Again CD I'm well aware of the above however when one is sick and has already been put through the mill w.r.t. all the hoops disabled people have to metaphorically jump through having to then battle against the DWP and/or Atos coupled with the time it could take could seem a very daunting experience that some disabled people may not feel they can manage.
It's probable that tribunal would have little interest in whether the DWP had followed proper procedures, they would just want to make up their own mind about whether or not the claimant was exempt. Contacting ones MP would have a greater impact.
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
I hope you don't mind me chipping in. In reference to the OPs specific problem, a very common one I'd imagine:
The exemption covers people who would be likely to endanger themselves or others in the event of being found fit for work or fit for work-related activities, right? So people at risk of suicide or violence towards others shouldn't be being called. So if someone is then wrongly assessed as fit to work and one of these consequences results, their death and/or someone elses death or serious injury, assuming that ATOS had had fair warning beforehand that this was likely, would ATOS or the DWP be held responsible, legally?
I know that they would be responsible morally, I'm just wondering if the law reflects morality in this case, at least in theory.
