Monthly Archives: October 2013

Letter to DWP Minster Regarding Tribunal from Myalgic Encephalomyelitis sufferer

A Minster for Employment (DWP)

Thank you for your letter

Unfortunately you have misunderstood the situation.  However you have clarified the need for me to ask this question at this time.

The DWP are failing to consider the validity of resistance to Appeals made by claimants.

I am retried on medical grounds (medical evidence accepted by two pension companies.)  I was diagnosed with ME/CFS in xxxx, my symptoms are worsening.  I stopped work in xxxx.  Have been signed unfit since xxxx; and referred to mental health services xxxx and cardiology xxxx due to increased stress.  I have been accepted for ESA from April 2013.

The DWP are still resisting (via the tribunal) my Appeal for ESA for 2012.  What the Upper Appeal have to prove (to itself since the DWP – according to you give no further instructions?) is that I was miraculously fit for some reason from April 2012 to April 2013? (based on a report that I complained was inaccurate?!) In the first year that my doctors declared me unfit?

They are to do this after the DWP admitted that it failed to deal with my complaint:

  • about the inaccuracy of the ATOS report;
  • the reply to which I only received after my first appeal.
  • you confirm that the ATOS report may not contain my statements. [Legally then it is of no use to anyone – verified with solicitor.]
  • you confirm that the advice given to the DWP and ATOS is from the Disability Handbook 1996?!  Well that is out of date the legal definition for ME (CFS) is from 2007, the Nightingale definition.

To avoid stress on me; and to stop wasting tax payer money:

  • The DWP should have advised the Tribunal that a complaint was in progress
  • The DWP should have advised the Tribunal the result of the complaint
  • The DWP should advise the Tribunal if it should proceed or not; based on the merit of the case and the seriousness of the complaint

Without an informed process the result of complaint and Tribunal are meaningless.

After all if the DWP made a mistake and discovered it would surely tell the Tribunal, in order that the claimant not become a victim of abuse by the DWP/Tribunal?

  1. Are the DWP going to waste my and the Tribunal times (and tax payers money) continuing to resist my Appeal?
  1. ZZZZ XXXX will be asked to consider investigating and raising the question in the House of Commons as to why Tribunals are left to run when there is no validity in the case; and why Tribunals are asked to resist appeal in all instances; this is not an independent or fair Tribunal?
  1. Under the Freedom of Information act I am requesting copies of all DWP instructions given to the Tribunal in my case. (Reference 1234xyz)
  1. Consider ‘Regulation 29’, if Tribunal failed to consider risk to mental and Physical health if the claimant were found not to have limited Capability for work.  Having failed to consider Regulation 29 the DWP are liable for the stress and injury caused to me.   This includes your failure to update the Tribunal with complaint status and medical evidence.
  1. Incorrect application of descriptors.  “It must be possible for all the descriptors to be completed reliably, repeatedly and safely, otherwise the individual is considered unable to complete the activity.”  You might be able to go up three steps *once* – but if cannot do it “reliably, repeatedly and safely”, in Fraud’s own words you CAN NOT do it at all.

I can’t repeat tasks due to my condition; but we also see that ATOS cannot repeat facts?

The Tribunal must be updated with the complaint details and outcome (including why it was late!)

Regards

***

After getting that together which has taken since last month – I’m exhausted!!  The stress I get from concentrating on fact and typing correctly gives me chest pains and panic attacks.

I intend to copy the letter from the DWP about the ATOS report very soon!  Keep reading!

Well thats over with for today.  Now to try and get it off my mind!