Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit taken away

[limasierra]

I had a medical last week for my Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit.

Today I had a letter saying it was being stopped.

 

This benefit has been in payment since 1982 when I had a serious back injury and have had 5 operations since. I am progressively having more and more problems.

 

My disablement was increased to 40% from 30% at appeal two years ago.

 

I have bowel damage and major nerve damage to my legs from one of the botched spinal operations (accepted at appeal two years ago).

I am listed for a 3 level cervical spine fusion next month which is due to the long standing lumbar spine damage.

I was told 3 weeks ago I need both knee joints replaced due to the leg weakness , I also have bursitis of the right hip so I can't walk very far.

I gave consultants reports to the examining doctor and she said these would be read by the 'decision maker'.

Today when I rang the DWP to make sure they hadn't sent the wrong letter, the clerk even said he was sorry as it was a very unusual decision to suddenly go from 40% to zero.

I asked him if my GP or any of the consultants had been written to and he said no.

He said the 'decision maker' had based this decision on what the ATOS doctor had written.

 

It's an understatement to say how shocked I am. Plus my money will stop soon and there's a long wait for the appeal.

I've read about this type of callous treatment of claimants in the papers but I didn't expect to be treated as harshly as this.

To top it all I was told this week I have a heart problem and have just started medication.

I could do without this added stress.

I feel absolutely poleaxed. Things couldn't get any worse.

[sj01]

Hi, I get iib and was told last time in january that I would get iib for life if i was the same next year.

ThatI suppose depends on if I get the same doctor next year.

The problem now is that this year I had lots of medical letters and appointments but I have now come to the end of my treatment so when I go next year I will only have my word.

i am too young for knee replacements and it looks like operations are going to be limited by the NHS.

we are all going to be penalised for not getting jobs because we are not capable of doing them.

I cant stand all day, I cant sit all day. There are no jobs and I am on strong medication.

I too am very worried as the dwp have just stopped paying my morgage now, they expect my son to pay it.

I wish now I had voted labour.

[limasierra]

I've now seen what this 'doctor' has written on my medical report.

 

The written evidence/report of a top Complex Spinal Surgeon at Guys Hospital noting that I suffered Cauda Equina damage at the time of the initial

back injury has been completely ignored.

Any doctor worth their salt should know about Cauda Equina and the irreversible and devasting damage caused by this syndrome.

 

The ATOS 'doctor' has said ' NO ' to the question ' Does the evidence listed in the B18 lead you to conclude that the accident/prescribed disease still result in a relevant loss of physical or mental faculty ?'

 

Does this government really intend that benefit should be taken away under these circumstances?

Or are they turning a blind eye to ATOS earning themselves thousands and thousands of pounds in incentive bonuses by causing such stress and misery?

 

So there we are. What do surgeons working at flagship hospitals know compared to an ATOS doctor??

[limasierra]

I have shifted this from the Disability section as I've realised this is more appropriate to Benefit queries.

 

Two years ago my Industrial Injury benefit was increased at Tribunal to 40%.

I have needed 5 back operations since suffering Cauda Equina ( serious and permanent spinal nerve damage) at the time of the accident and further damage caused by bad back surgery.

Leg weakness, bowel damage and depression resulting from all this was also accepted at the Tribunal as well as the obvious spinal problems .

 

Can anyone tell me how on earth an ATOS doctor after examining me a short while ago can write that they agree with the previous board but then tick a box that says none of my existing problems relate to the original Industrial Injury????

 

I phoned the DWP and asked why they'd taken my benefit away completely and was told that only my back injury was considered??

Does that mean anything to anybody because it's complete double talk to me.

 

Today I had a letter saying.... 'they'd looked at the points you raise and the advice from your medical on ** * **** (recent ) and find there's been no change since the previous decision was made on your claim in respect of the industrial accident on ** ** **** ' (29 years ago).

 

Can anyone hazard a guess as to whether they're talking about the Tribunal decision two years ago or the most recent decision a couple of weeks ago?

 

I'm phoning them again on Monday to ask what they mean but I'm wondering if anyone else canmake sense of such a ridiculous letter and to put it mildly a very bad and punitive decision.

 

I'm having a very difficult time working out why they would do this to me considering how much damage I've suffered from this spinal injury plus how can anyone have 5 spinal operations resulting from the accident but be considered not to qualify any longer for the benefit.

 

Grateful for any input, thankyou.

[rebel11]

Hi lima

 

Welcome to CAG

The guys will advise as soon as they are available.

[maroondevo52]

Hi, limasierra.

 

I've merged both your threads, best keeping them in the Forum your now in.

 

Regards.

 

Scott.

