More than 2,500 benefit claimants die after being found fit for work in just two years

REF; Debbie Abrams MP
One of her constituents had a heart attack during his interview..Attending nurse sent to hospital.
Received a letter a week later stating will be sanctioned for failure to complete the interview.
Nobody wants money paid to someone that doesnt deserve it but looking to sanction these people demoralizes the populace and does not raise enough money.
It does look like a targeted attack no matter what its dressed up as.
According to the ONS the UK has over £12Bn a year in unclaimed benefits. This has not been mentioned once.
All of the questions raised have been raised because the report is vague to say the least, much like manifesto and just about everything that this government has said. What hasnt IDS lied about? Education, military career. UK statistics office have also reprimanded him for making things up. He has been playing the game of lies for a very long time. He gets caught out every few years but there is no consequence.
Before the benefit cap, it was the work programme, which is meant to provide training for the unemployed. The statistics authority criticised the "coherence" of Duncan Smith's statistics and, once again, the manner in which his department presented them to the public. Far from being a success, the programe found work for a mere 8.6% of the desperate people who went on it. Meanwhile, Jonathan Portes, director of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research and a former chief economist at the Cabinet Office, has convincingly demonstrated that the Tory claim that "more than a third of people who were on incapacity benefit dropped their claims rather than complete a medical assessment" is false and demonstrably false.
The UK Statistics Authority has a fine phrase that guides its mathematicians: "Numbers should be a light, not a crutch". Duncan Smith does not wish to shine light on his policies, for he fears what he may see. He uses his twisted figures as a crutch instead, to help his dogmas hobble along.
The sad fact is nothing is going to be done about this and as far as government are concerned they have a mandate for 5 years.
Dont get sick and find a way to make money independently.

originally posted by: PaddyInf
a reply to: Scouse100

Got it from here .

These are a good few years old now, please see my post for the latest stats. Since these figures the system has had a number of official reviews and updates due to the massive barrage of criticism it faced (quite rightly so) and the number of cases overturned. They still have a hell of a long way to go though in my opnion.

I'm going to throw in a bit of empirical observation from my time helping people complete the ESA forms. This isn't based on facts and figures but my own experience. I've not done this for quite a while now so I'm sure it's changed several times since.

The first thing that needs to be addressed is demographics. I'll clarify this before people start yelling "OMGWTFBBQ HE'S SAYS ALL BROWN PEOPLE ARE BENEFITS CHEATS!" Nope. What I mean is that there are noticeable differences in how different groups in society answer the questions. The older white people, for example, were brought up with a "mustn't grumble" attitude and a reticence to discuss intimate things in detail. Males were far more sensitive about "intimate" medical issues than other issues. I was always slightly shocked at how happy many women seemed to be about discussing their menstrual cycles (whether I asked about it or not), while getting a 53-year-old white lorry driver to discuss his bowel movements can be a sensitive and difficult job. Other demographics are simply more relaxed about discussing these things and often in detail.

A classic example is how far someone can walk. We always used a known distance (from our location to a particular shop just down the road) as an aide. You'd start off with someone saying that they could walk that far. Eventually, with a bit of digging, you would find out that they could walk but would need breaks. A little more digging and you would find that they would need to take a few minutes break every 5 meters. Why didn't they tell me that from the start? Because from their point of view, the question was whether they could do it, and they could.

The main mistake that a lot of people made with claiming ESA is that they would talk about what they could do on their best days, when really they should be answering on the basis of their worst days. The fact that you can sprint to the shops once a week isn't very useful if the other 6 days you can hardly crawl to the bathroom. You need to be telling people about the 6 bad days, because that is what is stopping you working.

It's tricky. We wouldn't "coach" people on passing the assessments and we would never blow something out of proportion on the forms. We just spent the time doing the digging and highlighting to the client why it was important to share these details, as uncomfortable and invasive as it might seem.

