www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474772...terminal-cancer.html

While I'm all for targeting benefits,and removing the bad apples I've always said current benefit reforms were badly designed,and administered.
This current government have let themselves down badly here.

Surely his cancer was not even diagnosed when his benefit was cut?

He appealed the decision but died before a hearing.

I fail to see how an assessor could "see" an undiagnosed illness was coming?

They are.not mystics !

PS - You forgot to mention that he hadn't worked for 24 YEARS !

'Although the 57-year-old tried to appeal the ruling by the Department for Work and Pensions, which was based on evidence including a report by Atos, the private company behind fitness-to-work tests, he was told it would take a year.'

'In August Mr Coupe was diagnosed with cancer and given just weeks to live. Although he tried to bring the appeal forward the request was refused.'

'Mr Coupe was assessed as fit to work in December last year, despite the fact he was seriously ill with diabetes, a heart condition and a badly injured back, which had left him in serious pain and unable to work for the last 24 years.'

'His doctors and specialist nurses wrote to the firm but never received a reply'


No wonder he couldn't work for 24 years given the seriousness of his conditions.
A number of people I know have had similar problems with ATOS,even Cameron has been embarrassed into 'investigating' this problem.

He was assessed as fit to work last December and not diagnosed with cancer till the following August

Again I ask .... Are these people supposed to see into the future?

In The Know wrote:
PS - You forgot to mention that he hadn't worked for 24 YEARS !


I think we must make sure that everyone claiming benefits needs them, but hiring bus conductors and lollipop men and giving them the power of a doctor is beyond lunacy.
The assessment system is designed to find reasons to catch people out and disqualify them.

For instance...
I helped someone to fill in the forms giving medical details, and posted it back well within the time limit stated.
The money was stopped.

When I rang to find out why,I was told that the office at the address printed on the return form is not in the same building as the office where the forms are assessed and it can take weeks for the envelopes to be collected and delivered to the right department,
(I was becoming a bit shrill at this point)
and that this was not considered a good enough excuse for "failing to return the form"

The person (cretin) on the phone gleefully told me that they had no way of knowing when it was posted, and so the money would not be reinstated.

I replied (A bit forcefully, I was becoming hysterical ) that actually I did know exactly when it was posted, what time it was delivered and the name of the person who signed for it because I had sent it by recorded delivery and I was seeking legal advice.

Three days and several repeats of the conversation later the money was re-instated.
This person would not have been able to fight it without help.

And...

Another person has agoraphobia and other mental disorders.
He has had it for more than twenty years and is receiving treatment.

Even very short trips cause severe panic attacks, and so when he was asked to attend an assessment fifty plus miles from home he asked if he could have a home visit instead (explaining the problem) and was very distressed to be told that this was impossible (it isn't, but he was only given ten days notice and it doesn't give time for complaints etc)
To attend is impossible, and he is suicidal.

And...

Someone else was so nervous filling in the form that she made a pigs ear of it and asked for another one to be sent. This was point blank refused, and she was told that it would be considered a refusal. (We cobbled something together with sellotape)



The system is useless and needs replacing immediately. The assessments need to be carried out by consultants already treating the patient. People might well be signing off or "failing to attend" but i think it is often due to fear and stress, not because they are cheats.(some will be, of course, and this is more likely to be spotted by proper medical staff)

In !the Knowledge wrote:
He was assessed as fit to work last December and not diagnosed with cancer till the following August

Again I ask .... Are these people supposed to see into the future?


I agree that that the cancer is incidental and nothing to do with the assessment.
Even if Atos were competent they could hardly have predicted it.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
I agree that that the cancer is incidental and nothing to do with the assessment.
Atos could hardly have predicted it.

He's not the only one who has been claiming for more than 20 years ! -

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/438996/Mum-wit...enefits-for-20-years

... and remember our mother of 11 (and a horse)?

Police want to talk to her about keeping the shoplifters going -

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/438354/Jobless...ods-from-shoplifters

In !the Knowledge wrote:
He was assessed as fit to work last December and not diagnosed with cancer till the following August

Again I ask .... Are these people supposed to see into the future?

