ATOS

[go.oot.by.dog]

At a time when the bedroom tax is being imposed on them who can least afford it MPs are to get an extra £100 towards the cost of expenses to run their SECOND home taken their allowance to £20100! You just could not make it up......... Perhaps this is why our MP Mr Carmichael voted for the bedroom tax so as to help cover some of his and his colleagues expenses after all we cant have them struggling in their SECOND HOMES and god forbid they might not have enough for gas or electricity.

 

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9927858/MPs-get-another-100-to-help-run-their-second-homes.html

 

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority said the sum MPs can claim was increasing for “associated expenditure†on their second homes “to reflect inflationâ€.

 

The cash takes the total amount that can be spent on rent and bills from £20,000 to £20,100 from April 1 this year.

 

Ipsa said the cash was to help MPs pay for increases in the cost of Freeview television, gas and electricity bills and insurance.

 

Other costs covered by the increase were council tax bills, service charges, contents and building insurance, phone line rental and bills and burglar alarms.

 

Figures from the Office for National Statistics show that household bills have risen four times faster than average earnings since the credit crisis began, leaving many families fearing worse to come from Budget 2013.

 

Ipsa also announced that the amount of money MPs can claim for the cost of running their offices was also going up by 2.4 per cent.

 

Ipsa decided on the increases after it had “sought the views of the public, MPs and other interested parties about any possible amendmentsâ€. It added that it considered that the MPs' expenses “scheme is working well and that only minor adjustments were necessaryâ€.

 

Ipsa has also decided to publish as a matter of routine the names of any MP who is a tenant or landlord of another MP.

 

Last year Ipsa decided to publish the information after a request under the Freedom of Information Act despite protests from Commons speaker John Bercow and other MPs.

 

Matthew Sinclair, Chief Executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Whilst the 0.5% increase in the amount available for running their second homes is modest, MPs must not be insulated from the impact of the rising cost of living.

 

"Our politicians must also not be allowed to forget that when it comes to things like fuel and energy costs, it is their policies which are directly responsible for the higher bills landing on everyone’s doormats.â€

 

It also emerged that Lord Hanningfield, who was jailed for his expenses claims, has started claiming Lords allowances again. Latest figures show that he claimed £4,800 in October 2012 alone, plus £383 travel costs.

 

That brings his total claims in the first five working months since he was allowed back to £15,900 worth of allowances, plus £1,329 travel costs. Lord Hanningfield has not spoken in the House of Lords since he was sentenced to nine months in prison in 2011 for fraudulent claims.

[oddtablet]

SIC now have the Discretionary Housing Payment application form on their website bur I've not found it yet....

 

 

Try this link -

 

http://www.shetland.gov.uk/about_benefits/DiscretionaryHousingPayments.asp

 

thank you

[ArabiaTerra]

go.oot.by.dog, I just want to say that while you might not be getting a lot of feedback on this thread, I for one appreciate your updates on the latest atrocities committed by the evil tory scum and their lib-dem facilitators.

 

Keep it up.

[go.oot.by.dog]

go.oot.by.dog, I just want to say that while you might not be getting a lot of feedback on this thread, I for one appreciate your updates on the latest atrocities committed by the evil tory scum and their lib-dem facilitators.

 

Keep it up.

 

Cheers, will do

[go.oot.by.dog]

Taken from labour Mp Michael Meachers website. A very interesting read.

