jump to content
my subreddits
more »
Want to join? Log in or sign up in seconds.|
[-]
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
subreddit:subreddit
find submissions in "subreddit"
author:username
find submissions by "username"
site:example.com
find submissions from "example.com"
url:text
search for "text" in url
selftext:text
search for "text" in self post contents
self:yes (or self:no)
include (or exclude) self posts
nsfw:yes (or nsfw:no)
include (or exclude) results marked as NSFW
e.g. subreddit:aww site:imgur.com dog
this post was submitted on
370 points (97% upvoted)
shortlink:
reset password

unitedkingdom

subscribeunsubscribe113,048 readers
294 users here now
For the United Kingdom of Great Britain (England, Scotland, Wales) and Northern Ireland; News, Politics, Economics, Society, Business, Culture and anything else UK related.
Tourists - please use /r/AskUK for questions.

Do not editorialise titles.

Please report posts that contain disruptive or misleading titles; try to keep your titles more or less verbatim if it is linking to a news site. Let commentators make their own decisions on an article.

Try to keep a positive attitude.

This is the UK subreddit; posts that seem to come from people coming here only to attack the country in some sort of downvote brigade from another subreddit will be banned. Anyone cross-posting to other subreddits to gain support and upvotes for a certain point of view will be banned. reddit is not your personal army.

Images

Images are encouraged to be posted to /r/britpics.
No image macros/memes, pictures of text, screencaps of websites, photos of newspapers or any image of terrible quality (taken with phones, tablets, potatoes, etc.).

Flair

Flair should only be used for location information. Other flair will be deleted without warning, repeat offenders will be banned.

Bots and novelty accounts

No bots or novelty accounts allowed (/u/TweetPoster is the exception).


Related Subreddits:

If you think your post has been banned, please contact a mod.

Join us on IRC at irc.snoonet.org #uk

The moderators of r/unitedkingdom reserve the right to moderate posts and comments at their discretion, with regard to their perception of the suitability of said posts and comments for this subreddit. Thank you for your understanding.
a community for
message the moderators

