I think the above evidence is evidence enough of what the tactics are.

Tactics is indeed the issue here. Let me put another possible scenario up for you to consider. Given that we don't know the facts of the case, we cannot know where this case actually sits in the spectrum of possibilities.

One one side, the guy has had serious health issues, some of which may remain, and was so ill in his medical he had to be carted off to hospital. So he should remain on the sick.

If he were still very ill I would agree with you. I also think Atos would too.

But the other side of the argument could be this. He has had health issues in the past that he has largely recovered from, which still affect his health but not so much. Being a redundant steelworker, he might well be in receipt of an additional redundancy payment that is on-going, and would stop if he were ever to find a job (my father in law was a miner and got that from 1984 until he retired 15 years later). So that payment, plus his extra for incapacity benefit (and maybe DLA too) is a BIG position to defend. So the guy goes into the medical with a lot hanging on to him being found unfit. He has to do anything to get through. Anything. What better way than to need an ambulance during the medical? How can anybody dispute he is ill if that happens? So he feigns some illness, and Atos call the ambulance to cover their ass - they don't want somebody dying on their patch - the PR is bad enough already. Atos then find him fit for work - presumably at a new medical, or off the original medical if they had done enough of it to be able to come to an assessment [which, if you think about it, could explain the sudden 'illness' when the claimant realised he was done for].

I have worked in the benefit system for 15 years, 6 years at the front line. I have seen it all. Until you have interviewed a heroin addict who is clucking in front of you and telling you every lie in the book to get what they want, getting increasing louder and violent when they realise they are not going to get what they want, you will never understand. An ex-colleague told me recently that one of his claimants was told she had to look for work as her child had reached the age threshold for requiring her to now start finding work. She was not happy and said the only way out was to get pregnant. 3 months later, this single parent turned up to report pregnancy. With people around who do that, a little performance in a medical to pretend you are ill is nothing.

Regardless of your views on this case, I would find it slightly eye-popping that a French company are deciding that people should work!!

My original point shab was to ask, what does one need to be to be declared unfit?
You suggest that it might be some elaborate hoax, that the GP may be corruptible and that his very real health problems may not impinge on him working, he might be defending a pension after showing willingness when young to graft......all conjecture that you use against what may or may not be total integrity.
Thats a lot of supposition to guess whether somebody is fit or not, might the probability suggest it more likely that ATOS are simply getting it wrong?
40% suggests so doesnt it?

My original point shab was to ask, what does one need to be to be declared unfit?

They should be unfit if they are not able to do any job. That means that if this ex-steelworker can sit in a chair all day, has reasonable eyesight and hearing and use of at least one hand, then he could work in a call centre, for example. The woman last week who claimed she was unfit, yet had brought up 3 children could work as a domestic help - she had done it for her own children but was too ill to do it for a job?

You suggest that it might be some elaborate hoax, that the GP may be corruptible and that his very real health problems may not impinge on him working, he might be defending a pension after showing willingness when young to graft......all conjecture

I'm saying that it is a possibility. We don't know the facts. In all of these cases, why doesn't the publication, or a trades union, or somebody, publish the full facts of the medical condition of the person and of the Atos medical - why do we always just get their sad story? If they want sympathy, show full disclosure and let us all see what exactly is going on. Does it not worry you that this has never happened?

the probability suggest it more likely that ATOS are simply getting it wrong?

It is quite possible, even quite probable, that Atos have got it wrong. However, without the full facts of this case, neither of us can say that they have or have not.

Id love to know the facts shab, Id love even more to see the 'algorithm' that they use to determine what constitutes ability to work divided by quality of life, Id say there is a duty to make it be known, it is up to some sort of regulation to force this info, the individual doesnt have this information all they can give is the evidence of their side, and such as in this case imo the evidence is damning.

this is a well written piece on the whole subject of how the government are, as usual, targeting the weakest groups of society:

http://www.campaignforafairsociety.com/2013/03/dr-simon-duffy-on-full-facts-where-to-find-them/

Sorry Badger but that is another load of leftie cr@p. I read this far ...

