Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,883
Excellent post Gary and so true but like myself you are on the inside so to speak so know what you are talking about.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
I have emailed you Gary.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
of course there is abuse of the system and all parties are aware of this and in the past have allowed it to continue.
that said in the net will be a lot of geniune geezers and geezeress's
the very people this was set up for.
I think everyone is behind I.D.S In trying to stop the fraud, but it normally hits others to.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Gary if I can be of any help please let me know
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Are you then suggesting a free for all then Gary and no checks should be made?
At the end of the day you have to have a system and you need to route out malingerers and scroungers. That process will always worry some but it still has to be done.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw;
if you read barryw's posts he has a number of times clearly stated there is some abuse of the system, and that those abusing the system should be targeted.
his concern(like a number of posters) is who else gets caught up in this
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
You cannot have it both ways - do something about abuse and scare stories will be told and fears raised.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
barryw;
you have probably never been in the position of some of these people and probably therefore don't appreciate some of the fears.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
Diana - my wife Jean has done peritoneal dialysis for over 11 years (the norm is around 8). She has been able to be as "normal" as possible, but cannot walk very far as she has quite severe muscle weakness.
She recently started Haemo-dialysis and for most people it works quite well and they attend their Haemo-dialysis unit 3 times a week - Jean does Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday mornings, but because her veins are not very good, she is having a real, hard time of it.
If you have to go on dialysis and get the choice of either Peritioneral or Haemo, try to find out as much as you can on both of them, so you can make a fully informed decision on which one you want to do. If you don't have any choice, that's different.
If you'd like Jean to have a chat with you about dialysis, we live on the Folkestone Road, I'm sure she will be happy to talk to you about it.
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Keith: of course I appreciate they may be worried but that is not a reason to have a free-for-all. You have to ensure the benefit only goes to those who should get it.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
and thats exactly what garyc has also been saying barryw
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
DLA and other associated benefits are just another tool in the Politicians tool-box. When high unemployment levels are seen as a problem one of the ways to make the figures look better is to move people off on to non employment related benefits. And when high unemployment figures are less of a problem, upping the numbers by reducing the up-take of more costly benefits is the easy thing to do.
"It's been rising well ahead of any other gauge you might make about illness, sickness, disability or for that matter, general trends in society".
This is a quote from IDS, but I am not sure what it means as it is something that could be said about anything and elsewhere more bold statements have been made about cost savings.
Any reduction in this or other benefits will certainly reduce the cash-flow within a community and reduce employment prospects and earnings for people and businesses locally. It will also put a large amount of money ATOS's way. [I have had some experience of an ATOS health/benefit check and found them (one doctor anyway) to be reasonable and professional.]
I doubt that this 'drive' for savings will find any actual savings, with or without factoring-in ATOS's cost. Nevertheless as the idea is being sold as a saving exercise pressure will be brought to bear ultimately on many who can least bear it.
A pay rise for MP's will be the next idea...all these tough decisions etc. etc.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
another point here is that ids touts the idea of a universal flat benefit payment so why he is he taking such pains to move people from one benefit to another?
Guest 719- Registered: 11 Jul 2011
- Posts: 443
I know it is hard to get D L A it took me 3 year,s to get it after my stroke because i can do some thing,s for myself they kept turning me down in the end i had to go to a hearing in ashford where they over turned the D L A i won my case
Yorkshire Born And Yorkshire Bred
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
your correct ted,
I represented someone at Ashford that had been declined dla
for many years even though couldn't dress, needed people to help her dress
was in a wheelchair, and lots more
by quoting at ashford the doctors own guidlines made them look up
also the lady coming in with a wheelchair.
with this of course the story behind it all.
a lady to proud to claim, and then when she did, she then went on underplaying the complex problems she had.
Sometimes you have to challenge these decisions, and thankfully this lady won the case.
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 671- Registered: 4 May 2008
- Posts: 2,095
BarryW.
I do not wish to stoop to name calling, so I won't but you do know what I could call you for consistently ignoring the content of my posts.
I have clearly stated many time and let me be clear about this, all abuse is wrong and should be dealt with.
All past Governments have wasted £million's just to say "hey look, we are dealing with this problem" without caring about the people they are dealing with.
The next doctor that comes around to examine my wife, without her medical history and lifts her legs up himself because she could not, then I will call the police and have him charged with assault.
Because I care for my wife, she is mobile for longer periods with less bedridden periods. What he did by lifting her legs, was to commit her to bed for the next 6 weeks, with bed pan, bed wash, the whole work's and then many months trying to get her back to the level she was at, prior to moron examining my wife.
Oh, I forgot to add, he took her benefit off her as well and it took us nearly a year to get it back.
To eradicate abuse, put a team of professionals together, that have full access to the patients' medical records, that have a clear set of rule to work with to protect the genuine but be able to pick out the abuser.
Howard is right, up till now it has simply been a numbers exercise and Tom is right by saying no money has been saved, probably the reverse.
"My New Year's Resolution, is to try and emulate Marek's level of chilled out, thoughtfulness and humour towards other forumites and not lose my decorum"
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Well done Ted. It is the 'potential' claimants endurance that is tested from the off. [Isn't it funny how, when one has endured the process of claiming, one is stuck with the designation "claimant" and not (deserving) recipient?]
There seems to be something of a 'contest' between doctors who are charged with ordering ones health issues and doctors who are there to ensure that ones health needs do not impinge upon the public purse through the benefit system.
How many of the "deserving recipients" are not under the care of a GP or Hospital Specialist?
Why is it that one short consultation trumps the considered opinion of experienced, trained (fellow) professionals?
It all seems to be something of a political game. Where one Government can cloak a section of the population and another Government can then reveal them, but why must it always be the fault of the individual?
I cannot shake-off the idea that the population is farmed by successive Governments and not in a true partnership.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Jan Higgins- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,883
Barry, you are missing the point that the deserving cases loose their money straight away and have to wait for their appeal case to be heard, this can and in most cases does mean extreme hardship.
Imagine living for THREE years without your money that is how long Ted had to wait or the year Gary's wife had to wait. Congratulations on winning your battles that neither of you should have had to fight in the first place.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 656- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 2,262
Its so sad to read the posts above of the deserving cases for DLA. Both Ted and Gary and his wife should not have to endure this kind of treatment, my heart goes out to both of them. I'm very pleased to hear that they finally had their rightfull benefits restored.
It seems now that every entitled person has got to fight tooth and nail for their rights. If only, as Gary has suggested above, there was a system in place to protect the genuine thus enabing the abusers to be quickly identified.
It is outrageous that good people are neglected and abused by the system. Absolutely the system should root out the feckless and support the people who need it. To abuse people just at the time when they need support, and in the name of helping them, is not only cruel but heartless.