MODERATORS

all 110 comments
[–]MolitovMichellex 72 points73 points74 points  (1 child)
This happened to the woman who lived in my flat before me. Died 3 weeks later.
[–]Digging_For_OstrichExpat (Switzerland) 26 points27 points28 points  (0 children)
3 weeks after you moved in? She probably wasn't ready for a lodger.
[–]i_sideswipeBelfast 49 points50 points51 points  (1 child)
Given my own experience with applying for ESA and DLA (we don't have PIP in Northern Ireland yet thankfully), this doesn't surprise me in the least. Even when your advisor points out case law relevant to your situation because they make incorrect decisions, they still flat out refuse to apologise and just say something along the lines of "Due to new evidence we have reviewed your claim." That you even need an advisor to push through the absurdity of the system is insane.
I know for myself, the ongoing issues with my claims (ESA is sorted thankfully, just DLA have screwed up) my recovery has been set back significantly.
[–]Carnagh 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
We're infallible I tell you. Infallible!
[–]sdritchie 39 points40 points41 points  (8 children)
While claiming Universal Credit I had to work at the DWP in their appeals team for 6 weeks which, although it was unpaid, I was happy to do as I figured it would be good experience and might help me get a job in the future - that was supposed to be the point of it.
That was not the point of it - the point of it was to supply free labour to the office to do the filing. It literally didn't get done unless there was a work placement person like me in to do it.
Fine, whatever. No complaints it's still experience. I just spent my time keeping notes about the fucked up shit I heard around the place and by far the worst was the woman in charge of the department that my department was within boasting that she had a woman in her team working on the Friday and she died of her cancer on the Tuesday, so there was no excuse for the amount of sick leave in some of the other groups.
That's the mentality of these people.
[–]JayneLutWales 27 points28 points29 points  (7 children)
A while ago (2007) I did a sixth month stint audio-typing fraud investigation tapes for the DWP.
Bloody depressing.
For every dodgy person breaking the rules there were at least three who'd made honest mistakes, and another two who hadn't done anything wrong at all.
One case they went all guns blazing for a kid because a form, two years previously, had said 7 instead of 9. Could have been bad handwriting. The amount owed? £10. The amount spent on the investigation? Over a grand...
Another case they stopped a woman's benefits because, although there was absolutely no evidence of fraud, they worked out they were not giving her enough money to live off... Ergo she must be committing fraud to be making rent and feeding her kids... Totally ignored that she was using foodbanks and being mega frugal.
[–]thegingergamerMiddlesex 14 points15 points16 points  (5 children)
"this woman barely has enough money to afford to live but her and her kids aren't homeless and dead yet?SHE MUST BE COMMITTING FRAUD!"
[–]JayneLutWales 8 points9 points10 points  (4 children)
That was indeed the crux of the argument. To be frank, if most of the people who were hauled in could afford a lawyer I'd say they'd have stood a good chance of defeating the allegations. Most were bullied into agreeing to pay back the DWP though.
[–]thegingergamerMiddlesex 8 points9 points10 points  (3 children)
It's sad how we make poor people pay for a lawyer to defend their case,from the get go they are at a disadvantage in a 'equal' courtroom setting
[–]Usgarden 7 points8 points9 points  (1 child)
Don't worry we have legal aid for that! Oh? The government cut that too?
[–]AmosralLondon [score hidden]  (0 children)
All according to plan.
[–]fiercelyfriendlyLincs 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Trapped by the system. Without the means to bring a case they can't bring a case. If they had the means they wouldn't have a case to bring. Kafkaesque.
[–]Uaedaien [score hidden]  (0 children)
I represented a few clients in DWP interviews under caution. The investigators were utter morons.
[–]SuddenlyLibrarySurrey 68 points69 points70 points  (7 children)
A spokesperson for the DWP said: “Our thoughts are with the family of Mrs Amos. The decision was based on evidence which included the opinion of Mrs Amos’ own GP.”
No apology, then. There are few people this world would be better off without, but IDS is number one.
[–]OpenSourceGlobe 0 points1 point2 points  (2 children)
If that's the case, not sure what people expect the DWP to do besides get the opinion of the medical professional that dealt with the person.
Might as well blame the health service?
People just want their pound of flesh I guess.
[–]Certhas [score hidden]  (0 children)
No, the system is just incredibly trigger happy. In Germany the Hartz 4 laws also mean that, if able, you have to look for work or loose your benefits.
I've never heard of ANY stories resembling what is coming out of the UK. I expect the DWP to not force people to beg or starve, unless they have clear proof.
[–]HuhDudeEuropean Union [score hidden]  (0 children)