 

http://www.michaelmeacher.info/weblog/2013/03/dwp-ministers-run-frit-of-seeing-delegation-on-atos-healthcare/#more-4914

 

DWP Ministers run frit of seeing delegation on Atos Healthcare

 

March 15th, 2013

 

This week something happened which is without precedent in my 40 years of Parliamentary experience. On an issue of acute public importance where there had already been a Parliamentary debate revealing a total cross-party consensus solidly opposed to government policy, a Departmental minister then refused to see a delegation to discuss the matter further and to consider necessary changes in procedure. This issue, the work capability assessments carried out by Atos Healthcare, has been a top-line matter on the political agenda for many months now. I had therefore written to Iain Duncan Smith on 31 January asking him to receive a delegation from some of the key campaigning and analytical groups (I had, regrettably, to restrict this to three). I heard nothing for more than 5 weeks and therefore put down a Parliamentary Question on the Commons Order Paper asking when he proposed to answer my letter. As a result I got an immediate reply from Mark Hoban, the junior minister dealing with Atos matters, saying “my current diary requirements mean I am unable to accept your invitation at this timeâ€. That is simply civil service-speak for a flat No. But I have taken the matter further.

 

I therefore waylaid Hoban in the lobbies after a vote and as soon as he saw me, he said immediately “I’m not seeing youâ€. I was taken aback at his aggressiveness and said “But you can’t possibly do this , this is a matter of the highest political importance and it’s your responsibility to talk to and listen to key disability organisations about this matter, however contentious it might beâ€. He simply replied blankly “I’m not seeing youâ€, and repeated it 3 0r 4 times. I kept on insisting ‘Why not?’ and finally he said “I’m not seeing Spartacusâ€. Again I was taken aback and asserted that in my view Spartacus had analysed hundreds of cases, prepared a very detailed and thoughtful analysis of the implications arising from these cases, and even if he disagreed strongly for whatever reasons it was his responsibility to meet them. To this he simply kept repeating “I’m not meeting Spartacusâ€.

 

After thinking over this exchange later I decided to apply for an Adjournment debate, not on Atos as such, but on ‘Ministers’ refusal to accept a delegation on Atos Healthcare’. I also went to see the Speaker about what I consider to be the unprecedented and wholly unreasonable and unacceptable behaviour of DWP ministers, and he listened carefully. I am now very pleased to say that I have obtained an Adjournment debate next Thursday, 21st, at 5pm in the Commons chamber. I intend to use this opportunity to bring this whole matter to a head.

[go.oot.by.dog]

http://news.stv.tv/scotland/217795-doctors-slam-atos-benefits-reviews-as-a-disaster-for-patients/

 

Doctors slam benefits reviews as 'a disaster for patients'

 

A doctors' conference has heard that a controversial benefits assessment centre has been dubbed "Lourdes", because claimants "go in sick and come out cured".

 

But the annual BMA Scotland GPs conference heard claims that many of those judged by the Departement and Work Pensions successfully appealed.

 

Glasgow GP Georgina Brown raised a laugh when she told the conference in Clydebank the new nickname for Atos' Scottish headquarters in the city.

 

She said: "The assessment office is called Corunna House, but to locals it's known as Lourdes - because you go in sick and apparently you come out cured."

 

Dr Brown described the government-driven system to review patients' benefits as "an embarrassment to the coalition government and a disaster for patients".

 

She said: "Ensuring the poor and sick become only poorer achieves nothing but pushing up the unemployment figures, increasing social inequality, increasing health inequalities and stripping patients of their security and self respect.

 

"They are struggling to navigate a system that does not support the most vulnerable in our society. Around 40% of appeals are successful. What does this say about a system where they get it wrong at least 40% of the time?"

 

She said GPs provided medical information to the DWP about every claimant undergoing a fitness to work assessment. But the 20+-page assessment resulted in the wrong outcome in many cases, resulting in patients going cap in hand for money they were entitled to.

 

Dr Brown concluded: "If Atos took notice of the information originally provided, there'd be no need for GPs to prop up a failing system. It's not the job of public services to bail out the system. It must be sorted out at the root level and the problems fixed."

 

Lanarkshire doctor Colette Maule, a negotiator on the BMA's Scottish GP Committee, said GPs in many areas were being overwhelmed by the number of patients seeking extra information for appeals.

 

She said: "GPs did not create this system and many are struggling to cope with the additional demands it is making on them. This is impacting on practice time, which would otherwise have been spent on health concerns. The appeals process is causing distress to thousands of people with long term health conditions who are being deemed fit for work.