[limasierra]

Thankyou Guys on the team

 

Looking again at the ATOS doctors report, part 5 of the Opinion on loss of faculty says -

 

1. 'Musculo-skeletal injury lumbar spine'

then to the next question -

 

2. Does the evidence listed in the B18 lead you to conclude that the accident/ prescribed disease still results in a relevant loss of physical or mental faculty?

The 'NO' box has been ticked and alongside is printed 'Go to Part 9'

Here is written -

'I agree with the previous board.

Present symptoms are costitutional (sic) in nature and not attributable to the accident in 1982.

NRL.OF '

 

Does anyone know what 'NRL.OF' means?

[limasierra]

My GP wrote a very strong letter in support of my appeal explaining thoroughly how the Cauda Equina spinal injury has definitely caused 'loss of function' , also asking the DWP to read the consultants letters they were supplied with which describe the problems in detail.

 

This was sent by recorded delivery on March 11th.

Apart from a 'standard' letter received on March 13th telling me when my benefit would stop I've heard nothing since.

 

So I rang the DWP Industrial Injuries office today asking for an update.

 

I've been told that my papers were returned to ATOS on March 21st for their 'medical person' to reconsider the report as the Decision Maker has 'picked up on a couple of points' in my GP's letter......

 

This may take another couple of weeks before I hear.

 

Wouldn't like to lay a bet that the ATOS 'medical person' will concede that their 'report' is totally false would you??

[limasierra]

More feet dragging by DWP & ATOS

 

 

On April 26th I telephoned the DWP, I thought it was time to make a 'progress check' as more than 2 weeks had gone by with no communication.

 

File 'wasn't where it should be', nothing entered on the computer re the return of my papers from ATOS, someone will call me back later.

 

Rang back again same day as no-one returned my call. Message had been put in 'wrong supervisor's tray' hence no return phone call.

 

Did get a supervisor on the phone who had no prior knowledge of my case and after reading up on it she offered to ring ATOS (or 'medical services') as they call it.

 

To her credit she did ring me back promptly having been told by ATOS that due to a 'shortage of doctors' nobody had looked at my case to reappraise it following my GP's supporting letter having been submitted. So it had been sitting there for over a month doing nothing.

And presumably if I needed to still go to appeal stage I would have been pushed even further back in the queue??

 

DWP will be in touch with me when ATOS have finally found someone to reconsider their medical report in the light of my GP's letter.

 

No hurry then.

[leemack]

It astonishes me how the dwp and atos 'doctors' believe they are more knowledgeable about a persons condition than a spinal surgeon and the person's own gp.

 

Unfortunately iidb appeals are notoriously slow to go to tribunal (certainly in my area).

[limasierra]

Yes - the local CAB who are helping me told me there's at least a 6 or 7 month wait for a tribunal hearing (which I had a success with 2 years ago). Perhaps they're hoping claimants will give up/die/ or get a 'miracle cure'??

 

This combination of arrogance and a determination to 'kick the claimants with heavy boots' attitude sickens me.

 

We all know there are plenty of people making fraudulent claims and this sort of treatment should be reserved for them, not genuine claimants who are being subjected to unnecessarily harsh treatment when they are already ill and disabled.

 

And as for the sloppy office procedures..........is it a 'couldn't care less' scenario are are they badly understaffed?

[limasierra]

The DWP have deferred to ATOS and decided to ignore my GP's written evidence of my medical condition on top of the supplied written evidence of the top complex spinal surgeon who operated on me last year.

 

They feel the decision by the ATOS medical person to reduce my 40% award to 0% has to stand.

 

Apparently ATOS say that despite having had 5 spinal operations since the initial spinal injury in 1982 and all the resulting problems from that are nothing to do with the initial injury and in fact to quote the DWP this morning I am now "better".

 

In fact to have a 0% award they are saying the Industrial Injury never happened.....Whoopee - a miracle has happened of the 'take up thy bed and walk ' variety.

 

This is a perverse and punitive action on the part of ATOS/DWP and entirely supports the evidence in the press recently that the wrong claimants are being targeted.

[limasierra]

Anybody else waiting for their Tribunal hearing been told they've been put down for a 'PAPER HEARING ONLY?'

 

I rang the Tribunals office at Sutton this morning to find out how long I'd have to wait, the CAB and I having received a sheaf of papers in readiness...........dated 11th May and received 17th June.

 

Me: 'How long roughly is the waiting list please for the Tribunal?'

 

Sutton : 'Oh, you want to attend do you?'

 

Me: 'Attend? Of course I want to attend! I wouldn't not turn up for my Tribunal hearing!'

 

Sutton: 'Oh well we've got you down for a paper hearing only'.

 

Me: 'You've sent me all the papers for the Tribunal plus you've sent them to my CAB representative as well so why on earth would I not attend? Would you mind telling me please who told you that my case was to be a 'paper hearing only' ?.

 

Sutton: Oh nobody, it just says paper hearing only so I'll amend it'.