which included the opinion of Mrs Amos’ own GP
Could literally mean anything. The opinion could have been 'she shouldn't work', and the comment from DWP would still be true.
EDIT: I'm a doctor. I'd be surprised if the GP made a definite statement on what activities the patient could do - for one, they aren't paid by the DWP, and secondly it would be a ver hard/impossible judgement call in most situations.
[–]johnfarrellfitness -4 points-3 points-2 points  (2 children)
Sometimes an apology can be seen as accepting some guilt for what happened.
While I don't like him I'm sure we can all understand why he wouldn't want to directly apologise.
[–]fiercelyfriendlyLincs 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
Fuck it. All because they might get sued. If they were wrong they apologise and take it on the chin. This attitude of not admitting guilt makes me puke. Perhaps the courts need to start cranking up the damages where evidence is clear cut and there is no admissions of guilt or shreds of compassion. Fuck this heartless, heartless system that rewards lying, chicanery, and deceit.
[–]oliethefolieHertfordshire 117 points118 points119 points  (3 children)
She was probably faking it to get free money.
#CompassionateConservatism
[–]ProjectFrostbite 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
#CompassionateConservatism
Use the \ key as a way to declare the next character to be text, not a command to use a formatting shortcut. Note my source text, I had to actually type a \\ to get a single \
[–]oliethefolieHertfordshire 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
God damn, I always do that. Thanks.
[–]ProjectFrostbite [score hidden]  (0 children)
#HashtagsForAll
[–]StonedPhysicistGlasgow 84 points85 points86 points  (4 children)
"The decision was based on evidence which included the opinion of Mrs Amos’ own GP."
Yeah, six months prior. Fuck's sake, DWP, even if they could once admit they fucked up they might retain a sliver of credibility.
[–]infernal_llamas 8 points9 points10 points  (1 child)
Welcome to the "streamlined" NHS, outdated reports on chronic conditions are fairly common.
[–]zlexRex -1 points0 points1 point  (0 children)
They have always been pretty chronic.
[–]JeesterA Shropshire Lad [score hidden]  (1 child)
Well the office worker at the DWP isn't likely to be able to give an updated on are they!?
For fuck sake.
[–]mikejudd90Isle of Bute [score hidden]  (0 children)
It may well have been up to date when submitted to ATOS... by the time they have turned it around and got it to the DWP it might well be 6 months out of date
[–]imRegistering2Wales 48 points49 points50 points  (1 child)
An utter disgrace to this country.
[–]JeesterA Shropshire Lad [score hidden]  (0 children)
Alright there Gareth. Calm down.
[–]Terrythecoat 19 points20 points21 points  (0 children)
Why is it surprising?
IDS is the biggest fuckwit I've ever seen, and I've seen many
[–]lillyringlet 4 points5 points6 points  (2 children)
4 out of 7 days a week I couldn't walk across the room to go to the loo, nor get food, struggled to hold a conversation without my partner about to help... I was refused help from social services because on my best days I could walk in the local shops but I struggled to get to health appointments safely (I scared a lot of people do they stopped my help as they felt I couldn't handle the travel.)
I was also refused pip and told I would get worse from trying to get esa as they would try to put me on jobseekers.
It was the same with health services - I was too ill for some (to get there or attend regularly sure to the unpredictable nature of my issues) and too good on my best days that I have slipped through the system for 10 years to try and fix this.
A year ago I was told I had a 70% chance of healing it completely or a 90% chance of kickstarting recovery - thing is treatment is extreme, not a NHS approved treatment for it and very expensive emotionally and financially for the rest of my life. The positives though, it would be free, sex with my partner would be involved and I'd have a baby at the end of it. We both wanted kids so now I'm 3 months later and now I'm getting help left right and centre because I'm pregnant and my illness is already much better...
If it wasn't for the bump though, I'd have no help at all and I'd be still unable to walk across the room to the loo most days... Pregnancy can't help others like me and I've seen how the government is destroying these people's lives through stupid decisions.
[–]oliethefolieHertfordshire [score hidden]  (0 children)
Sorry for all the shit but congratulations on getting pregnant!
[–]AmosralLondon [score hidden]  (0 children)
You've obviously gone through a lot of shit, and I hope it's getting better for you, it sounds it.
I'd like to ask you though, when contending with the bullshit bureaucracy you have to go through to get help, why don't you simply lie your arse off on the odd day you're feeling better? It's a crap thing to have to do, but you clearly needed the help, sometimes you have to make the system work for you.
[–]rougement 16 points17 points18 points  (8 children)
It's really surprising to me that nobody has tracked down IDS and offered a few new policy ideas, delivered with the thick end of a baseball bat.