A figure that used to be floated around a lot was the very high rate of successful appeals against ESA rejections. To be honest, that was rarely because Atos had deliberately screwed them over. It was usually because they had completed the initial application on their own and had failed to go into the kind of detail needed. When they needed to appeal, they came to a charity like ours for help. If they had come to us in the first place, the initial claim would be less likely to fail.

a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Correlation does not equal causation.

If those 2600 people were found to have died because they were working, then that would be something.

How many dies of overdoase? Auto accidents? At-home accidents? Health related issues not related to employment?

To just take a figure and extrapolate that because of this, then that is the cause is just BS and not scientifically nor statistically sound.

ESA and sanctions review had two employees of ATOS on the panel.
Do you think they argued against making the process faster and easier to process or did the people that now work for Maximus say thnaks for renewing the contract?
Untrained target driven office staff cannot assess the health needs of anyone.

With the exception of MIND none of the charities which are supposed to represent these people are speaking out. These charities have shops staffed by workfare schemes but I am sure that is a coincidence.

originally posted by: bbracken677
a reply to: Cobaltic1978

Correlation does not equal causation.

If those 2600 people were found to have died because they were working, then that would be something.

How many dies of overdoase? Auto accidents? At-home accidents? Health related issues not related to employment?

To just take a figure and extrapolate that because of this, then that is the cause is just BS and not scientifically nor statistically sound.

Considering that the reason for collecting all this information was to prove or disprove causation and correlation, I would bet my last red cent that our gov already has knowledge of the details regarding the individual causes of death, but because those details will reveal death was due to (and can be correlated to) benefit sanctions, certain information is deliberately omitted and hidden before publication.

If the details had supported the gov's side of the argument you can be assured we wouldn't have had the major expensive taxpayer-funded legal battle to prise this information from gov, it would have been submitted instantly, and the media would be ordered to rub it in our faces 24/7.

Yes, I believe our gov would have gathered all the info it needed in the belief the resulting evidence would support its stance. Instead, the evidence shows that benefit sanctions are causing death. So while our gov used our money to fight us in court it had plenty of time to remove the 'benefit sanctions cause death' label from bits of incriminating info, and place those particular subjects amongst a few other or wider applicable categories.

That's what I think.

a reply to: doobydoll

Wouldn't surprise me at all, I earned good money and expenses in the 90's 'cleaning up' citizens clerical files in the months before the access to information codes came into effect.
Government administration honesty usually boils down to what it can get away with.
I don't believe that all the people described in the OP died as a direct result of being told they had to claim Job Seekers Allowance instead of ESA though. That is just ridiculous sensationalism with little substance.

a reply to: grainofsand the whole story is made up. I'm no fan of the Tories and rely on ESA, but the story is basically madEvup. It's about deaths of people who have ended their claims not been told they are fit to work. If I died with my illness, my claims would be ended because I was dead, not because I was deemed fit for work. fullfact.org...
It's a story that's is factually wrong and blown out of proportion. It's this dangerous reporting that is potentially more dangerous to vulnerable people

a reply to: woodwardjnr

I assumed it was sensationalist rubbish pages ago, but regarding government hiding/massaging information, yep that absolutely does happen daily where the administration staff think they can get away with it.

I agree that emotional bleating without substance can damage the cause when there are real issues for us all to protest about.
That is a continuing problem for 'the left' because they whine about everything (even if it cannot be verified) and people become desensitized to it, or just dismiss it as yet more socialist redski complaining...Citizen Smith BS, just not as funny.

a reply to: grainofsandthis story was posted in the daily mail, hardly left wing I just prefer truth rather than erroneous tabloid sensationalism no matter what side it comes from. Full fact is great site for getting proper facts not just tabloid headlines, try it when looking at your immigration news.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Lol, the OP used the Mirror as his source, that left wing enough for ya?
I use multiple sources to gain as much background info as I can before making any assertions, or drawing conclusions, about any issues.
That is just being sensible.

a reply to: grainofsand yes your a testament to truth and rational.

a reply to: woodwardjnr

Hahaha! You are always free to engage and call me out if you ever disagree with me, just stick to my posted words and don't invent an agenda or mindset for me if I haven't declared it.
Too many folk on ATS cause rubbish debate by twisting clearly posted words.

a reply to: EvillerBob

How does this work? What I mean is are you declared eligible, go get something, bye. Are you declared eligible you have x amount of time to find something, bye. Or are you declared elible to do say office work vs construction or whatever else? Are there jobs you are classified as being able to do or just you can work?

a reply to: Reallyfolks

You are regarded as fit for work. There is no specification as to the type. You stop being eligible for ESA and move onto jobseekers allowance with all of the associated requirements that involves.