 

Me: 'I insist on you telling me exactly where that came from'.

 

Sutton: 'I don't know, it just says on the form'..........

 

I phoned the DWP back and the lady said she'd never heard of such a thing happening before, plus I should have been sent a form by Sutton to complete re attending the Tribunal.

She said she'd ring them for me and sort it out.

 

Just thought I'd let you know what's happened to me in case anybody else has any input or similar experience.

[leemack]

Before I became too ill to work, the Tribunal service were having some administrative issues - its hard to believe they still are, over a year later.

 

This could be just an isolated incident - I've never had someone put down for a paper hearing without being sent the TAS1 enquiry form.

[jacobsl]

Hi, I am sorry your benefit has been stopped. This happened to me in May last year. My benefit just stopped before receiving a letter telling me so.

 

I had an accident in 2004 and injured my lower back. As I had a pre-existing spondylolisthesis from a childhood accident I was told that even if I hadn't had my accident I would still be disabled and in pain within a five year period. I do not believe this and so I appealed. I eventually went to tribunal in February this year and the doctor there said that it isn't my spondylolisthesis that is causing my problems but a slipped disc. At the appeal I gave evidence that showed that the natural history of a spondylolisthesis isn't painful and doesn't lead to disability. This is why I think the doctor changed the diagnosis.

 

Two weeks after the accident in 2004 my upper back started with pain and back in 2007, not long after I started getting IIDB I appealed as I thought I was more disabled than the percentage that had been awarded. The tribunal back then included my upper back and increased my award from 30% (with 3% knocked off for the spondy..) to 57%.

 

My appeal in February this year was unsuccessful and so I started the process of applying to the Upper Tribunal but before I could do that I first had to request a statement of reasons and then ask permission from the first tier tribunal judge to appeal to the Upper Tribunal. I received a letter yesterday saying they refuse. I can now apply directly to the Upper Tribunal. The reason I am appealing to the Upper Tribunal is because I don't think there is adequate explanation, in fact one important element hasn't been explained at all and that is regarding my upper back. In their statement of reasons, the judge and doctor state that they disagree with a previous medical doctor, who had said that my upper back pain is related to something rheumatological prior to my accident in 2004, as there is no evidence to support this. Then later in the statement of reasons they state that there is evidence of pain in 1995/6 which is further evidence of a constitutional weakness and vulnerability. These two statements contradict each other; in one hand they are saying that there is no evidence to support an upper back problem prior to my accident in 2004 and then they say there is.

 

At the tribunal hearing I explained that I had an accident in 1995 to my upper back which was work related and this was backed up by my occupational health papers (which I didn't have with me at the appeal) but no mention of this was in the decision notice or the statement of reasons but was mentioned in the 'minutes' taken at the time of the appeal. I have no history of upper back pain prior to the accident in 1995 so it should have been explained how they arrived at their decision. I believe that a lot of the supporting evidence I have given has been ignored or maybe not even looked at.

 

It is very difficult and as you say, I think they hope claimants will give up. I think it is important not to give up but try all avenues. It is made more difficult for me as I now live in France and don't have access to help or advice so am on my own with this.

 

I hope you are successful but for me getting another doctor to say that they don't think my symptoms are constitutional seems impossible. Doctors don't seem to like to rock the boat so to speak. Good luck!

[limasierra]

Had a phone call from Sutton this afternoon in response to my recorded delivery letter.

They said they were not prepared to write a 'statement' of what had happened because things had now been 'corrected'.

 

I had one hell of a heated discussion on the phone with this person who would not accept that anything need a 'statement'.

All she was prepared to do was write and tell me that I will be having a Tribunal hearing sometime in the future.

 

I stuck to my guns and demanded the recent events be put in writing .

Almost at the end she suddenly tried to get me to say over the phone that I wanted to appear at the hearing without sending me an enquiry form.

 

Once again I said I would not agree to anything via phonecalls as too many mistakes have been made already and I want everything confirmed in writing.

There was a sudden silence and she very abruptly closed the conversation with 'Ok then. Goodbye.'

And down went the phone.

Disgraceful.

[limasierra]

Have now received and returned the 'enquiry form' stating I wish to attend my tribunal.

 

I also received a written apology from the Tribunal service for failing to send me an enquiry form and also for being told over the phone that my appeal was listed as a 'paper hearing only'.

My appeal has apparently now been '....registered to continue to hearing where you will be invited to attend...'.

Well that's good.

 

I was told that it could be in August which is a lot quicker than I'd been expecting.

Anybody else getting their Tribunal dates through promptly?

[limasierra]

Received a letter from Sutton Tribunal office today enclosing copies of my submission for the Tribunal which the CAB did for me.

No date yet but when I was with my CAB advisor 2 weeks ago they phoned Sutton and were told that my file was with a judge.

