Do i have grounds to sue ATOS

[p45]

I'll try to keep this brief. I have been tested by a specialist and a hospital to have carpal tunnel syndrome in both wrists. I have been getting sick notes regularly and put on a waiting list for the necessary surgery, and have been prescribed Amitriptyline, which clearly advises not to operate machinery if drowsy.

At a ATOS medical I told the Gestapo doctor that I felt it would be dangerous for me (carpenter) and others if I have limited feeling in my hands and are drowsy,

Now I'm no doctor but I can see that being a liability.

 

ATOS concluded I was fit for work. I naturally appealed the decision, whilst still receiving reduced benefits.

 

The tribunal agreed with ATOS, and my benefits were stopped, I had carpal tunnel surgery on my left hand a few months ago, I decided I needed to feed my family so I started working, 3 weeks ago I was cutting skirting with a table saw (which is a circular saw, bench mounted) it was very early and I was a bit drowsy.

I partially amputated my index finger and was rushed to hospital. 2 surgeries later, I'm now looking at a lengthy healing time. 30 years as a carpenter this is the first tool related injury.. to make matters worse I've been playing guitar for 42 years too..

 

 

Can I sue ATOS?please any help would be appreciated

 

Edited April 25, 2013 by citizenB

[p45]

In the ambulance receive a call from the hospital saying they had a cancellation and did i want to have carpal tunnel surgery on the other hand the next day. clearly they didn't think I was making it up.

[citizenB]

I have moved your thread to the Benefits forums, although you might actually need to be in the legal issues - I will check on that.

 

This is purely administrative and you need to do nothing and will still be able to find your thread.

[tomtom256]

But you are fit for work, just not as a carpenter.

 

As for using a saw, health and safety is your issue not ATOS, they didn't force you to carry on working as a carpenter, nor did they force you to use a saw. Did you risk assess before using it knoeing you wree feeling drowsy.

 

Your own common sense would say to follow the instructions on your medication and if feeling drowsy not to operate machinery.

 

The blame in my eyes lays with you.

[renegadeimp]

But you are fit for work, just not as a carpenter.

 

As for using a saw, health and safety is your issue not ATOS, they didn't force you to carry on working as a carpenter, nor did they force you to use a saw. Did you risk assess before using it knoeing you wree feeling drowsy.

 

Your own common sense would say to follow the instructions on your medication and if feeling drowsy not to operate machinery.

 

The blame in my eyes lays with you.

 

Please read the thread and stop posting like that. Thanks.

[havinastella]

But you are fit for work, just not as a carpenter.

 

As for using a saw, health and safety is your issue not ATOS, they didn't force you to carry on working as a carpenter, nor did they force you to use a saw. Did you risk assess before using it knoeing you wree feeling drowsy.

 

Your own common sense would say to follow the instructions on your medication and if feeling drowsy not to operate machinery.

 

The blame in my eyes lays with you.

 

We are NOT here to judge, we are here to advise.

[tomtom256]

We are NOT here to judge, we are here to advise.

 

ok no you have no grounds to sue.

 

Check health & safety law. The fault would be with the employer for not carrying out any risk assessments.

[tomtom256]

Please read the thread and stop posting like that. Thanks.

 

I did read the thread and answered accordingly. OP found fit for work, not necessarily in chosen field, has an accident caused by his medication, wants to blame someone.

 

What did I miss?

[p45]

Interesting a while back I was working on a building site for a firm, the foreman told me not not to wear my safety boots the next day, but wear trainers as I would be working inside fitting curtain rails. I slipped outside on some mud and broke my leg. who's fault was that?

[tomtom256]

Interesting a while back I was working on a building site for a firm, the foreman told me not not to wear my safety boots the next day, but wear trainers as I would be working inside fitting curtain rails. I slipped outside on some mud and broke my leg. who's fault was that?

 

Clearly an accident as you could have slipped had you been wearing safety boots.

 

The fact here is that medication clearly stated not operate machinery if drowsy end of. No one forced you to use the saw whilst in your medicated drowsy state. Had you not been on medication that made you drowsy and based on your experience quoted above and lack of previous accidents in the workplace, in all probability it wouldn't have happened.

 

Your point is?

[p45]

The employer was myself and carpentry is my trade. once I have surgery the problem is solved. please read all the thread before commenting.

[tomtom256]

The employer was myself and carpentry is my trade. once I have surgery the problem is solved. please read all the thread before commenting.

 

I have and answered accordingly.

 

Sorry it's obviously not what you want hear, but it is the exact same thing a judge would ask as would any defending solicitor.

[p45]

sorry this has nothing to do with last post re ATOS, but something that happened a few years back..

So tomtom you feel the issue with the broken leg was my fault, and before anyone else says it, I'll say it first, that I don't have a leg to stand on legally. does anyone think I have a claim?

[tomtom256]

sorry this has nothing to do with last post re ATOS, but something that happened a few years back..

So tomtom you feel the issue with the broken leg was my fault, and before anyone else says it, I'll say it first, that I don't have a leg to stand on legally. does anyone think I have a claim?

 

How about you read the thread as it was answered a few posts above regarding your broken leg, remove the chip from your shoulder.

