Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • It's Hotpoint (but I believe they're part of the Whirlpool group now?). The part was bought direct from them as a consumer.
    • Thanks BankFodder for your latest, I'm in complete agreement on the subject of mediation and will be choosing to decline mediation, the longer timeline is not an issue for me, I will happily let the going to court run it's course. I really appreciate the support from the Consumer Action Group. I'll post the email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response. Regards, J    email text I'm sending to Evri's small claims in answer to their recent defence response:  
    • Sec127 (3) repealed, now gone. S. 127(3)-(5) repealed (6.4.2007) by Consumer Credit Act 2006 (c. 14), ss. {15}, 70, 71(2), {Sch. 4} (with Sch. 3 para. 11); S.I. 2007/123, art. 3(2), Sch. 2
    • We used to recommend that people accept mediation but our advice has changed. The mediation process is unclear. Before you can embark on it you have to agree that you are prepared to enter a compromise – and that means that you agree that you are prepared to give up some of your rights even though you are completely in the right and you are entitled to hundred percent of your money and even though EVRi are simply trying to obstruct you in order to discourage you and also to put others who might want to follow your example off from claiming and even though they have a legitimate basis for reimbursement. Mediation is not transparent. In addition to having to sign up that you are prepared to give up some of your rights, you will also have to agree not to reveal any details of the mediation – including the result of the mediation – so that the whole thing is kept secret. This is not open justice. Mediation has nothing to do with justice. The only way of getting justice is to make sure that this matter goes to trial unless EVRi or the other parcel delivery companies put their hands up and accept the responsibility even if they do it is a gesture of goodwill. Going to trial and winning at trial produces a judgement which we can then add to our small collection to assist other people who are in a similar boat. EVRi had been leading you around by the nose since at least January – and probably last year as well – and their whole purpose is simply to drag it out, to place obstacles in your way, to deter other people, and to make you wish that you'd never started the process and that you are prepared to give up your 300 quid. You shouldn't stand for it. You should take control. EVRi would prefer that you went to mediation and if nothing else that is one excellent reason why you should decline mediation and go to court. If it's good for them it's bad for you. On mediation form, you should sign that you are not prepared to compromise and that you are not prepared to keep the result secret but that you want to share the results with other people in similar circumstances. This means that the mediation won't go ahead. It will take slightly longer and you will have to pay a court fee but you will get that back when you win and you will have much greater satisfaction. Also, once you go the whole process, you will learn even more about bringing a small claim in the County Court so that if this kind of thing happens again you will know what to do and you will go ahead without any hesitation. Finally, if you call EVRi's bluff and refuse mediation and go to trial, there is a chance – maybe not a big chance – but there is a chance that they will agree to pay out your claim before trial simply in order to avoid a judgement. Another judgement against them will simply hurt the position even more and they really don't want this. 300 quid plus your costs is peanuts to them. They don't care about it. They will set it off against tax so the taxpayer will make their contribution. It's all about maintaining their business model of not being liable for anything, and limiting or excluding liability contrary to section 57 and section 72 of the consumer rights act.     And incidentally, there is a myth that if you refuse mediation that somehow it will go against you and the judge will take a dim view and be critical of you. This is precisely a myth. It's not true. It would be highly improper if any judge decided the case against you on anything other than the facts and the law of the case. So don't worry about that. The downside of declining mediation is that your case will take slightly longer. The upside is that if you win you will get all your money and you will have a judgement in your favour which will help others. The chances of you winning in this case are better than 95% and of course you would then receive 100% of your claim plus costs
    • Nice to hear a positive story about a company on this form for a change. Thank you
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Atos Health Care/postggj Taking Them To Court


postggj
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5090 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

FOR THOSE NOT IN THE KNOW, ATOS HEAL CARE ARE GETTING A LOT OF COMPLAINTS AT THE MOMENT, THE GOVERNMENT USE THEM FOR DLA BENEFIT ASSESSMENT. they have there own so called doctors etc,

just read the complaints on them so far on the forum. that is not my case.

 

last year royal mail suspended occupational health and brought in these jokers. ill try and be brief.

 

over the last eight months, i have been having problems with my knee. started off as an inconvenience but got worse over the months. royal mail contacted atos and arranged for an assessment at work which i had two weeks later.

for some reason a psychological evaluation questionnaire was included

 

three weeks later i get called into the office, the day before i was speaking to the office manager as i had an appointment to go into hospital for surgery on my knee.