Strange or what??

[limasierra]

I still haven't heard anything further from the Tribunal Service as to when my hearing will be so I phoned this afternoon.

 

I was told that my papers were with a judge. I reminded them that my CAB adviser was told this on July 13th and asked why nothing has moved on since then.

 

The explanation I was given was that the judge is looking at the papers in order to make a recommendation to the panel as to how much time my hearing will take.

 

When the papers are sent back from the judge it will then probably be another six weeks until my hearing takes place.

 

Strange - my letter from the Tribunal service dated July 1st stated that Tribunals for hearing at Ashford were presently being listed for August. Mine will not now be until October at the earliest if this afternoon's conversation is anything to go by.

 

Has anybody else been told that their papers have been sent to a judge prior to a Tribunal hearing and if so, how long did they have to wait for a date?

Edited August 22, 2011 by limasierra

[ANDYANDFLO]

All I can say is that I admire you tenacity. I had a Industrial accident in 1995 and was awarded IIDB of 80% until 2004. Came 2004, new claim submitted, and after 6 months they came to the decision that my mental health was 'cured' as the medication ( the lithium part) prescribed by the psychiatrist was not recognised by ATOS as being used for mental health problems. It was normally prescribed for stress type problems only??? Therefore I don't have any problems relating to the accident, just a continuation of the stress problems.

 

What stress problems?? Never suffered with it, no record of it - what are they talking about?

 

I sent over some reports which showed that the medication WAS issued for mental health reasons. ATOS still said no it isn't - you don't have a problem just stress.

 

Anyhow after letters going back and forth for nearly a year with them (ATOS) even suggesting that my psychiatrist doesn't know one drug from another. I gave up, it was like hitting my head against a brick wall.

 

Made a new claim this year (after 7 years of continual suffering) and I enclosed copies of the ridiculous ATOS reports from 04 and updates from my psychiatrist, only to be told that I have to have an assessment with ATOS to see if I am still suffering from the accident.!!!

 

This I must see, they have to come up with the same argument as if they don't they will look idiots!! Yes he had a problem from 1995 to 2004, then he was cured, then he has the same accident problem again from 2011 - as if - I just know they will say I am suffering stress that existed before the accident.

 

How can you get these cretins to see sense?

[limasierra]

Good luck AndyandFlo

ATOS are ignoring consultants reports and GP supporting letters in the claims of many many genuine claimants. It's being widely reported and ATOS came under heavy criticism recently by the Work and Pensions Committee headed by Anne Begg MP.

Don't give up, go to Tribunal if you have to, my case seems to be dragging on and I've already had one written apology over the way it's been handled.

Yes you're right, I've got a lot of tenacity but I'm very well informed on ATOS and I've got good support from CAB which is vital. I recommend them to you.

Please post again and let us know how you get on!

[limasierra]

Update....

 

Rang Sutton Tribunal Service yesterday to ask again how much longer I'd have to wait for my hearing, especially as their letter of 1st July said they were currently listing cases for August.

 

My papers are now back from the judge and I've been given a 'verbal date' of 17th November.

 

Apparently they are having problems hiring the right doctors for the panel and my case needs the right sort of doctors.

 

Will let you know when the letter arrives.

[limasierra]

Successful outcome from today'sTribunal.

 

Just to say the Tribunal reinstated my Industrial Injury Disablement Benefit of 40% and instead of provisional it is now for life.

 

A huge relief after enduring 9 months stress and apprehension.

 

I found the Tribunal to be very considerate and understanding and we could see they were genuinely pleased to be able to restore this for me with the big surprise bonus of it being for life.

 

I want to say on the forum also that I wouldn't have coped with this and achieved this result without the help of the Citizens Advice Bureau.

Their submission was very accurate and succinct and was handled very professionally today.

 

To anyone else facing what I've just been through I recommend you to seek their advice and help, and I wish you all the very best of luck.

 

Now at last I can 'put this to bed'.

 

Many thanks to all those on CAG who have replied to my posts and offered support.

[jacobsl]

I am so pleased for you.

 

As I stated in an earlier reply, my industrial injury benefit was stopped 18 months ago and I have tried to appeal. I wasn't successful in February but have recently seen another consultant here in France who doesn't agree with Atos and the consultant in England that my current condition is constitutional. I have sent this letter to the IIDB team and also to the tribunal service. The doctor here speaks very good English and was kind enough to translate his letter into French and had his secretary type it up.

 

I had a reply from the IIDB person dealing with my claim today and he is still trying to say my condition is constitutional.

 

Unfortunately, I can't get any help from the CAB or such like as I now live in France but having my benefit stopped has made the last 18 months very difficult.

 

Again, I would like to say how pleased i am for you. Well done for sticking with it.

[jacobsl]

Sorry, I meant the letter was translated into English from French.