Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks so much!    1. Ok so on planning permission my WS says: The signs did not have planning permission under the Town and County planning. I have an email stating there was no planning permission from the council.The signs do not fall under deemed consent.  * Their WS says they do not need planning permission by being an approved operator of the trade association, and it is not for the  county court to determine planning permission.       2. Excel are trying to say I’m dishonest. Their WS states my defence appears to be cut and pasted from websites relating to parking whose aim is to assist motorists on contesting PCN's. Large portions are non sensical and irrelevant to the claim This is Unacceptable as the defendant has signed a statement of truth whilst clearly not being the defendants knowledge  Q Any comments?      Their WS states that I alleged I received no correspondence, and the onus is on the driver to update DVLA. I did update DVLA, but I moved numerous times due to domestic abuse. This was in my set aside and part of why it was granted. Evidence was provided at that time. Q Is this going to come up again?    *Also they question how I would be able to comment on the signs if I’m not the driver of the vehicle, as she would not have first hand knowledge, therefore it is the claimants position that she is being disingenuous.  I state that photos will be provided in my bundle. I actually haven’t submitted any but I do also know somebody who had PCN from the same carpark, He gave me all his evidence etc, Mr Booth and he won his case. I linked to the parking pranksters article on it.  Q So is it ok to use such websites and to use photos from someone else?    Thanks 
    • Not anymore now that the right have manipulated voters into voting for a conservative dictatorship.   All of what you've said is just another worrying aspect of what the future holds 
    • Just like all the rubbish spouted over the past 4 years, would, would, would.  What you really mean is COULD.    
    • You're ignoring the most difficult issue in a trade agreement. It's not the tariffs or the lack of them  which is the tough part to reslove but the regulatory standards of the goods to be imported & exported that needs to be decided.   For example the EU banned the import of chlorine washed chicken since 1997 which of course hurts the US, and who are going to be very keen to include it in any new agreement with the UK and will use it to barter prospective concessions in exchange . As a nation we're going to first have to decided whether that is acceptable or not and that alone will be difficult enough to resolve. And that's just one product.   This has all the makings of a category 5 $h1t storm that will last an eternity. 
    • 28 of the 32 wealthiest countries in the world reside within the EU.  Realistically we will need the US because they are one of the few remaining countries outside of the EU that would be worth doing a deal with, but as discussed on here previously, the exact agreement we strike with the US is open to debate.  Should we still want a trade deal with the EU we would need to align our standards with them, which makes a deal with the US harder.   Also 80% of our economy is services.  Try selling financial services to a person in India... or try sending engineers half way round the world just because some numpty has decided trading with the countries geographically closest to us wont work anymore because of immigrants and sovereignty. 
  • Our picks

udaymorjaria

ESA85 ---ESA85A what is the diffrance

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 2476 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

just about to my tribunal paperwork and I was wondering what is the diff. between ESA85 and ESA85A

 

Also on medical report form

ADVICE

I advice that the person meets the criteria for having limited capability for work.

PROGNOSIS

I advice that a return to work could be considered within 18 months.

if advice to return to work 18 month why I am in wrag for one year

this person who have produce esa85a has lied so much are doctors allowed to lie? where is ethics?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:udaymorjaria:

 

An ESA85 is the report from a face to face assessment with a Atos assessor for employment n support allowance, cos of limited capability for work/work related activity.

 

An ESA 85A is a report from an Atos assessor on a claimant's limited capability for work/work related activity without a face to face assessment.

 

The Atos assessor's prognosis is only a recommendation which can be, and frequently is, over-ridden by a Jobcentreplus decision maker.

 

Atos and acceptable ethics? Tis my opinion that they're mutually exclusive. Their assessors are given targets (evidenced by the fact they get audited if they make too many recommendations of limited capability for work related activity) which, if followed and claimants don't appeal, will reduce Government spending on income replacement benefits.

 

Best wishes for your appeal, Margaret.

Edited by **Margaret**

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also tho the reports been overriden can be not in the claimants favour as well as in their favour, some people may assume wrongly if they dont get SG that it is down to ATOS.

 

I wonder how common it is for atos to reccomend SG but then the claimant gets WRAG.

 

Sadly tho I still dont have my ESA85 dispite requesting it multiple times and since my SG appeal didnt proceed due to successful reconsideration I will probably have to do a SAR to get it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well I guess that's an interesting point, as they say it is always the DM's decision in the end. Hence the job title. However there were so many lies on my atos report that the DM couldn't realistically done anything but found me fit, the tribunal on the other hand thought differently, thankfully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruby,

In my case atos doctor has used 1995 med 3 as available evidence and D.M has gone along with atos. I had no f2f with atos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's ridiculous. Obviously, I know very little about your situation; but a lot has probably changed in the last 18 years. Don't understand how they can use an 18 year old sick note.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's ridiculous. Obviously, I know very little about your situation; but a lot has probably changed in the last 18 years. Don't understand how they can use an 18 year old sick note.

 

I was going through paperwork which I received from DWP. D.M has not received copy of esa50 from ATOS my esa50 was received by atos but they lost it and dwp has tried there best to find but cannot find ( funny never ask me if i have copy of esa50) also d.m said in tribunal paper that i did not send any further evidence with my gl24 ( well I did send letter from my cons. from hospital clearly saying I can not walk more then 10 meters)

so much waste of tax payer monies tribunal time and above all it is stressful like hell until I get decision from tribunal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's ridiculous. Obviously, I know very little about your situation; but a lot has probably changed in the last 18 years. Don't understand how they can use an 18 year old sick note.

 

Yes Nystagmite lot of changes all for the worst 39 tab. a day with nine injection a day but that is life

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...