[–]LeonicholGeordie in exile (Surrey) 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Honestly, my guess is it is likely because those both affected enough and with sufficient desire, have no idea who he is, or his responsibility for their issues.
[–]Possiblyreef -2 points-1 points0 points  (6 children)
Off you go then.
Be sure to use your supervised computer time in prison to report back how it went
[–]rougement 15 points16 points17 points  (5 children)
I said I found it surprising, it's sad that you have trouble understanding words.
[–]Possiblyreef comment score below threshold-10 points-9 points-8 points  (4 children)
Yet you can't understand why a random member of the public doesn't want to physically assault a highly public facing member of parliament?
[–]rougement 17 points18 points19 points  (3 children)
Not random, somebody personally effected by the callous system IDS dreamt up.
[–]Rzah 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
Well that's the beauty of it, they're all too sick to smash his face in.
[–]Possiblyreef comment score below threshold-12 points-11 points-10 points  (1 child)
tracking him down, getting past bodyguards and then hitting him with a baseball bat is probably not the best way to get your "too ill to work" claim passed though is it?
[–]code0011Suffolk 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
It would be good for getting your "too in prison to work" claim passed through, though
[–]arrezzo[S] 20 points21 points22 points  (11 children)
I believe this is called compassionate conservatism. Don't think labour would have been any better under Milliband. They were just as bad under Blair and Brown.
[–]mush01Northerner in London 11 points12 points13 points  (0 children)
It's amusing that I didn't even need to click that to know who said it
[–]steve__Jarrow 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
He has become a right fucking dooley recently. Never agreed with his viewpoints in the first place but I always at least took what he said seriously.
[–]CMCyantistBest Yorkshire 🍺🍺🍺 3 points4 points5 points  (6 children)
You actually believe people were denied DLA or whatever is was called back then like they are now?
[–]JayneLutWales 4 points5 points6 points  (4 children)
Yup. A lot of the stuff being implemented now was suggested in a civil service document in 2009, pre-coalition. That said the Tories really have rolled with it!
The change from DLA to PIP is one of the biggest kickers. The former was never that easy to get, but they've completely changed the goalposts with the new benefit.
With DLA the idea was that it would cover additional costs incurred because of disability. It wasn't means tested (which meant you could have a full-time job and still receive it).
While PIP is ostensibly the same, it is virtually impossible to get if you have a variable health condition (MS/ ME/ most mental health conditions). Being able to hold down a job, or having obtained any sort of qualifications, is held against you.
You have to prove you are negatively impacted more than 50℅ of the time. With variable conditions this is damned hard to prove. You also have to meet certain thresholds.
I have no problem with actually checking people are sick/ disabled before handing out benefits, but the new rules are designed to penalise anyone who is doing even vaguely okay - even I they're only doing okay because of the extra stuff they have to spend money on, which was previously funded by DLA.
[–]KipackNewcastle upon Tyne 2 points3 points4 points  (3 children)
I don't know if it was under PIP, but with regards to my Mum while she was still alive last year it made my blood boil how they rated her.
Her MS had recently taken a turn for the worst, lost motor functionality in her arms (legs went a while ago), and they tried to put her down as a 'medium' rating in whatever B******* thing they had for 'being able to take care of yourself'. I.e She had difficulties but could still manage.
'Medium' my arse. She couldn't do diddly squat by herself, never mind the most basic thing of bring able to drink some water even if it was on her tray in front of her. Luckily the rest of my family fought agains't it and she got the full funding she needed.
I wish to God that I had been in that room when they were assessing her. I would have torn them a new Arsehole and made sure the rest of their colleagues saw it when they went into work the next day.
[–]JayneLutWales 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
Yup. Thing is the folks doing the medical assessment are private contractors. They have nothing to do with the DWP. They're provided by Capita now, used to be Atos. The decision maker, who is part of the DWP, is based in an office (I think PIP/DLA is mostly done out of Blackpool?). There's a big disconnect, I think probably intentionally, between the people making decisions and the people those decisions affect.
[–]KipackNewcastle upon Tyne [score hidden]  (1 child)
I've been reading through this thread and I've had to stop. Stuff on this subject matter always hits way too close to home for me. What on earth are we as a people meant to do about things like this? It sickens me that I think about it and the only thing I can come up with is: Not much.
