. When he became established and believed that he could survive on what income he was earning, he ceased all claims (1988). Some two years or so later (1990) he started getting telephone calls from his customers, friends and family saying that the DSS (as it was then) had a guy asking an awful lot of questions about him. He thought nothing more about it, until 1991, he started to lose customers. A few explained to him why saying that this guy from the DSS was saying that he was being investigated for benefit fraud and any body that was involved with him was likely to be looked at as well, unless they gave statements about him. In late 1991, this DSS guy turned up one evening (without an appointment) and demanded that he discuss the benefit claim that was in force between 1986 and 1988. He produced a whole lot of signed and cashed giros for him to confirm that they were cashed by him, which he did. The guy then left. A few months later and still having telpehone calls from people, he was awoken at 4.30am one morning with someone banging on his front door. It was the Police - about 10 of them with two cars and a van outside. They made him get dressed and told his wife and children to do the same. Then they proceeded to search his home, his car, his garage and shed. They removed bundles of paperwork. He was handcuffed and put in a car and driven to some rented rooms he used as an office. That was searched and nearly everything was removed. He was taken to the Police station and detained for over a day whilst answering questions. He did not have a solicitor as he thought that it was a mistake and a big joke. Anyhow after 30 hours or so in the cells, he was bailed to comem back in a month. Now not having any files or work documents, he could not work. He went back after a month and was charged with Theft between 1986 and 1988. Moving quickly onwards it went to Magistrates who sent it to Crown Court. Another year or so later - 1993, he pleaded guilty to the theft of £12,000 in total. He was sentenced to 12 months in prison, and on release after serving nearly 10 months he had a further 2 years of probabtion with an order that the £12,000 plus costs be repaid within 28 days. That was not possible. He sold everything he had which still left £9,000 outstanding. He was taken back to court and put back in prison for another 28 days AND still had to find the £9,000. Eventually he borrowed it off me!! The upshot of this is that because they kept all his paperwork until after the Crown Court hearing his business folded leaving him in serious debt. Like the other poster, he was told that if he had gone about it in a different way, they calculated that he would have had grants etc totalling £6,000 plus help with the rates. The PS to this is that he appealed against the order to the Social Security Commissioners and produced accounts, books and records covering the years 1986 - 1988 which clearly showed sales, but expenses exceeded them to the extent that he lost money in those two years. Nothing happened he still had to pay the money. The law was eventually changed in that if working for yourself now you are allowed to deduct reasonable expenses from the money earned. In his case, this showed that he didn't earn a penny!!! He would now, still get full Income Support!!!!

Hello This might be of interest. It is taken from an internal website from a Local Medical Committee that represents GP's in the South of England: This was information received from an LMC secretary in England who provides useful information "I sit on Employment and Support Allowance appeals. The criteria for ESA are VERY much stricter than for Incapacity Benefit, which it replaces. Although the Department for Work and Pensions talks about the test defining the claimants ability to work, it does no such thing. You have to pass the test ((score 15 points) to claim the benefit. If you don't you have to claim Job Seekers Allowance. This does not neccessarily mean that you are fit for work or employable. It is likely that nearly all applicants will appeal as you continue to get ESA until your appeal is determined. If the appeal panel hears a case and thinks it would be helped by further medical evidence it can adjourn the case and ask for a GP report or for a copy of the records. The Tribunals Service will pay for these, not a very high rate but better than nothing. The practice does not, therefore, disadvantage a patient if it declines to do a report for at the patient's request before the appeal ."

Hello I believe that there are other Government schemes available to help stop repossession. Sale and rent back is one. However from what I hear and read, they are so restricted that very few manage to get on them. It was interesting to read what was said at the time that no one should lose their homes with the reduction of interest payments, banks and building societies have assured the government that that will not happen. How, no one knows!! Go see Shelter - they might know more. Gemma

