Dr The Singh Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Just to clarify the blind bloke was seen in the video with a guide dog, I assume that he would have it with him. To overlook a guide dog would mean the assessor would have to be as blind as the claimant. I do not totally disagree with the assessments but the pass requirement is too high. It is easy to distinguish between someone who attends and limps with an ingrowing toenail and someone in a wheelchair who has a medical certificate from a specialist or someone who is awaiting major heart surgery or has a cancerous growth on their neck. To put it bluntly they are targeting the wrong people. I cannot see how anyone can disagree that it is unfair for a severely disabled person to lose most of their income when the true culprits get away scott free. The sheep comment was in response to the poster who said there was no guide dog in the video. I saw a guide dog I do not know what the poster saw. WTF Ken, I still don't get it!!
Dr The Singh Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Government vet killed man in sex session. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/apr/02/former-government-vet-kirk-thompson-guilty-of-manslaughter-bird-flu Does the vet have anything to do with Ken and his guide dog story........this is worse then Twin Peaks!!!
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 WTF Ken, I still don't get it!! A bloke who was blind was passed fit by ATOS. The reason given was that he made eye contact with the assessor which is a natural thing to do when another person speaks to you. blind or not blind In the video that I posted he was seen with a guide dog which is normally used as a seeing aid for a person who is blind.
Dr The Singh Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 A bloke who was blind was passed fit by ATOS. The reason given was that he made eye contact with the assessor which is a natural thing to do when another person speaks to you. blind or not blind In the video that I posted he was seen with a guide dog which is normally used as a seeing aid for a person who is blind. Oh I see, shame ATOS could not see that your mate could not see!!!
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Oh I see, shame ATOS could not see that your mate could not see!!! close enough.
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 A bloke who was blind was passed fit by ATOS. The reason given was that he made eye contact with the assessor which is a natural thing to do when another person speaks to you. blind or not blind In the video that I posted he was seen with a guide dog which is normally used as a seeing aid for a person who is blind. Sounds like an old Paddy and Murphy joke. Paddy and Murphy rock down to the job centre to try and claim some disability money for being deaf. Paddy walks in and signs all his forms etc and on the way out the fella says "Can you shut the door behind you?" Paddy does and get caught out, says on the way through the reception to Murphy, "Murphy, at the end he says shut the door, don't do it, he's trying to trick you!" Murphy walks in and signs his forms and on the way out the guys does the same thing again, "Murphy, do you mind shutting the door on the way out?" Murphy turns around and says.... "Shut it your fcuking self" I'll get my coat.
Webbo Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Why are you unfit to work just because you're blind?
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Why are you unfit to work just because you're blind? Think he had severe arthritis too. It doesn't really but the job opportunities would be few. It would also depend on where you lived. I am not saying he could not and I am sure he and many other blind people would like to work, but maybe there should be a job suitable first. I am thinking how many employers would take him on over a fitter younger person if he is liable to take days off at short notice through not being able to move far.
DANGEROUS TIGER Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 It's either an administrative error or they never informed the DWP he had cancer. Obviously it's bad, but there many instances of people dying and then receiving correspondence. My partner's husband died, some eight years ago, and even as recently as three years ago, she was still being sent letters, addressed to him, informing him the benefit he received (while dying of cancer), was being looked into, despite the fact they had been informed of his death, on numerous occasions. The benefit had actually stopped when he died. This is a similar type of distressing cock up. Dreadful!
Merging Cultures Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Not bad Matt. The story I told really happened. I'll say why I defend the most serious ill of disabled people. I was talking to someone yesterday. I may have mentioned him before His mother died recently and the day after her funeral he received a letter from the JC to attend on Bank holiday Monday. Anyway he attended another day.The first questioned they asked was whether he was living alone. He questioned how they knew that as they had not asked on previous visits. He thought it suspicious but after thinking about it I assume they were informed when he registered the death. Now for the reason of the post. He has won his appeal and been signed off until 2019, I do not know how serious his condition is. He now uses a stick and takes several pain killers a week. He lives alone and the house is paid for. Heres the bit you will like to moan about. He likes his ale and makes two or three out of town trips a week doing pub tours. He has not worked since 1990. He was a painter and decorator by trade. Like I said I do not know the full extent of his illness. If they signed him off I would guess it is serious enough to do so. So when I see people who on the outside are obviously in a worse position I speak out. TBH I don't know how he affords to do what he does. Before he also had his mother's pension (she was 88 and blind)Now it will just be PIP. He may have a private pension but even that would not allow him to do what he does. He has no PC or mobile or any other gadgets. Still it is his life and not for me. I could not afford it without digging deep into my savings and it would be gone in a couple of years if not before so it niggles as much as I do not envy his lifestyle. Sorry for the long post. So, some guy you don't know what his condition is or how serious is, but he uses a stick and takes painkillers, hasn't worked since 1990, lives a life of drink (likely) thanks to his now dead mother's pension. And he had been signed off until 2019. Yeah, this is really helping your cause.
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 My partner's husband died, some eight years ago, and even as recently as three years ago, she was still being sent letters, addressed to him, informing him the benefit he received (while dying of cancer), was being looked into, despite the fact they had been informed of his death, on numerous occasions. The benefit had actually stopped when he died. This is a similar type of distressing cock up. Dreadful! Once you can put down to administrative error. When it is in the hundreds or thousands there is a serious balls up somewhere and ignoring it or denying it will lead to more errors and distress to families.
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 So, some guy you don't know what his condition is or how serious is, but he uses a stick and takes painkillers, hasn't worked since 1990, lives a life of drink (likely) thanks to his now dead mother's pension. And he had been signed off until 2019. Yeah, this is really helping your cause. I do know him but not his medical history
Merging Cultures Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 I do know him but not his medical history Right, but citing such cases without facts, or appropriate detail, doesn't really help strengthen your points.
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Right, but citing such cases without facts, or appropriate detail, doesn't really help strengthen your points. Maybe.
Webbo Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 So he's in his late 50s and he hasn't worked since 1990? Meaning he virtually retired in his mid 30s and he was incapable of learning a new skill in 24 years?
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 So he's in his late 50s and he hasn't worked since 1990? Meaning he virtually retired in his mid 30s and he was incapable of learning a new skill in 24 years? Sounds worse when you say it like that. I agree with you.
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 It's just fantastic. A passionate defence of a painter and decorator who had to retire from work at the age of 29. I'm 31 now, I must be like Bruce Forsyth in your eyes
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 I may have got the number of years wrong. Is 2000 any better?
Guest MattP Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Certainly more believable if you pick a year when Labour were in power.
MooseBreath Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Correct me if I'm wrong Rincey, but it seems like you're trying to use the fact that he's down the boozer every day as a reason why he can't work?
Rincewind Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 Correct me if I'm wrong Rincey, but it seems like you're trying to use the fact that he's down the boozer every day as a reason why he can't work? Not at all.
FoxesAreBlue Posted 28 August 2014 Posted 28 August 2014 **** it - I've got a bad knee too and if I take my contacts out, I can't drive or work - where do I sign up for the loot?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.