[–]JayneLutWales [score hidden]  (0 children)
It is damned hard and very disheartening, but there are little things we can do. We can make sure we all know the rules, how the system works and how to help those who need to go through it navigate that system (it's bloody complicated!). We can lobby our politicians, we can support charities who do good work helping people get the benefits they're entitled to. It may not be much individually but if we all stand together we can make a difference :)
[–]arrezzo[S] 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
What was the name of that Sheffield based company that was providing similar services under labor? Can't recall without a bit of searching but I recall a scandal involving their owner.
[–]JorvicYorkshire 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
James Pernnel was talking about bringing in a work capability assessment but it never materialised.
[–]EmphursisWorcestershire 18 points19 points20 points  (23 children)
Before everyone gets their knickers in a twist, lets have a look at this without getting emotional.
The original claim was in June. Information about her condition was provided with the claim. It was deemed that she qualified for the benefits.
Then, come November she reapplied but no up to date information appears to have been provided from her GP. The old information was from five months ago therefore outdated, her condition could have improved.
That is why it was denied, because the information they had was five months out of date. Not because of some malicious government plot. To make it fair, the decision has to be the same rules for everyone otherwise it is one rule for some and one rule for others.
[–]pheasant-pluckerSussex (Hove, Actually) 35 points36 points37 points  (18 children)
her condition could have improved.
COPD is a progressive, degenerative disease. There is no cure or any way of slowing the progression.
[–]BananasonfireNottinghamshire 9 points10 points11 points  (7 children)
-and a person at the DWP is unable to make a decision based on something like that, since they don't have the training to do so. A doctor, however, would be able to give a professional opinion on such a thing.
[–]Mod74Tyne and Wear 1 point2 points3 points  (2 children)
So why wasn't a current professional opinion sought before making such a crucial decision? You can talk about "doing the best in a tough situation" but that sounds like negligence.
[–]JeesterA Shropshire Lad [score hidden]  (1 child)
Surely it is the not the state's responsibility to source this information?
[–]TheScouseWizard [score hidden]  (0 children)
As the state both employs the DWP worker and almost the entire popation of medical professionals in the country (via NHS) it seems a bit inefficient to suggest that one should ask the left hand for information so you can give it to the right hand
[–]SpeedflyChris 0 points1 point2 points  (3 children)
Surely if your job is making value judgements of people's disabilities, a working knowledge of various common disabilities would be a prerequisite?
[–]BananasonfireNottinghamshire 3 points4 points5 points  (2 children)
Uhh no? That's what the doctors are for. An administrator will never have enough knowledge of disabilities to make a decision like that. They base their decisions on information from the person's doctor and not their own personal knowledge of the disability.
[–]ScheduledRelapse 0 points1 point2 points  (1 child)
A 10 second google search is too much to ask?
[–]OpenSourceGlobe 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Yes, actually. Terrible idea
[–]EmphursisWorcestershire comment score below threshold-8 points-7 points-6 points  (9 children)
I'll be honest, I have no medical knowledge so wasn't aware of that. But the point stands - her condition could have changed in such a way that she was no longer eligible for the benefits.
[–]LeonicholGeordie in exile (Surrey) 19 points20 points21 points  (0 children)
While your point stands generally it doesn't apply contextually.
The DWP have the facts of the case in front of them when making a decision. They can be fully aware of what constitutes a likelihood of improvement and what does not.
Although she could have magicked up a lung transplant, I guess.
If there was ever an argument for data to be shared between different bodies of Government, the DWP would be it. The DWP should be able to pull up Doctor-Patient data directly from the NHS, should the claimant have agreed to it.
[–]AazadiTyneside 15 points16 points17 points  (5 children)
Why couldn't they have just picked up the phone, called her GP and be done with it? You know, like how a sane person would do it?
[–]jpgm 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
I can't actually believe I'm about to defend the DWP here(!?!?!) but I think they did try to get in touch with the surgery. From the article...
"Speaking to the Guardian on the phone, Mike Amos said there was difficulty in getting hold of the surgery, St Lawrence medical practice, and did not know the name of his wife’s former general practitioner and that it may have kept changing. He said his family was making a formal complaint: “because there’s lots of things they could have done, but didn’t.”