[p45]

You clearly don't know what you're talking about. regarding the broken leg. that claim I won and got 35k compensation a few years ago. company admitted telling me not to wear safety boots. due to causation the fault was clearly theirs. it didn't even go to court. No offence but if you thought

that was my fault. then I'm suspecting your knowledge regarding ATOS is also flawed.

[havinastella]

P45, although tomtom is quite crass and abrasive, I think his point is correct.

 

ATOS is there to find you fit for work, the work they find you fit for may have nothing to do with your trade, but you could for example drive a train.

 

And as you know full well, on any H&S course, the person responsible for the safety of everyone, is yourself.

 

I think it would be impossible to sue ATOS, as they will just throw that at you.

[havinastella]

But on the brightside, you'll be unfit for work for a few more weeks after they attach the tip of your finger

[tomtom256]

Where did I lay blame for the broken leg with you?

 

"Clearly an accident as you could have slipped had you been wearing safety boots."

 

The company probably settled out of court as it did act inappropriately and probably didn't want the hassle of court. However that is a totally different scenario and if you slipped outside on mud I can't see how they could be held accountable anyway, but we only have your word for it.

 

READ CAREFULLY: Did ATOS tell you to work as a carpenter and to use a saw whilst taking medication that made you drowsy and did they also tell you to disregard any warnings about your medication? I suspect not. However on the off chance that they did, do you have this in writing or did you record your assessment?

 

By all means telephone injury lawyers for you, I am sure they would represent you.

[estellyn]

No, sorry, P45, I don't believe you have a case. When ATOS are assessing you, it is on whether you are fit for ANY work, not just your usual occupation. When they are assessing you, it is against a specific set of criteria called 'descriptors'. Score enough points and you pass, don't score enough and you fail. It isn't saying that you are completely healthy, but that you are fit enough to do some sort of work.

 

Yes, there are issues with the ESA assessmenst, and ATOS have a terrible record for assessing according to the criteria - whether or not you have grounds to appeal the decision would depend on whether you fit the descriptors, exemptions or special circumstances, and from the information given I can't tell that.

 

But do you have a case to sue? No. ATOS were assessing you for general fitness for employment, not fitness for carpentry. Had it been an employer who had ATOS assess you for your usual employment, like in an occupational health assessment, and you'd been found fit for carpentry, and then had this accident, then you would have a case against the employer, who would then have a case against ATOS.

 

But sorry, in these circumstances, no.

[**Margaret**]

: p45:

 

Tempting though the idea is I doubt you've a personal injury claim against Atos.

 

The work capability assessment is a legal test of your ability to perform a series of pescribed activities; walking (mobilising), using your hands, relating to other people, etcetera, that are relevant to any workplace. Employment n support allowance isn't payable just cos someone can't pursue their own occupation.

 

Med 3 (unfit) notes are only accepted as evidence of limited capability for work whilst waiting for an Atos assessment or an appeal decision. Anyone who's in hospital for longer than a day can be treated as having limited capability for work. Ask the doctor for a Med 10 note.

 

Good luck for the surgery, Margaret.

Edited April 25, 2013 by **Margaret**

[p45]

By saying "Clearly an accident as you could have slipped had you been wearing safety boots." is saying it's my fault if not theirs.

Safety boots have superior grip, unlike trainers.

The company went through their insurers and were dragging their feet for 4 years. hardly the actions of someone wanting to settle without hassle.

I wanted more and we were about to go to court. I settled for 35k.

Surely acting inappropriate the same as being responsible?

[p45]

@havinastella you suggest I perhaps drive a train. you know drowsy is the same as being stoned or maybe having a few stallas.

I can't think of any profession where being off your nut is acceptable can you?

[tomtom256]

Now its semantics.

 

Being responsible would mean they physically pushed or knew you would fall. They would have played a helping hand in it as the grip is allegedly superior on safety boots ( I always thought it was about protecting the foot but hey ho).

 

They had no idea you would slip/trip etc and therefore acted inappropriately by suggesting you were trainers. You could have refused knowing the grip on your trainers was not up standard, which then opens a new argument in that where you responsible by compying with the request, I'm guessing what it boiled down to where site rules that probably stipulated safety equipment must be worn at all times and the site gaffer/foreman should have stopped you entering the site without the appropriate equipment being worn. So not responsible per se but blame can be partially attributed to them and to you for the accident and therein the circle of who to blame starts.

 

Which cam first the egg or the chicken.

[estellyn]

Now its semantics.

 

Being responsible would mean they physically pushed or knew you would fall. They would have played a helping hand in it as the grip is allegedly superior on safety boots ( I always thought it was about protecting the foot but hey ho).

 

They had no idea you would slip/trip etc and therefore acted inappropriately by suggesting you were trainers. You could have refused knowing the grip on your trainers was not up standard, which then opens a new argument in that where you responsible by compying with the request, I'm guessing what it boiled down to where site rules that probably stipulated safety equipment must be worn at all times and the site gaffer/foreman should have stopped you entering the site without the appropriate equipment being worn. So not responsible per se but blame can be partially attributed to them and to you for the accident and therein the circle of who to blame starts.

 

Which cam first the egg or the chicken.

 

This is really getting off topic, yes?

[tomtom256]

This is really getting off topic, yes?

 

Yes but questions have been asked and he deserves an answer, no?

 

Seems we live in a blame culture and blame needs to be laid somewhere, but not through ones own accountability.