 

this atos report stated there was nothing wrong with me , i was exaggerating my condition and recommended i go back to full time duties.

 

 

THATS SLANDER/DEFAMATION AND FALSE DIAGNOSIS

 

i did an sar and got back medical records for a postie who works in London, unbelievable

 

well i am on the sick at the moment after having surgery three weeks ago.

 

ILL BREAK THIS DOWN

 

1/ WHAT AUTHORITY HAD ATOS IN RELEASING THIS REPORT TO ROYAL MAIL WITH OUT MY SAY SO DATA PROTECTION ACT

 

2/ HOW CAN A DIAGNOSIS FROM A SO CALLED PROFESSIONAL BY SO WIDE OF THE MARK

 

3/ by what authority can a psychological questionnaire be included in a clinical injury.

 

4/ the medical records of some one different says it all

 

5/ why did atos before making a report not contact my GP or consultant

 

after an sar and two letters of complaint , i just get sod off letters.

 

this is not about hurt feelings, to thicked skinned, even my office manager laughed when he go the report from my consultant, but stopping them being a bully.

 

if they can get my knee wrong, what about people with a dodgy ticker for example

 

there is more to this but lets get the ball rolling.

 

THIS IS NOT ABOUT ANY COMPENSATION

IF ANY IS AWARDED I WILL PASS IT ONTO THE SITE TEAM TO PASS ON TO THE ROYAL BRITISH LEGION IF AND WHEN ANY CLAIM FOR DAMAGES IS ISSUED

 

COMMENTS PLEASE

 

GOOD OR BAD

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Doesnt sound to professional does it ?

 

Look forward to your updates:)

Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

Uploading documents to CAG ** Instructions **

Looking for a draft letter? Use the CAG Library

Dealing with Customer Service Departments? - read the CAG Guide first

1: Making a PPI claim ? - Q & A's and spreadsheets for single premium policy - HERE

2: Take back control of your finances - Debt Diaries

3: Feel Bullied by Creditors or Debt Collectors? Read Here

4: Staying Calm About Debt  Read Here

5: Forum rules - These have been updated - Please Read

BCOBS

1: How can BCOBS protect you from your Banks unfair treatment

2: Does your Bank play fair - You can force your Bank to play Fair with you

3: Banking Conduct of Business Regulations - The Hidden Rules

4: BCOBS and Unfair Treatment - Common Examples of Banks Behaving Badly

5: Fair Treatment for Credit Card Holders and Borrowers - COBS

Advice & opinions given by citizenb are personal, are not endorsed by Consumer Action Group or Bank Action Group, and are offered informally, without prejudice & without liability. Your decisions and actions are your own, and should you be in any doubt, you are advised to seek the opinion of a qualified professional.

PLEASE DO NOT ASK ME TO GIVE ADVICE BY PM - IF YOU PROVIDE A LINK TO YOUR THREAD THEN I WILL BE HAPPY TO OFFER ADVICE THERE:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

1/ WHAT AUTHORITY HAD ATOS IN RELEASING THIS REPORT TO ROYAL MAIL WITH OUT MY SAY SO DATA PROTECTION ACT

 

 

Hello

 

I had an op through my company BUPA and even though it was a company policy, I had to sign something before BUPA could tell the company anything. So ATOS should be doing the same!

 

Sounds like a nightmare - Good luck.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You Are Correct On That

 

Even Though Atos Are Working For Royal Mail Under Contract

 

They Are Not Part Of Royal Mail

 

I Needed To Sign A Dpa Waiver Which I Did Not

 

Ill Post Up Some Letters I Have From Atos

 

Uploading Them Now

Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a passenger in a car accident a few years ago. I was fine so wasn't even going to put a whiplash claim in but the claims co for the insurance company kept ringing me and saying I should, so I eventually went to see their private doctor which was a real eye opener. There was nothing wrong with me. He asked if I'd had any headaches, I said yes, but they were hormonal. He said "no, they're not hormonal, they're down to the whiplash". etc etc. I got £2,000 after his assessment.