The Guardian has contacted the surgery but was not available for comment."
[–]honestFeedback 7 points8 points9 points  (0 children)
lol. If their anything like my GP they probably did call but hell froze over whilst they waited for the phone to be picked up.
[–]windy906Cornwall 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
How do you know they didn't? Whose to say the doctor isn't at fault?
From the article: "Speaking to the Guardian on the phone, Mike Amos said there was difficulty in getting hold of the surgery, St Lawrence medical practice, and did not know the name of his wife’s former general practitioner and that it may have kept changing."
[–]steveporkBarnoldswick 3 points4 points5 points  (1 child)
That's exactly what I don't understand! Why can't they try to find out some of the information there and then? Instead of forcing the claim to go back through the system yet again, costing another 4/5 months.
[–]OpenSourceGlobe 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Welcome to bureaucracy. Someone will have the same job every day to sift through an endless pile of forms, from 9am until 5:30pm. They aren't gonna investigate each case with missing information.
[–]sekai-31United Kingdom 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
her condition could have changed
There's no cure. Either she's just as ill as she was when she was approved benefits or worsened. Or died.
[–]iain_1986 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
What part of "progressive, degenerative disease" don't you understand?
The DWP should give the person the benefit of the doubt. If they think her condition could have improved, they should bloody well prove it or investigate before just assuming it has.
"We haven't got new information since 5 months. 5 months is AAAAGES. You can total be cured from most known diseases in 5 months. Lets assume they're ok. There's no way they could have just misunderstood and not given us up to date information...our policies and forms are crystal clear and in no way confusing. Nope. She must be better. Benefits removed"
[–]inawordnoBrummie 8 points9 points10 points  (0 children)
I'm not sure the fact it isn't malicious is important.
The argument against so much beurocracy in receiving benefits was partly based on the idea that no system is perfect. Some people always get lost in the machine so to speak.
Such an ideologically driven and beurocractic close eye on benefits would inevitably lead to this.
[–]dystopian_nowEngland 14 points15 points16 points  (0 children)
Not because of some malicious government plot.
Not so much a malicious government plot as a system designed to inflict hardship as the rule rather than the exception.
[–]arrezzo[S] 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
The spokesman did say the decision was based on information supplied by her GP. That aside for me it's more the iniquity of the system which is so sad. Surely we can do better than this?!
[–]Mr_Evil_MSc 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
Business as usual for the Dept. of Whipping the Poor, then.
[–]haste75 13 points14 points15 points  (9 children)
In cases like this, I really believe the acting manager of the particular case should be named. Responsibility should fall at a persons feet, not under the umbrella of 'DWP'.
"Sandra Jones, manager at DWP, denies woman sickness benefit on the day she died" would have so much more effect long term.
[–]Digging_For_OstrichExpat (Switzerland) 57 points58 points59 points  (2 children)
I couldn't disagree more strongly. That will create huge witch-hunts that will do more harm than good.
Chances are the person you think is responsible was trying to do a good job in a tough atmosphere where maybe there are inadequate or incorrectly set targets, manager pressure, or bad processes. The person probably did the best they could given all the other factors your blanket naming policy ignores.
People follow processes. It's the process's fault, the system is letting down these claimants, not the people who happen to be employed in the office that particular month.
[–]YourLizardOverlordScotland --> West Sussex 2 points3 points4 points  (0 children)
Manager pressure, people follow processes.
Anyone with a moral compass will resist this sort of pressure and attempt to subvert this type of process. The ultimate expression of this is Nuremberg Principle IV.
[–]JayneLutWales 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
People are fallible. There are some fab people in the DWP, some asshats, and some people working under a lot of pressure.
The problem is the system tries to reduce a person to a simple numeric equation. The people at the end of the line, making the final decision, are not involved with that person. They just have a form and an assessment from a (often rushed) one off medical assessment.
It means people fall through the cracks. Especially when there are overly demanding targets set by government.
[–]FransB 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
