What does it mean?

Hi All

What does it signify if Atos decide that you don't require a medical? I would assume it means they have accepted you have provided satisfactory evidence of a genuine chronic medical condition? This being so, how can they then put you in the WRAG!!

Shirley

Shirley wrote:

Hi All

What does it signify if Atos decide that you don't require a medical? I would assume it means they have accepted you have provided satisfactory evidence of a genuine chronic medical condition? This being so, how can they then put you in the WRAG!!

Shirley

Hi Shirley,

They would have put the claimant into WRAG, as they considered that the evidence in front of them qualified the claimant as having LCW, (Limited Capability for Work), which puts the claimant into WRAG.

To qualify for the Support Group the evidence must prove that the claimant has LCWRA, (Limited Capability for Work Related Activity).

ie, Limited capability to attend WFI's, WRA, etc.

Hope this helps

cheers

bro58

There's also the possibility that it's a cynical tactic to massage the numbers, to reduce the benefits bill and to wear claimants out so they get fed up and go away.

If you are put in WRAG instead of SG you get paid less, you have to cope with Work Focussed Interviews, and you get retested by ATOS at frequent intervals. There's also legislation going through to cut off contribution-based ESA after one year for those in WRAG.

Call me cynical, but I'd say those are good reasons to shunt as many people as possible into WRAG instead of SG. If you don't care about justice or care for the sick and disabled, that is.

Shirley, if you believe you qualify for SG, i.e. you meet one or more of the SG descriptors, then you should consider appealing. Check out the B&W guides in the members area here: www.benefitsandwork.co.uk/help-for-claimants/esa

Thanks Gordon, bro58 and Andy for your advice.

I think the government have ordered the DWP to stick as many people as possible in to the WRAG, even though they deserve to be in the SG, for the reasons Andy has put forward. I also think it's more than a coincidence that more and more people are being put in to the WRAG without a medical. Is this so that people can no longer complain about the awful treatment being given at the medical's and also to save money? I suspect so.

I certainly intend to appeal, I don't want to let them away with this terrible injustice being doled out to chronically ill people.

Shirley