 

"These assessments can have a devastating effect on patients' mental and physical health."

 

An Atos Healthcare spokesman said: "We will consider any relevant medical evidence presented by claimants during the process that will enable the DWP to make a more informed decision on benefit entitlement.

 

"We only proactively write out to GPs for further medical evidence where we believe that receiving it may mean we can avoid a face-to-face assessment for the most disabled and unwell. This leads to around 17% of claimants not needing to attend an assessment.

 

"It is wrong to suggest appeals are the fault of Atos Healthcare. Of the 15% of benefit decisions appealed, recent figures show that an inaccuracy in the report from Atos Healthcare is the reason in only 0.3% of cases."m benefits reviews as 'a disaster for patients'

[go.oot.by.dog]

Seriously what chance do we have against this corrupt Government!

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/mar/15/dwp-law-change-jobseekers-poundland

 

DWP seeks law change to avoid benefit repayments after Poundland ruling

 

Lawyer for Cait Reilly and Jamieson Wilson, who won court battle over unpaid work, condemns 'repugnant' emergency law

 

Iain Duncan Smith's department has introduced legislation to 'protect the national economy' from a £130m payout to jobseekers. Photograph: David Fisher / Rex Features

The Department for Work and Pensions has introduced emergency legislation to reverse the outcome of a court of appeal decision and "protect the national economy" from a £130m payout to jobseekers deemed to have been unlawfully punished.

 

The retroactive legislation, published on Thursday evening and expected to be rushed through parliament on Tuesday, will effectively strike down a decision by three senior judges and deny benefit claimants an average payout of between £530 and £570 each.

 

Last month the court of appeal ruled that science graduate Cait Reilly and fellow complainant and unemployed lorry driver Jamieson Wilson had been unlawfully made to work unpaid for organisations including Poundland because the DWP had not given jobseekers enough legal information about what they were being made to do.

 

The ruling meant that hundreds of thousands of jobseekers who had been financially penalised for falling foul of half a dozen employment schemes, including the government's flagship Work Programme, would have been entitled to a full rebate if a final government appeal was rejected by the supreme court.

 

However, the government has instead published a seven-page jobseekers (back to work schemes) bill to head off a potential multimillion-pound payout and "protect the national economy".

 

The Guardian understands that Labour will support the fast-tracked bill with some further safeguards and that negotiations with the coalition are ongoing.

 

The new bill would also put a stop to any potential claims for the national minimum wage, which could otherwise be due to those who spent weeks working for no pay at high street chains such as Tesco, Matalan and Argos.

 

Lawyers and campaigners branded the DWP's move as "repugnant" and "unbelievably disgusting", saying it undermined the rule of law.

 

Official notes to the bill admit the legislative mess was caused by the court of appeal's ruling. "The effect of the court's judgment is that the Department for Work and Pensions had no right to impose a sanction on claimants who had failed to meet their requirements," they say.

 

However, the explanatory notes add: "Once enacted, [the bill] will ensure that any such decisions cannot be challenged on the grounds that the [back to work employment scheme] regulations were invalid … notwithstanding the court of appeal's judgment. Therefore benefit sanctions already imposed or to be imposed, will stand."

 

A DWP spokesperson said: "This legislation will protect taxpayers and make sure we won't be paying back money to people who didn't do enough to find work."

 

Tessa Gregory from Public Interest Lawyers, who successfully represented Reilly and Wilson at the court of appeal, said the legislation smacked of desperation.

 

"The emergency bill is a repugnant attempt by the secretary of state for work and pensions to avoid his legal obligation to repay the thousands of jobseekers, who like my client Jamieson Wilson, have been unlawfully and unfairly stripped of their subsistence benefits.

 

"The use of retrospective legislation, which is being fast-tracked through parliament, smacks of desperation. It undermines the rule of law and means that Iain Duncan Smith is once again seeking to avoid proper parliamentary scrutiny of his actions.