'Mr Coupe was assessed as fit to work in December last year, despite the fact he was seriously ill with diabetes, a heart condition and a badly injured back, which had left him in serious pain and unable to work for the last 24 years.'

The cancer was just the final straw.

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
I agree that that the cancer is incidental and nothing to do with the assessment.
Atos could hardly have predicted it.

He's not the only one who has been claiming for more than 20 years ! -

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/438996/Mum-wit...enefits-for-20-years

... and remember our mother of 11 (and a horse)?

Police want to talk to her about keeping the shoplifters going -

www.express.co.uk/news/uk/438354/Jobless...ods-from-shoplifters

She is obviously managing quite well with whatever her flooring is made from, and I know two firms that will make shoes to order with no glue!
Why wasn't she given a few pairs years ago?


And not only horsewoman!

Did you see "Python man" ? He cant be bothered to wipe the walls down with bleach to get rid of the mould, had another six children since being given a three bedroom house, is with-holding "his" rent money in protest because he wants a five bed-roomed house and now says he would be a burglar if he didn't have handouts.

My eyebrows are never far from the ceiling these days.


Here is the story..
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2471453...ival-10th-child.html

And as if that wasn't bad enough...
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474783...k-year-benefits.html

reality is if there were no social security, crime would skyrocket and even those afflicted with cancer would be hunting down pompous ITK type Tories to belt over the head with a brick for his briefcase.

better to pay them not to turn to crime..even give them a pony if need be.

call it protection money or whatever.

hedda wrote:
reality is if there were no social security, crime would skyrocket and even those afflicted with cancer would be hunting down pompous ITK type Tories to belt over the head with a brick for his briefcase.

better to pay them not to turn to crime..even give them a pony if need be.

call it protection money or whatever.

No Hedda,welfare should be a limited last resort,not a way of life to keep the underclass passive.
It should be available to the genuinely sick,for life if needed.But not for those who can contribute,but won't.

However the government needs to contribute by making sure the economy is geared up to provide jobs,and making those available to the locals first,before allowing cheap foreign labour to drive wages down to the unlivable levels they have reached now.

The guy in this example was simply proof that coalition policies on welfare are not fit for purpose.They simply need to examine and learn.Then provide proper suitable legislation.

Pattaya wrote:
No Hedda,welfare should be a limited last resort,not a way of life to keep the underclass passive.
It should be available to the genuinely sick,for life if needed.But not for those who can contribute,but won't.

Quite right.

We have a very good system for those who dont want to live in society - it's called prison (although ITK does have an alternative !)

However the government needs to contribute by making sure the economy is geared up to provide jobs,

It is NOT up to governments to "provide" jobs ! and the government IS proving a good economy (see recent figures?) by paying off the debt, keeping down inflation and making businessmen willing to expand businesses.

However, most businessmen would not want some of these people at any price.

These people - largely unemployable - have got themselves into this state, why should we pay out even more money for them?

They have wasted their education, and will waste every other penny spend on them.

Many are learning - and the current squeeze is ensuring that some take jobs - any job ! - if they were worth something better they would find it.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
is with-holding "his" rent money in protest because he wants a five bed-roomed house and now says he would be a burglar if he didn't have handouts.

My eyebrows are never far from the ceiling these days.

Did you read the "key" line, honey?

"They have three televisions, Sky Plus HD, a Playstation 3 and an Nintendo Wii in their cramped property"

(all of which WE pay for !)

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474783...s.html#ixzz2iql16vCH

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
is with-holding "his" rent money in protest because he wants a five bed-roomed house and now says he would be a burglar if he didn't have handouts.

My eyebrows are never far from the ceiling these days.

Did you read the "key" line, honey?

"They have three televisions, Sky Plus HD, a Playstation 3 and an Nintendo Wii in their cramped property"

(all of which WE pay for !)

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474783...s.html#ixzz2iql16vCH


It would be a bit less cramped without all that stuff. And without all the children.
I don't understand why they are entitled to a new house at all. Overcrowding is considered "homelessness" by the council, but you are not allowed to make yourself "intentionally homeless"
How can an an extra six children since moving in be "unintentional" ? Unless the house is so cramped that Mrs Python keeps being accidentally impregnated in the crush to see the giant TV?