 

Point is that private doctors can be, and are, swayed by whoever who is paying their bills ...........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Bingo

 

Atos Is There With Royal Mail Because Occupational Were To Strict And Followed The Book

 

The Goverment Are Using Them To Get People Off Of Dla

 

Who Calls The Piper

Who Is Picking Up The Tab

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had to see Occupational Health for my condition. Well, I say had to, but that wasn't necesserily the case. My company policy states that an employee with a condition which requires reasonable adjustments should be referred to OH, but it is the employee's choice whether or not they go. However, if they don't go, the company is not obliged to put any medical specific reasonable adjustments in place, other than their own risk assessed ones.

 

When my manager completed the refferal form, I had to sign it to say I agreed to the information contained in the refferal, I agreed to attend, and I understood OH would share the information found during the assessment, and recommedations as a result of the assessment, with my employer. There was a seperate form for me signing for the release of my medical records from my own GP to my employers, pertaining to my condition.

 

So I'm fairly disgusted that your consent was never requested, nor given.

 

With my referral form, I refused to sign it as the information written by my manager at the time contained her personal opinion, not fact and I did not agree with what she had written. I refused to sign it until she altered her own opinion out of it, and stuck to the facts we had discussed. With the release form, I signed it, but included that I consented to information being released to OH after it was screened by me, as I wanted to ensure they were only being given information I had consented to.

 

My GP refused to release my medical records. She wrote that my employers had no need for my medical records and would find difficulty deciphering the medical jargon. She wrote a letter instead, outlining my condition, diagnosis, dates of treatment and type of treatment, as well as the outcome of treatment. She explained to me in private that a lot of companies obtain the medical records, can't understand them and apply their own interpretations.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Post That

 

What If Atos State The Consent Was Obtained On The Phone.

I Asked For The Telephone Recording And Guess What

There Is No Recording

 

I Take It This Consent Has To Be In Writing, Should Have Been Done When I Had The Face To Face Assesment

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if there is anything specific but one would assume that consent of this sort would have to be in writing, otherwise there would be no recourse for them if a person states they did not give consent.

 

My initial assessment was carried out over the phone, and the report was full of rubbish, it did not reflect the conversation that took place. I emailed my manager stating that I thought the nurse had mixed up my report with someone elses, as the information did not reflect the discussion. The OH nurse insisted the report did. With no telephone recording available, it was really a case of he said/she said. So I then had a face to face assessment with someone who more specialised in my type of condition. He was excellent, and the report was fact, after fact, after fact.

 

However, what annoys me about OH, any OH or ATOS assessing employees/benefit claimants is that the person being assessed is never given the opportunity to see the report to clarify any misunderstandings before the employer/benefit section sees it. In a way I can see this point, as the report is the medical "professional's" opinion based upon the answers given during the assessment.

 

Far worse, they are not required to sign the form with the "ticked" selection boxes, to agree that the answers on the form are the answers they gave during the assessment.

 

To me, this is completely wrong. It's another he said/she said situation. I think when the assessment is being completed, the employee/benefit claimant should be required to sign the form with the selection boxes, to confirm that those were the answers they gave, and sign to confirm any physical examinations took place.

 

The biggest issue with ATOS and benefit claimants is benefit claimants disputing the tick box form, stating they did not give the answers selected on the form by the assessor. Fair enough, a minority of people will try it on with the "I never said that" and I do understand that, however with the sheer volume of complaints about the exact same issue, I simply can't see how they can all be trying it on, and I believe there to be truth in these complaints.

 

Note - This is not an accusation against ATOS or any other OH providing body. This is merely an observation and opinion.

My advice is based on my opinion, my experience and my education. I do not profess to be an expert in any given field. If requested, I will provide a link where possible to relevant legislation or guidance, so that advice provided can be confirmed and I do encourage others to follow those links for their own peace of mind. Sometimes my advice is not what people necesserily want to hear, but I will advise on facts as I know them - although it may not be what a person wants to hear it helps to know where you stand. Advice on the internet should never be a substitute for advice from your own legal professional with full knowledge of your individual case.

 

 

Please do not seek, offer or produce advice on a consumer issue via private message; it is against

forum rules to advise via private message, therefore pm's requesting private advice will not receive a response.

(exceptions for prior authorisation)

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

theyre just a bunch of cowboys, i had a disablity assessor decide i was fit for work, she had no qualificiations or experience in mental health and decided my problems were mild, i have bipolar disorder and am in treatment, i was in the process of awaiting to see pschiatrist for diagnosis when i had the atos test, the "doctor" ignored all i told her and passed me as fit, how can they assess people if they have no idea how to, it takes a mental health proffessional to assess people such as myself, my disability isnt physical.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to work in a GP surgery and ALL requests for medical info had to have signed authority from the patient without exception.