If you read the letter it says the decision was made with the information that was available and the current situation/symptoms. Which would have been out of date as the medical practice hadn't passed them on. A witch hunt to persecute an individual who did their job with the information available to them would achieve nothing. Calling for reform to the system after this terrible incident is the only way change will come about.
[–]dystopian_nowEngland 8 points9 points10 points  (4 children)
Both are culpable.
[–]haste75 4 points5 points6 points  (3 children)
Yes but saying "DWP" gives no accountability. The only way changes will happen internally is if people take responsibility for their actions.
[–]dystopian_nowEngland 10 points11 points12 points  (0 children)
You can change from one bureaucrat to the other, if the policy is to inflict hardship on the disabled which it is then that will continue no matter who is being paid to do it.
[–]BFoskettSomerset 4 points5 points6 points  (0 children)
Its Ian Duncan Smiths responsibility
[–]DogBotherer 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
The problem is that these days organisations/departments are being set up with people in positions specifically to be the sacrificial lambs for failures of policy or deliberate malfeasance. Often they are there almost entirely to shield others who really should carry the blame.
[–]AustinB93 5 points6 points7 points  (0 children)
IDS should be treated as a murderer. As a disabled person myself I am disgusted that this government actively want to exterminate people like me.
[–]alxffdeep rooted depression 2 points3 points4 points  (5 children)
If I was going for an interview for a IT project support role at DWP tomorrow morning what positives should I focus on?
Theoretically, of course...
[–]animflynny2012 3 points4 points5 points  (0 children)
That your fit and healthy for work.
GOOD LUCK!
I despise the system that's been made by both labour and now hurriedly being ripped up with no regard by the tories to those grieved. Ironically the very people the changes where brought in due to (benefit abusers ) aren't being affected. It's the polar opposite and has been for years. But since the solution will be many many terms in power neither party wants to appear to be the one to fix it. Just quick chops here and there to appease..
[–]LeonicholGeordie in exile (Surrey) 1 point2 points3 points  (0 children)
If I was going for an interview for a IT project support role
Given what people say about working and implementing UC, it is not something you might want on your CV.
Reconsider?
[–]CaptiousnessBedfordshire 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
It's a huge organisation that somehow keeps itsellf together through numerous of these bad pr events
[–]N4N4KI 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
collating as much information as you can for as long as you can stand it, then send it to the press.
Just think of the warm glow you will have if it takes some of the bastards down.
[–]SpeedflyChris 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
That as an IT guy you'll end up being given access to all sorts of things that the regular staff don't get to see, and that microsd cards are very easy to smuggle in and out of even a secure office.
Hell, we could do a kickstarter for media leaks.
[–]mikejudd90Isle of Bute [score hidden]  (0 children)
Atos would probably have written her another letter the day of the funeral, saying that they had refused her appeal and she was still considered fit for work!
[–]a_mad_scotsmanScotland [score hidden]  (0 children)
fucking disgusting that David Cameron and his Government have been allowed to continue
[–]welk101 0 points1 point2 points  (0 children)
Her illness was almost over, clearly.
[–]tyrefire2001 comment score below threshold-7 points-6 points-5 points  (1 child)
Lol. I hope she at least had the good humour to have "I told you I was ill" put on her headstone.
[–]crosstherubicon -1 points0 points1 point  (5 children)
I read this and thought it appalling but, when you look at the eligibility criteria you have to be over 65 to qualify. Am I missing something? (https://www.gov.uk/attendance-allowance/eligibility)
[–]Holty12345Berkshire [score hidden]  (3 children)
Dawn Amos, 67, from Essex, died in November
Unless you mean something else...I don't know?
[–]crosstherubicon [score hidden]  (2 children)
You're absolutely right.. then she qualifies. Both her and her husband look much younger in the photo(s)
[–]Holty12345Berkshire [score hidden]  (1 child)
Think its her daughter in the photo not the women herself
[–]crosstherubicon [score hidden]  (0 children)
The photo further down on the left hand side.. its titled as her. She looks good for 76 and given she was ill, very sad.
[–]i_sideswipeBelfast [score hidden]  (0 children)
Dawn Amos, the woman who died was aged 67. Attendance allowance is the retirement aged version of DLA or PIP.
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy (updated). © 2016 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
π Rendered by PID 23285 on app-169 at 2016-01-08 01:46:40.537005+00:00 running 11f0405 country code: DE.
Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies.  Learn More
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%