 

"It is time for his department to admit that maladministration and injustice costs. In light of the bill we are considering what further legal action we can take on behalf of our clients."

 

A spokesperson for Boycott Workfare, a grassroots organisation that has campaigned to stop forced unpaid work schemes, said the move was disgusting. They added that they were shocked that Labour was supporting the move.

 

"This is almost unbelievably disgusting. They [the DWP] broke the law, now they want to retroactively change the law so that they didn't break the law in order to keep £130m out of the pockets of some of the poorest people in the country.

 

"The high court found workfare unlawful precisely because people had no way of knowing the rules that applied. It shows an incredible level of arrogance and disregard for the poorest to now attempt to backdate laws to challenge this ruling."

[go.oot.by.dog]

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/capable-of-workrelated-activity-partially-blind-thalidomide-victim-with-brain-tumour-fights-atos-decision-to-force-her-to-attend-interviews-and-put-together-cv-8536873.html

 

Capable of 'work-related activity': Partially blind Thalidomide victim with brain tumour fights Atos decision to force her to attend interviews and put together CV

 

A Thalidomide victim with a brain tumour who is blind in one eye and has trouble walking is battling against a decision by Atos that she is capable of “work related activityâ€.

 

Martine White, 50, is due to appear at a tribunal in which she will appeal against the decision which she fears could force her to take employment or face losing up to half of her benefits.

 

The mother of four from Burnley, Lancashire, is one of a number of victims of the morning sickness drug which left more than 500 people in Britain with severe birth defects who claim they are being unfairly treated by the Government’s controversial back-to-work assessors.

 

Mrs White, who has deformed arms and is facing spinal surgery which she fears could put her permanently in a wheelchair, was assessed by Atos and moved from incapacity benefit to the new employment and support allowance last year.

 

She was placed in the category which deemed she was capable of “work-related activity†which can require attending a “work-related interview†once a month and putting together a CV in order to continue receiving her benefits of £212.70 a fortnight.

 

Mrs White, whose late husband Michael was also affected by Thalidomide, has twice appealed against her assessment but has now been told to argue her case in front of a judge.

 

Her son Carl, who has given up work to help his mother who also has a full-time carer, said: “We got a letter last year which said you are going on work-related benefit and you will have to attend courses and the job centre to prepare for going back to work.

 

“It is causing so much tension that we don’t need. It is stressing my mum out to the point where she feels she has had enough. She constantly feels like she is being harassed,†he added.

 

Mrs White said the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) already had evidence that she was incapable of work and would never be able to return to employment since giving up her job helping people with disabilities and learning difficulties.

 

“It is impossible. I can’t walk properly, I can’t stand, I can’t pick things up, I get dizzy with the brain tumour and I’m blind in one eye and deaf in both ears. It is depressing. What am I going to do,†she said.

 

Freddie Astbury of Thalidomide UK said Mrs White was not alone. “We have had this with people who have no arms or legs who need 24-hour care who are having to do the same thing and go to a tribunal. It is pathetic. It is causing a lot of stress.

 

“They have enough problems. Some of them are severely disabled; some are incontinent and are having to be forced into the shame of having to go through this procedure.â€

 

A DWP spokesman said people placed in the work-related activity group were not expected to look for work or apply for jobs.

 

“The old incapacity benefits system condemned too many people to a life on benefits with little hope of moving back to work. Now people who can work will be given help to find a job while those who need unconditional support will get it,†he said.

 

The fight back against disability tests

 

In February 2012 Cecilia Burns, 51, from Strabane, Co Tyrone began a campaign after having her employment support allowance cut by £30 a week after undergoing an assessment even though she was still receiving treatment for breast cancer. The decision was overturned on appeal although she died six months later.

 

In August 2012, 150 disability rights campaigners protested outside Atos headquarters in London claiming its tests for disability allowances were damaging and distressing and had led to suicides. The company was also criticised for its role as a sponsor of the Paralympic Games.