 

No signed authorisation - no release of medical info.

 

Good luck with this gg - about time someone took a stand.....

Link to post
Share on other sites

hope i get this right this time

 

scan0005ot.jpg

 

scan0006pq.jpg

 

 

scan0007oh.jpg

 

 

OK THEN

THATS THE REPORT SENT TO ROYAL MAIL WITH OUT MY CONSENT BELOW IS A RESPONSE TO MY INITIAL COMPLAINT

 

scan0008.jpg

 

scan0009iy.jpg

 

 

RIGHT I HAVE THEM ON NO SIGNED ORDER GIVING THEM PERMISSION TO RELEASE MY DATA UNDER THE DPA

 

LOUSY DIAGNOSIS

 

NO CONTACT WITH MY OWN GP OR CONSULTANT BEFORE DIAGNOSIS

WHY A PSYCOLOGICAL REPORT FOR A CLINICAL INJURY

 

ETC, ETC, ETC

 

THAT REPORT IS DEFAMATION AND SLANDER

WHAT I WOULD LIKE COMMENTS ON IS

 

HOW DO YOU PRICE DAMAGES FOR THESE BREACHES

Edited by ErikaPNP
pm sent
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

evening all

 

ime going ahead with this court claim, been doing some research but need some pointers

 

how do you set damages under the data protection act

misdiagnosis

well read the thread, the response is total crap

 

how do you price defamation, slander, etc etc

 

thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, don't know.

 

I'd make an appointment with a solicitor (maybe medical negligence?), ask them what could be done about it, let them explain, and then tell them you'll have a think about it. Then go away and do it yourself after you've picked their brains. Most of them do first free consultation, just check that when you make appointment.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am watching this with interest and like many others are behind you all the way, my complaint with atos was the regular dwp IB test, I was "tested" by a doctor with no knowledge of mental illness, and who does not recognise that depression and anxiety disorder come under mental illness, it turned out I am bipolar, so how the hell can someone like her be allowed to test me? am awaiting a tribunal....good luck with your case, like I said I am watching with great interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

theyre just a bunch of cowboys, i had a disablity assessor decide i was fit for work, she had no qualificiations or experience in mental health and decided my problems were mild, i have bipolar disorder and am in treatment, i was in the process of awaiting to see pschiatrist for diagnosis when i had the atos test, the "doctor" ignored all i told her and passed me as fit, how can they assess people if they have no idea how to, it takes a mental health proffessional to assess people such as myself, my disability isnt physical.

 

Exactly the same thing as what happened to me, I am now awiating psyciatric consultation

Edited by ErikaPNP
please refer to section 3.12 of the forum rules
Link to post
Share on other sites

Finally got pointed to this thread! Good luck postggj. What a load of pants Atos is turning out to be. As I said elsewhere: Atos by name, a t*ss by nature...

Seems they're as rubbish with OH as they are assessing us poor saps on ESA!

As far as ESA is concerned - and, presumably IB and DLA - their role can be seen as assessing what you are fit and able to do. Fair enough. Unfortunately, as is proving the case, you need to have a clear understanding of what is wrong with the person first. This is the point they have misunderstood. As it is clearly the case with mental health so it is with lung disease.

I have copd (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease) - the fancy new name for chronic bronchitis / emphysema (not as much fun as I thought it would be!). (Note to Atoss: not to be confused with asthma).

The only real way of checking for copd and what level it is currently at - it will not improve and the only thing you can do is impede its advancement - is through a spirometry test. This is a computer controlled series of breathing tests that monitor lung capacity, obstructions, functionality etc. Under this method I am classed as 'severe'.

Atoss only had a peak flow meter to assess me. This is, usually, used for asthma. It measures the force of air expired in order to give an indication of restriction to airways. An average of the best of three is taken and, for more accurate assessments, several should be done over a long period of time. No good for copd.

I gave it my best shot - always game! - and, after nearly collapsing, it was agreed any further attempts would be injurious to my health. (Needless to say that doesn't figure in my medical report...).

All is not doom and gloom though. Thanks to Atoss' thorough and professional medical, my lung problems have miraculously improved to 'moderate'. Hurrah! I can work as a labourer. And, it would appear, the Doctor I saw can change water into wine... :p

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...