Jump to content


Registered Users

Change your profile picture
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spitfire1964

  1. You need to get in writing that if you do not agree to the terms your contract will be terminated. If others are not being affected by change and it is evident that you are being treated different as in the case the young employees not being affected by change as opposed to you, you are being discriminated against. Forget ACAS, however before you can take your case to a Tribunal they have to try and mediate its just a protocol that needs to be followed before you can proceed. Do not accept anything that has been said, ask for the Company to put in writing what they are advocating. The important fact at this stage is your employment rights that you were giving the day after the point you were employed for two years. You have rights as do your employers but don't bow to them ask them to put it in writing give them a period of 14 days and state that if they do not put in writing or document their intentions the verbal threat that they have giving you should be retracted. Tell them and ACAS that you will reserve your right for a Employment Tribunal to adjudge the matter and on the grounds of age discrimination.
  2. I was thrown off ESA ( support Group ) and any subsequent payment's because the DWP imposed their right to stop that benefit and on the same assessment because I failed to keep to the appointment and thrown onto UC and without the benefits I was receiving for being disabled. Today I arrive at the Centre ten minutes before my appointment and I am told I cannot have the assessment because the file has not been sent. In otherwords the DWP have failed to attend or give me the opportunity to take their medical assessment as in theory they and not me have stopped the assessment from going ahead. If they can stop my benefits because an assessment has been missed I want any benefits as a result of this fully reinstated because their actions and like mine denied that assessment from proceeding today. If you are going to rely on rules maybe they need to adopt those same princibles as the rules and any reliance on them are their not only for the DWP but also the Claimant.
  3. UC have indicated that the carers rate would £151.89 per month. However claiming the same benefit and through the Carers allowance would mean that £248 could be claimed per month,obviously that is a difference of £97 per month. Are we obliged or do we have to go through UC in oreder to receive CA, or can we go straight to CA for any benfits for care are concerned,
  4. I am sure OP has indicated that they are currently on ESA and not JSA. And the benefit cap for rent is compulsory regardless of what benefit is being claimed Nystagnite.
  5. I think you may well have to pass the WCA that UC have to be considered for the extra benefits that you would get being in the support group of claiming ESA. So as well as having to wait five weeks for any benefit payment that it takes UC to make a simple claim add on to that about five months before they assess you for any medical benefits that you have been receiving whilst being on ESA. Stay on ESA for as long as you possibly can because it all goes down hill when UC takes over.
  6. Thanks for that Bookworm it is appreciated. The reason UC and service centre have indicated as a reason which seems to be a bit odd is that they are claiming the reason for this is because CA is means tested which CAB says is incorrect and should not be subject to any means test as this payment is an extra payment for the care that my wife needs to give me. All very confusion but I know who I would be rather trust in their advice.
  7. DX, some advice please. From what I am reading with my cases manager who deals with my UC, the impression that she is giving me is that I will be no better off claiming carers allowance as and in her words it would be taking back pound for pound and credited towards the UC that I am currently in receipt off. In otherwords any amount owed or that could be claimed through carers allowance goes straight in towards Uc which would mean that the weekly benefit of £62 would go towards any amount being paid in UC now. It seems very confusion but am I correct or does anyone know how an award for care extra financial support not giving if you are in receipt of UC.
  8. OP has indicated that similar cases have been dealt with by Civil Courts, I am only going by what he has writing. The point that I am trying to establish is that if the OP can demonstrate that others who are guilty of what the DWP have claimed, he can rely on those cases if proven guilty to argue that he has been treated differently. It is my understanding that Judges will look at similar cases as a means of sentencing.
  9. No you do not give the facts in mitigation, you give the facts and the evidence during the proceedings. OP has clearly indicated that he never intended or was predominately motivated in committing an offence and he needs to give those reasons. Mitigating or pleading with a Court comes after a judgment is made, not before. What you are saying is that OP only uses his defence after he is found guilty, don't think so.
  10. Hi mate, how do you now understand that the amount of money involved is below what the DWP would normally process in this way (case law) and have you proof that similar cases have ended with a civil penalty as opposed to an Administrative penalty.