In The Know wrote:
Pattaya wrote:
No Hedda,welfare should be a limited last resort,not a way of life to keep the underclass passive.
It should be available to the genuinely sick,for life if needed.But not for those who can contribute,but won't.

Quite right.

We have a very good system for those who dont want to live in society - it's called prison (although ITK does have an alternative !)

However the government needs to contribute by making sure the economy is geared up to provide jobs,

It is NOT up to governments to "provide" jobs ! and the government IS proving a good economy (see recent figures?) by paying off the debt, keeping down inflation and making businessmen willing to expand businesses.

However, most businessmen would not want some of these people at any price.

These people - largely unemployable - have got themselves into this state, why should we pay out even more money for them?

They have wasted their education, and will waste every other penny spend on them.

Many are learning - and the current squeeze is ensuring that some take jobs - any job ! - if they were worth something better they would find it.

Getting a bit off the original topic,so I will just say I happen to think the new welfare laws don't cater well for the genuine needy...in fact the 'plasma TV et al' scroungers still seem to be getting plenty,while real unfortunates like the guy I mentioned had his final days ruined....hence I did say the law is not working.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
is with-holding "his" rent money in protest because he wants a five bed-roomed house and now says he would be a burglar if he didn't have handouts.

My eyebrows are never far from the ceiling these days.

Did you read the "key" line, honey?

"They have three televisions, Sky Plus HD, a Playstation 3 and an Nintendo Wii in their cramped property"

(all of which WE pay for !)

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474783...s.html#ixzz2iql16vCH


It would be a bit less cramped without all that stuff. And without all the children.
I don't understand why they are entitled to a new house at all. Overcrowding is considered "homelessness" by the council, but you are not allowed to make yourself "intentionally homeless"
How can an an extra six children since moving in be "unintentional" ? Unless the house is so cramped that Mrs Python keeps being accidentally impregnated in the crush to see the giant TV?

Horrible though it may sound adoption at birth for kids whose parents haven't a hope of supporting them makes more sense.
ITK would recommend it for fun,JK & Hedda would offer to subside it,so long as they didn't live too close by.
I however was adopted back in the early 60s,for exactly that reason,and as such do think a child deserves a reasonable chance of success...and living with idle idiots as parents will not provide that,no matter how much money we throw at the problem.

Pattaya wrote:
while real unfortunates like the guy I mentioned had his final days ruined....

I'm sorry to say that you are still falling for the heart-tugging "spin", Pattaya.

Why was the cancer not found earlier?
(Could it be because he hardly ever went to see his doctor maybe?)

If he really had the conditions that are claimed why did his Doctor not contact Atos and tell them?
Surely they would listen to a qualified professional?

The earlier "story" tries to imply that Atos knew he had cancer and told him he would have to wait a year to be re-assessed. This is simply NOT true

"Five weeks before he died, Mrs Coupe contacted Atos to tell them her husband, 57, didn’t have long to live"
www.derbyshiretimes.co.uk/news/grassroot...-final-day-1-6174530

I was suspicious of this story as soon as I knew that Dennis Skinner MP (the totally loony "Beast of Bolsover") and the Derbyshire Unemployed Workers Assn (a ragbag of loonies - all unemployed of course ! - that represents any dosser and scounger that it can find) were behind it.

In The Know wrote:
[quote]Pattaya wrote:
[quote]
(Could it be because he hardly ever went to see his doctor maybe?)

If he really had the conditions that are claimed why did his Doctor not contact Atos and tell them?
Surely they would listen to a qualified professional?
/quote]

'His doctors and specialist nurses wrote to the firm but never received a reply'

You really should learn to read ITK

In The Know wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
is with-holding "his" rent money in protest because he wants a five bed-roomed house and now says he would be a burglar if he didn't have handouts.

My eyebrows are never far from the ceiling these days.

Did you read the "key" line, honey?

"They have three televisions, Sky Plus HD, a Playstation 3 and an Nintendo Wii in their cramped property"

(all of which WE pay for !)

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2474783...s.html#ixzz2iql16vCH

no room for a pony ?