I personally don't agree with this system. There should be something in place that identifies the nature of work you are capable of doing, at least for the physical disabilities. A better option might be identifying what you CAN'T do and make sure they do not get sanctions if there are no jobs that suits available. I don't know how you would police this though.

I'm no expert but there must be better ways to assist people back into work.

So, they died...sounds like someone was using names and when they were discovered, they killed off that name and moved to another, equally fictious name... Back a few years ago, I worked in a 'fusion center'. There were 200+ of us, that every day we found multiple cases of identity fraud, generally illegals using the names of real citizens. When we attempted to notify the Social Security Administration (SSA) in El Paso, Texas we were ignored. But then again if you want to go to the SSA office in El Paso, if you speak only English, your must make an appointment to have an English speaking worker there!!! One day I was in line at the DMV over on Transmountain. The 'guard' was telling some no-English speaking individuals how to go to the El Paso SSA, what forms to ask for and how to get fraudulent Texas drivers licenses. I reported this up through the TX DMV (they were eventually fired). At the main post office on Alamita Street, on welfare check day, the parking lot is full of Mexican plated vehicles. You will see people come out of the post office with the USPS white plastic 'flats' full of check, then drive off to Mexico. Fraud is rampant anywhere there are illegals. I did a paper on Mexico and its reliance on 'remisa', the funds sent back to Mexico by both legals and illegals in the US. 17.5 billion US dollars when I did the paper...and my source, MX government documents. I have NO sympathy for the 'poor illlegals'. I have seen what they are doing!

a reply to: ProleUK

Hi Cobaltic1978,

I second what you say as. Myself now on Job Seeker's Allowance, I have suffered in the past with weird sanctions that were not called for. As I had sent a letter to the DWP about my sanction as they still wanted me to get to my Work Programme appointments with no money. In which in the end they had to pull the sanction off.

As prior to my last unreasonable sanction I made sure I had kept all evidence and noted anything that went off.

Then few months later I go to sign back on as due to being ill lost my job. I do my application and they say my form got lost somewhere. (Which has my personal details on). I ask who do I need to call DWP Benefit Enquiry Office. Then they say I can have an emergency loan and they can not find my form and I wouldn't be paid until a month.
I get a call later on from DWP saying they can do my form through the phone I got paid that afternoon at 5pm.
Dawn

a reply to: EvillerBob

"The main mistake that a lot of people made with claiming ESA is that they would talk about what they could do on their best days, when really they should be answering on the basis of their worst days."

A potential problem with this is snooping. This was demonstrated in the Daily Mail recently with a derogatory article regarding a guy dragging his mobility scooter up several steps into his bedsit. The fact is this was just a snapshot of this guy's life. The only other choice he had was to leave his scooter out on the street with the risk of theft or vandalism. This snapshot does not show how this activity affected him or impacted on his illness.

Another problem which was highlighted in the House of Lords is that the individual should be able to complete the task safely and repeatedly before being assessed as being able to do that task.

The Health Assessment Advisory Service replaced ATOS with ESA (not PIP) Link. It would be interesting to see if they take this into consideration.

a reply to: uncommitted


yeah my good mate has chrons, hes a full time solider within the arforce, the problem is that there is a number of mental health issues that need to be addressed buy specialists, surely if they have medical evidece there shouldnt be much issue ??

a reply to: deliberator

After the assessment, DWP makes the decision on your benefits claim.

so HAAS doesnt decide, the dwp does ?