 

In January 2013 former Labour minister Michael Meacher told Parliament that 1,300 people had died after being placed in the “work-related activity groupâ€. Another 2,200 had died before the assessment came through. Another MP said a female constituent with Crohn’s disease had been told by assessors that she could return to work wearing a nappy.

[shetlandpeat]

After thinking over this exchange later I decided to apply for an Adjournment debate, not on Atos as such, but on ‘Ministers’ refusal to accept a delegation on Atos Healthcare’. I also went to see the Speaker about what I consider to be the unprecedented and wholly unreasonable and unacceptable behaviour of DWP ministers, and he listened carefully. I am now very pleased to say that I have obtained an Adjournment debate next Thursday, 21st, at 5pm in the Commons chamber. I intend to use this opportunity to bring this whole matter to a head."

 

 

 

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/extraordinary-dwp-refuse-point-blank-to.html

[go.oot.by.dog]

After thinking over this exchange later I decided to apply for an Adjournment debate, not on Atos as such, but on ‘Ministers’ refusal to accept a delegation on Atos Healthcare’. I also went to see the Speaker about what I consider to be the unprecedented and wholly unreasonable and unacceptable behaviour of DWP ministers, and he listened carefully. I am now very pleased to say that I have obtained an Adjournment debate next Thursday, 21st, at 5pm in the Commons chamber. I intend to use this opportunity to bring this whole matter to a head."

 

 

 

http://diaryofabenefitscrounger.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/extraordinary-dwp-refuse-point-blank-to.html

 

Thanks for the link shetlandpeat

[go.oot.by.dog]

Bedroom tax: Interactive map of where and when this weekend's protests will take place

 

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/bedroom-tax-interactive-map-weekends-1767294

 

Seems to be none arranged north of Dundee

[go.oot.by.dog]

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2013/03/16/dwp-trying-to-hide-crisis-loan-replacement/

 

DWP Trying to Hide Crisis Loan Replacement

 

The DWP are attempting to hush up the existence of the scant support available for those left without any money at all due to delays in processing benefit claims.

 

From April 1st the Social Fund will be closed down. This was a pot of money which provided repayable ‘crisis’ and ‘budgeting’ loans to those facing emergencies or awaiting benefit decisions. The fund was also used to provide small ‘community care’ grants – usually to people moving into independent housing for the first time, such as a young person leaving care. These were only available to buy the very basics such as a bed or oven, with prices set at the lowest cost possible for each item.

 

According to the legislation, some form of crisis and budgeting loan system will still be managed by the DWP. Much of the support however is being devolved to local authorities, many of whom have yet to release clear details on how they will manage the new schemes due to start in just over a fortnight. Many are thought to be introducing some form of smart card or voucher schemes.

A post on the PCS Union website (spotted by @UKJCP ) reveals that loans for those awaiting benefits are to be renamed Short Term Benefit Advances (STBAs). These will be available through Jobcentres providing new claimants meet the following conditions:

 

“There is an underlying benefit entitlement or reasonable expectation that there is entitlement to benefit; The claimant can afford to repay – other debt and loan repayments will be taken into account; There is financial need – there is serious risk to the health and safety of a family member.â€

Astonishingly, according to the PCS the “DWP does not intend to advertise the availability of STBAs to the public.â€

Which means it’s down to claimants and supporters to make sure that everybody knows about the existence of this scheme. Spread the word and make sure everyone knows about these loans which will be more vital than ever.

 

UPDATE: Thanks to @anitabellows12 to who’s discovered this document buried on the DWP website which explains the new schemes but contains no information on how to apply: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/bud…..ce-las.pdf

[go.oot.by.dog]

http://i1359.photobucket.com/albums/q799/magnacube/52314620-234f-474f-8db1-fd38cebca280_zpsc18c6b57.jpg[/img][/i]

[Distortio]

nothing that comes from this shower surprises me anymore. some light relief/spleen venting was definitely required, here's some more.

 

 

nsfw. although that probably depends where you work.

[go.oot.by.dog]