  11. From reading this you have already found OP guilty, some acheivment. As for being blinkered because of my issues with DWP, giving that I have just proved my case against them, blinkers must be working fine. Ignorance may well not be defence, but CIRCUMSTANCES leading upto and the fact that the OP has not got a criminal record, nor attempted to commit a criminal offence BEFORE are all factors that would be considered, IF THEY EVENTUALLY FIND HIM GUILTY.
  12. If OP thinks he has been wronged, of course he has the right to fight his corner. What he has been offered by the DWP is just that, an offer, certainly does not mean that he is guilty because they make him an offer. Let the Courts decide, lets see if the DWP continue with their threats, OP has indicated that he is retired to so worse case scenario if and I mean if the Courts find him guilty, he will have a criminal record, so be it, its not the end of the world, but I don't think they will, if the OP explains his reasons. I am sure the CPS have better things as to consider rather than taking the easy option and prosecuting someone who I believe made a genuine mistake, to say that the DWP have not found him guilty of this, please explain why they are threatening or should I say, would need to involve the CPS?, the CPS only considering people that they feel are guilty, unless the OP has handed himself in or the DWP think that he is guilty?, what option are you taking, because it can only be one of the two.
  13. If you feel that what has been done is wrong, represent yourself in Court and argue your case. You need to see your doctor and how the situation is making your help worse and explain what I believe is a genuine mistake, get it all put on your medical records asap. Going to Court and representing yourself may well make the DWP think twice about prosecuting it gives you more time to prepare your case and you can put your case across. Courts unlike the DWP will probably look at the bigger picture and may consider your motivations and giving the extreme circumstances will be more human and consider the facts as opposed to the DWP finding everyone guilty because their rules have been breached, or not. Don't give in to them matey, fight your corner because if you don't, you will always be thinking if only I took that option.
  14. You will definitely be worse off on UC, everyone is, its designed to work that way. Like it is designed to take 6 weeks for the first payment, meanwhile when all this is going on, your rent as normal is not being paid, you are therefore in debt, and not by choice but how perverse the system is now working, eviction is the next engineered process.
  15. He must have read this thread, I had a very detailed response about my concerns about the DWP and the treatment of the disabled and raised my concerns about the public funding being used by the DWP to take an appeal or the way to a Tribunal which they currently lose 3 in every 4, and I have asked for the figures and what it cost the taxpayer to rely on the judicial system as a means of the Claimant proving their claim which could have been established at a far earlier stage as to save all these costs. He is going to request the data and pass the information onto me, it should be a interesting read and will show how much the DWP are costing the public because of their actions.
  16. There is no harm, its just seems logical to distance two different subject matters. If someone has advice on the abuse of process being committed by the DWP, they are more likely to reply to that thread as opposed to a thread that in its meaning, is entirely a separate question. That is all.
  17. Abuse of process is not related as to whether carers allowance is entitled as they are two completely different subject matters, so why have you taking the time and the trouble to link them?
  18. My wife has now contacted the Cares Allowance Department and on three separate occasions to claim Carers Allowance of which and giving the facts, reasons and the award giving by the Tribunal would now be a formality and should not take more than five minutes to marry the two up, as all the evidence needed to fit into the criteria for Carers allowance to be awarded could and should be evidently drawn from the decision to award PIP, the proof. However and on the three occasions that we have tried to get this benefit paid by exercising our right to appeal a decision before PIP was awarded, which was within the mandatory period of appealing the earlier decision not to award CA, not only are the DWP being objective in denying those significant facts that PIP has now been awarded they are slowing the process down by telling us that we cannot use the PIP as a reason to rely on to appeal the decision made three weeks ago not to award CA, which was based on the fact that we would not qualify because we were not in receipt of PIP, well we are now, use that in the reconsideration and backdate any payments owed. We have been given a number of quite pathetic excuses why the above cannot be put into practice which is just another excuse for the DWP to further delay any entitlement of that benefit. Yesterday we were told it would take upto 12 weeks for them to reconsider a decision that in evidence and in reality could be established in seconds, the PIP award but more of a concern and to what I believe is a complete abuse of process and a delibriate attempt to deny any right of appeal, my wife was told that she could not use the decision by the Tribunal to award PIP as evidence to support her appeal and within the window allowed so technically a reconsideration has been denied not only on an abuse of proceedings but also on the provisions laid out by the DWP which clearly rely on the fact that evidence that would support an award for CA cannot be considered which is a load of old cobblers. Are we being subject to an abuse of process, from where I am sat, it would appear so, any advice would be appreciated as always.
