woodmally Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Nobody claiming disability benefits just gets money given to them. That has never been the system. Medical evidence was always required. Levels of fraud are low and always have been. Before Atos fraud was detected and dealt with. A properly targeted and efficient fraud detection system would surely cost less than the £400m Atos will be paid. But that doesn't fit the agenda of removing hundreds of thousands of people off their benefits. Atos are there to do the dirty work and take the flak. That's why they get paid so much. OK but the question is are doctors capable and should make decisions as to wether people should work or not. Yes they are qualified to identifiy if a persoon is ill or suffering but its only a diagnosis and how to if possible cure it and they would if they are sensible in most cases err on the side of caution and decide they are not fit for work. So of course they are going to hand out sick notes as there is no incentive for them to not and keep our workforce working where people can work. I personally think there should be a check on the system as I have seen many examples of people at work on long term sick signed off by doctors but would be capable of work but doctors are being cautious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 OK but the question is are doctors capable and should make decisions as to wether people should work or not. Yes they are qualified to identifiy if a persoon is ill or suffering but its only a diagnosis and how to if possible cure it and they would if they are sensible in most cases err on the side of caution and decide they are not fit for work. So of course they are going to hand out sick notes as there is no incentive for them to not and keep our workforce working where people can work. I personally think there should be a check on the system as I have seen many examples of people at work on long term sick signed off by doctors but would be capable of work but doctors are being cautious. 99 times out of 100 you are going to trust the medical professionals who know the people best rather than a less medically qualified person working with limited data, short time to assess the person against a rigid checklist and with a pre-defined target to hit. The DWP figures suggest that the level of fraud is low, in the low single figures percentage wise. That would suggest that relying on experienced professionals has the best accuracy rate. It's what you would expect if you break off from an Atos fixation and think about it rationally. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a check on the system. I'm saying there should be better checks in the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 99 times out of 100 you are going to trust the medical professionals who know the people best rather than a less medically qualified person working with limited data, short time to assess the person against a rigid checklist and with a pre-defined target to hit. The DWP figures suggest that the level of fraud is low, in the low single figures percentage wise. That would suggest that relying on experienced professionals has the best accuracy rate. It's what you would expect if you break off from an Atos fixation and think about it rationally. I'm not saying there shouldn't be a check on the system. I'm saying there should be better checks in the system. A fair post generally but how accurate are the DWP figures ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tradescanthia Posted October 2, 2012 Author Share Posted October 2, 2012 OK but the question is are doctors capable and should make decisions as to wether people should work or not. Yes they are qualified to identifiy if a persoon is ill or suffering but its only a diagnosis and how to if possible cure it and they would if they are sensible in most cases err on the side of caution and decide they are not fit for work. So of course they are going to hand out sick notes as there is no incentive for them to not and keep our workforce working where people can work. I personally think there should be a check on the system as I have seen many examples of people at work on long term sick signed off by doctors but would be capable of work but doctors are being cautious. Sorry woodmally but you are talking rubbish. Since when can YOU yourself look at someone and decide whether they are are fit and capable or not. Leave it to the medics to assess. The whole point of this thread is about ATOS using unqualifed people to make assessments, just people such as yourself........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 A fair post generally but how accurate are the DWP figures ? Ask the DWP. But taking DWP's own assement of DLA published in 2005, 0.5% of overpayments was down to fraud. Clerical error accounted for 0.8% of overpayments. Paying £400m to Atos to run every claimant through the mill and treat each of them like a potential fraudster is not rational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larky Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Ask the DWP. But taking DWP's own assement of DLA published in 2005, 0.5% of overpayments was down to fraud. Clerical error accounted for 0.8% of overpayments. Paying £400m to Atos to run every claimant through the mill and treat each of them like a potential fraudster is not rational. How can Atos know for instance if a person say is or is not suffering from severe Depression which is to do with the "MIND" so its a mental thing. and that person say has been on tablets for such for yrs ? Just how can Atos say all of a sudden a person was suffering with Depression then all of a sudden gets sent for from Atos , how do they go about such if a person is say suffering from such and cannot mix with people ? how can that person work for instance if he/she cant mix with others for instance ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeaFan Posted October 2, 2012 Share Posted October 2, 2012 Ok yes the daily mail and the sun do have an agenda (as do all papers) but these examples do exist. Some people will try to fiddle the system. The question is how do we solve this. Atos will need to be replaced by something else to stop it from happening. The benefit system needs to be policed. You've misunderstood if you think the changes to IB/ESA are to do with cutting out fraud. They never have been. Before they were introduced, fraud of incapacity benefit was about 0.5% according to the DWP's own figures, so for every example of fraud emblazoned across the front page of the Mail, there are 200 genuine claimants. Or rather were, because what is happening is that a high percentage are being re-branded as 'fit to work', even when they are not. That's the scandal - that people who have little to no chance of getting a job because of their health condition or disability are being re-branded 'fit to work' to save money. They system does need policing but it was already being policed very effectively. ATOS, the Tory government and their NuLab predecessors who introduced this are lower than vermin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kersplosh Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 You've misunderstood if you think the changes to IB/ESA are to do with cutting out fraud. They never have been. Before they were introduced, fraud of incapacity benefit was about 0.5% according to the DWP's own figures, so for every example of fraud emblazoned across the front page of the Mail, there are 200 genuine claimants. Or rather were, because what is happening is that a high percentage are being re-branded as 'fit to work', even when they are not. That's the scandal - that people who have little to no chance of getting a job because of their health condition or disability are being re-branded 'fit to work' to save money. They system does need policing but it was already being policed very effectively. ATOS, the Tory government and their NuLab predecessors who introduced this are lower than vermin. I couldn't agree more Teafan :clap: once again. I was fortunate enough to have two medicals by ATOS and both contradicted each other. One said I was unfit for work and the other said that I was not disabled and could work... I bloody wish !!!! I am now appealing against the decision to place me on work related ESA when my GP says I should not work, my consultant says I should not work and my physio says I should not work ???? WTF are ATOS trying to prove ? Maybe because they are a business and profits = happy shareholders ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheff1johnny Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 the best way for atos to work is if they expect you may be fit for work, refer you to a porper G.P with specialist training for that person's condition, for further assesment. This way should keep everyone happy. Atos should not be allowed to deem a person fit or unfit for work. I can not see any other way it could be done fairly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeaFan Posted October 3, 2012 Share Posted October 3, 2012 the best way for atos to work is if they expect you may be fit for work, refer you to a porper G.P with specialist training for that person's condition, for further assesment. This way should keep everyone happy. Atos should not be allowed to deem a person fit or unfit for work. I can not see any other way it could be done fairly. It wouldn't keep the government happy, they don't want it to be fair, they just want to save money and have decided they'd rather do this by taking it from disabled people than by making the rich pay their taxes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.