Hello I did a little researching a while ago relating to this particular subject of the issuing of an ESA113 (IB113). I first of all believed that all claims have this sent out. Then I find out from the DWP that they used to do it under IB claims, but since ATOS came on the scene, the responsibility is theirs. The DWP can request it to be sent but normally it is left for ATOS to decide who should and shouldn't have one. Then I looked at the ESA65. This has 4 boxes to fill in relating to what evidence has been used by the Decision Maker to arrive at the decision. Boxes 1 & 2 relate to the ESA50 and the ATOS medical report. Box 3 relates to medical evidence from the GP, and Box 4 for evidence/documents submitted by the claimant in support of their claim. Boxes 1 & 2 are clear and hold no problems. Box 3 is for the ESA113, which if ATOS deem it proper not to issue one that particular box will always remain empty. They appear to control what evidence should be obtained (Judge & Jury???) That takes me to Box 4. The DWP were very clear to me when I spoke with them that 'most' people submit evidence which will be used. When I challenged that by simply asking which document relating to the ESA claim actually asks or even suggests that that is the correct way forward, they ummmed and ahhhhed and said they would ring me back. This they did 2 days later and it was now a 'Case Manager'. I asked him the same question if he could point me in the right direction to that elusive instruction/request/suggestion. He admitted that there was no mention anywhere on any document that even remotely suggested that you should send anything in. But and he reiterated a big BUT, nearly everyone does voluntarily. OK, I then asked him to whom the evidence should be submitted - Oh that would be ATOS - send it with the ESA50 he told me. I agreed that that made sense as at that stage no claimant would know which DWP office to send it to as they had received no letter normally from the DWP relating to their claim. I then pointed out that ATOS specifically said in their covering letter that came with the ESA50 that NO document/letter or report should be returned to their office with the ESA50. To that he was surprised. So I read the letter out and he told me that that was ATOS saying that they did not deal with any additional evidence, just the Medical. He went on to say that the additional evidence should go to the DWP.????? From then on he ummmmed and ahhhhed. I pushed it and the upshot is that in reality the DWP or ATOS don't want any additional evidence to be sent in by the claimant until after and only if they decide that the ESA claim fails. So why have Box 4? Errr well that was on there because that is what was intended when ESA became law, but the DWP decided that they would not be able to work under the pressure if everyone sent in supporting documentation with every claim. UMMM - but you said nearly everyone does voluntarily anyhow. Yes he said they do, but we do not want to advertise the fact. Anyhow you can always send it in with the request for a reconsideration!! And that was it. Eventually I got to the bottom of it. I'm not saying that there is a conspiracy to keep the public in the dark, but there is ample evidence to suggest that the DWP/ATOS would prefer not to receive any supporting evidence at all. In which case and it is the case normally, that the DM only wants to use the ATOS report & ESA50 for speed of operation - or is there really something bigger at work - a way to reduce the number of successful claims in the first instance??? Politics and working practices go hand in hand in this one I think!!! Gemma

Hello Congrats!!!!! By the way did they indicate when you are to be re-tested by ATOS? Apparently ATOS at your medical will have indicated to the DWP when you are to reviewed again, unless you asked the Tribunal to fix a date or time different to that. And then the whole damn thing starts over again!!! Gemma x

Hello Thanks for your comments. Yes I was trying to make a point of saying that there are people out there that don't need any benefit at all. They have their own resources. It is criminal that this individual can 'invest the whole of his OAP for over 20 years. that total without interest would amount to some £90,000 so far!! That on top of his AA and War Pension (incidentally he suffered PTSD - something that happens today to 'ordinary' people and they get on with their life). Of course there are those that every £1 matters, but think of the increase they could have if all benefits and pensions were means tested? £102 pw? Yes I could live on that a week. In fact currently the minimum that somebody would get at 60 + is £132.60 pw, not £102. No rent, Council Tax etc - just food heat, light and general living costs - £132 pw - yes certainly - I happen to do so!. Gemma x

Hello I have been reading this with a great deal of interest. I agree absolutely that any contribution based benefit should have a time limit attached to it. Otherwise you are going to have millionaires claiming ESA for year after year because they paid some contributions in the past. I think that ALL benefits should be means tested and the contribution based ones should be scrapped. I would suggest that this includes everything - JSA, ESA, Bus passes, Winter Fuel Allowance, DLA, AA, Familly Allowance etc etc. If people have enough coming in then why should the state give them any more! I have someone in my family who retired from the Civil Service about 25 years ago. He actually lives quite well on that pension without the rest that he gets. He has never spent a penny of his Old Age Pension - he invests it in bank and building society bonds. He also gets another £71.40 every week Attendance Allowance which he uses to pay his gardener and handyman, £400 heating allowance, bus pass - yet still runs a car, but choses not to use it because it is difficult to park sometimes, free TV licence, a war pension etc etc. Surely that is a good enough reason to means test everything? Gemma