The truth is:

Disabled people and people in poverty did not cause the current debt crisis, and targeting them for cuts will not solve the crisis.

So the author doesn't know the difference between debt and deficit. Good start. Targeting them will not solve the problem of the deficit on its own, but will help.


Social care is not being protected, it will be severely cut, for it is the major activity of local authorities.

Maybe true, but it will force the Local Authority to target to the most needy. Remember that the DLA money that people get is not beer money - it is to pay for services that they need.


Benefit fraud is rare and disabled people and people in poverty commit much less fraud than other citizens

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What planet is this guy on? Obviously never been near a benefit office in his life.

I heard a statistic on the BBC recently. The total figure of money that has thought to have avoided the correct taxation by individuals is in the trillions of pounds worldwide, a figure that reportedly would solve world poverty numerous times over.

Who do you think has squirrelled this money away shab?
The poor....the disabled?

Shab
04 Aug 13 17:42   
My original point shab was to ask, what does one need to be to be declared unfit?

They should be unfit if they are not able to do any job. That means that if this ex-steelworker can sit in a chair all day, has reasonable eyesight and hearing and use of at least one hand, then he could work in a call centre, for example

You've obviously never heard an irate cockney on the phone.

well shab, I'll take the considered views of a respected academic in his field over your distorted vision of reality all day long

We live in a society which places greed above all other values ( and sex of course)
and encourage self interest..we have very few other values

So should we be surprised at the result, look at what the banks did to us

I don't know the answer
anyway no one would pay me for it if I did..I'm greedy as well

Unusual for ebulgery to lose the plot - but here he surely has!

Society does certainly NOT place greed above all other values - merely individuals within it, and not may at that I propose.
The majority merely wish to live comfortably with their own perception of quality of life.
'People' in general do not do whatever brings most moeny - very far from it!
Have you been unwell over the weekend Ebulgery?

Shab has done well on this thread imv.

He stands up for the ordinary job seeker actively seeking work. He stands up for the principle that there should be some tests in place to discriminate between people who should be excused this requirement on incapacity grounds ( to seek work, they don't necessarily have to find it ) and those who should not. He stands up for the principle that there should also be an appeals process, although to read some of the responses, you'd think that having an assessment process followed by an appeals process makes you some kind of murdering nazi.

Oh dear, Mr Badger opposes not the implementation ( which is being done by a less than desirable for-profit IT company ) but he opposes the 'corrupt policy' behind it. Is this for real? Does he really mean that. Does he really believe that the last government should not attempt to DISCRIMINATE between people who claim to be incapacitated and those who actually are, and we should take the claimant's word for it. That we should allow what started under MaggieT where GPs can tell people that they will never be employable again, ever.

That's what he's actually saying if he opposes the 'corrupt policy' behind it.

For information: the weakest group in society is the working person earning just enough not to qualify for any means-tested benefits. They don't have advocacy organisations. And even if they did, they wouldn't have time to ask for help from them. Because they're busy. And the government taxes them 20% income tax, 12% national insurance, 13.8% employers national insurance ( which the worker pays for but doesn't see on his top line ), and then has 20% of most consumption taken off him to boot, or more if it's petrol or a glass of malt after a tough day.

We can't always agree Ivor I am sad to say
..but a good thing I would say, we need a variety of opinions

It is certainly a society of consumerism if not greed, so everybody seeks more money at just about the expense of
everything else to buy these things

People in different positions in society have different perceptions

Sadly for some people benefits or being sick is their main source of income
..you may not like it, but I believe that is the truth of it

and I stay say they are probably taking the wrong people off sick

it is not those on sick who have got us into the economic mess we are in

Ibrahima Sonko   

02 Aug 13 21:09   

bdj, i thought better of you.

Just because the other countries dress it as something else it is ok Cry

You think russia is more corrupt than the uk ?

If you had ever been or had business in Russia, you would be embarrassed by your lack of knowledge here. We have our forms of corruption, but they are something else entirely. I have never bribed a policeman in the UK; it was a weekly occurrence over there!