  19. Again and reading the statement giving by DR UK, they again highlight the main problem which the DWP and the government seem to be ignoring and its stems from the most important part of the procedure carried out by Health Professionals who clearly are not qualified to carry out such an important assessment which the Claimant should be able to rely on. It goes further though when you consider the figures giving, after someone appeals the decision of a unqualified professional preparing a report, when the DWP consider this during the mandatory period they too are getting it completely wrong, when you consider that 82% of reconsiderations are rejected but higher down the road of appeal and when in theory a qualified doctor, judge and disabled person are presented with the same evidence 70% of Claimants are successful. So considering both percentages only 2 in 10 and after they have been told that they do not qualify are awarded ESA by the DWP ON appeal, but the figure of 7 in 10 are in favour of the Claimant but a Claimant needs a Tribunal to be able to establish this. The system and those figures prove beyond doubt that not only is the current system of a DWP medical assessment not working, and not up to a standard that any Claimant should be giving a basic right to a fair and proper assessment, the Tribunal Service are having to put right time after time, the wrong decision making being carried out by the DWP, after an assessment. The DWP are and in theory in a win,win situation, because they are always afforded to defend any decision that they make, which is wrong all the way to the Tribunal and chance their hand on the day, but going by those figures they are not proving their original decision to be correct in any event, quite a poor return. I would be interested to know how much public funding is being waged and evidently lost by the DWP in allowing these appeals to go all the way, knowing full well the chances of them proving their original decision in Court as 1 in 5. Where could I request the figures that show just how much public funding is being used to and in real terms argue a case that they evidently lose four times out of five. They and like the Health Care Proffessionals that they initially rely on to take Claimant off of welfare benefits that they are entitled too are not accountable in an anyway whatsoever, lets see how much they are costing the public in pounds, shillings and in pence, in chancing their arm in Court, so to speak.
  20. Just phoned up Carers Allowance and further explained that I wanted to use the Mandatory period of the last refusal of not being awarded PIP and on /the provision that will now met the criteria and within the period allowed to appeal, only to be told that a mandatory period decision would take longer than putting in a for a new claim. Does anyone know the period in which it normally takes the DWP to considerer a mandatory decision which now on paper should be straight forward as I was told this would normally take twelve weeks which seems a bit extreme.
  21. Appealing could change the outcome angeljs.
  22. There is a complaint procedure, ATOS have their own, don't bother or waste your time and effort, from my experience and from reading other threads this is just a paper exercise, they and like your assessor will both rely on fabrication, no matter what. There is also The Health Care Professional Council who and in all honesty are the same as those who deal with complaints within ATOS just make excuse upon on excuse they will both come back with the very same answer " its your word against the assessor's " and the assessor will always win, wrong but a fact. The only way that you will be able to prove to the only person that knows the report is a complete lie, which most if not all are, is to yourself. Put in for a Mandatory Reconsideration and within a month, which is an compulsory obligation for you to be able to appeal and if as expected that comes back as a rejection again based on a pack of lies appeal the decision, because appealing the decision is the only way you could seek justice. I was in the same situation and like you a year ago, and won my appeal, if I learned anything from it, the time and all the effort complaining against these lemons was a complete and utter waste of time, forget them, as hard as it seems because you are angry, and rightly so, but they are not accountable for their actions, that's why they do, that's why they get away with it. Just concerntrate all your energies on appealing the decision and don't give up.
  • Create New...