Hello, What you appear to have overlooked is the fact that DWP/ATOS are not interested in the diagnosis, or the illness - just that with that diagnosis and illness could you possibly do any type of work. There are many people that have very serious illnesses, but that doesn't mean to say that they can't work - many do! The 'medical' was there to test the various descriptors that show that someone is capable of some type of work - hence the reason why you scored what you did. It is their opinion that notwithstanding what the medical problems are, there is the possibility that you could work. It was mentioned by someone else - 'does that include sitting at home addressing envelopes?' - yes it does, it is a job! As you are able to use a keyboard, maybe a job at home using a computer would be possible. Very shortly, as stated in the Spending Review' you will have to sign on as 'unemployed' and claim JSA instead. You will be made to look for a job or lose your benefits. Be positive about yourself - think about the things you can and could do. It is far better to have maybe a part time job and earning a few pounds than doing nothing with yourself all day and night. Look to the bright side, the government is trying to help you - see it for what it is and help yourself more. Gem

Have you told DWP that your condition is worse or better than before the medical? If you have then they are re-assessing you. Probably get a new medical with ATOS as well!! If not, maybe the DWP have information from somebody - GP, Consultants?? or maybe somebody has told them that you are claiming but not really ill!!!

Thank you Erika once more. Yes it is crazy isn't it. It seems to me that when I may be entitled to more benefit, the DWP can hide behind the fact that if I didn't know that I was entitled, then that is my fault, not theirs. And consquently lose money because I should have known and can't have it backdated. I can understand their argument be it not for the fact that I have made countless telephone calls to their office asking for help and basically being told that there is no help for me, I will have to wait for the Court hearing and "it's not our job to explain what benefits I am or am not entitled to - that is your responsibility to find out and then make a claim for them". Never mind I think I have it sorted now in my head due to your excellent help and advice. Thanks Gemma

Thanks Erika, That is fine. I see what you are getting at, the law has changed and DWP may not be aware of it. I will do as you suggest, and enclose the evidence with the letter. I presume that I will have to go and have another medical which does not give me any great feeling of possible success. I will no doubt be found still fit for work and have to appeal against that decision as well. What a crazy world we are living in! Thanks once again, and I will keep everyone that has been so kind to me, updated with what happens. Gemma x

Thank you for your replies. I can now understand what you are saying. (that is apart from the link - do people actually manage to read and understand that stuff?) Should I download a new application form and send it to the DWP with the evidence? Thanks again. Gemma

Hello, I have tried to get an answer from the DWP but they keep saying the same old same old. My problem is that whilst I am happy with waiting for my turn at the Tribunal Court (had my medical in December 2009 and appealed against the decision in Januray 2010), my health has since taken a nose dive. Not only have my previous conditions deteriorated but I have now been diagnosed as having something else wrong with me. I have a progressive disease which will, if I look at the statistics, result in my early death (anytime after 2011). In addition I have a worsening of a previous problem which is my mental health. Having said that, what I cannot get an answer to is do I notify the DWP of my current condition which as I mentioned earlier, is now a lot worse than at the time of the medical and how do I go about doing it? The DWP say that I must wait until my Tribunal has been heard, and if I fail, I should then make a new claim. They say I can't make a new claim based on what my problems are now as I already have a claim ongoing through the appeal system. They did however give me some hope in that I can ask the Court to consider my current health condition and give a ruling on that as well. At the moment they say I am fit for work, which I am not. I know I am looking at the worse case scenario, but what would happen if something happened to me before the hearing and I die? (high risk category of developing terminal cancer with a 5% chance of survival) I can understand a constant illness but there does not seem to be a way of them keep reviewing my ESA claim as I get progressively worse. Thank you