Disabled dad told he is fit to work TWO WEEKS before death

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 1:56 pm

First topic message reminder :

Diabetic David O'Mar, of Cardiff, was lying in a hospital bed with pneumonia when the DWP made its decision

A disabled dad died two weeks after being judged fit for work as he lay in hospital with pneumonia

Diabetic David O’Mar was stripped of his disability benefits in April after a work capability assessment for Iain Duncan Smith’s hated Department for Work and Pensions.

His daughter Alexandra believes he is one of the growing number of victims of brutal government policies.

She is calling on officials at the DWP – as well as Prime Minister David Cameron – to make good on their pledge to reveal how many deaths are linked to cuts.

David, 58, was bed-bound in hospital on the date of a tribunal to decide whether he should carry on getting disability benefits or was well enough to look for a job.

Despite family pleas to reschedule, the court ruled the former radio DJ fit for work.

He died of pneumonia on April 29.

Alexandra told the Sunday People.: “It definitely affected him. I think it’s disgusting they stopped somebody’s benefits who genuinely needed them.”

She is demanding the release of government statistics showing how many people have died within six weeks of being ruled fit for work and losing their benefits.

Mr Duncan Smith once claimed the figures did not even exist.

But in a climbdown this week, Mr Cameron told MPs that the data is “being prepared for publication as we speak”.

A string of deaths are feared to have been caused by cuts. Stephanie Bottrill, 53, of Solihull, West Midlands, killed herself in May 2013 and left a note blaming the bedroom tax.

She was worried about paying an extra £20 a week to stay in her home.

Diabetic David Clapson, 59, died of a lack of insulin after his Jobseeker’s Allowance was axed over a missed appointment.

The ex-soldier had just £3.44 in his bank and could not afford electricity to power the fridge where he kept vital doses.

As the Government prepares a further £12billion a year in welfare cuts, campaigners fear there are many more victims – including David O’Mar.

Before he fell ill the dad-of-three, of Cardiff, had a £400 bill from the council for unpaid rent after his housing benefit was cut.

He attended a job centre in March for a work capability test, which found he had “limited” ability to work and he had his £100-a-week Employment Support Allowance stopped from April 1.

David appealed but caught pneumonia shortly afterwards and was admitted to Llandough hospital, Cardiff.

He only found out the date of his appeal when his daughter went to pick up things from his flat and found a summons.

Shop worker Alexandra, 26, called the court and was
told to write requesting a postponement, which she did.

She said: “I explained the situation and he’d had notes from the doctors about his condition.

“But then I received a letter saying it wasn’t a good enough reason.

“My dad said: ‘Fine, wheel me into court on my bed then’. He had a great sense of humour. But it was hard to see him suffer with this on top.”

Later that week he had the letter saying his disability benefit had been cut.

David was well enough to return home for a few days and his mum Margaret Moore, 78, travelled from Somerset, where she lives with her partner, to care for him. Mrs Moore was optimistic he would recover in time for his 59th birthday on July 19.

But she said: “He couldn’t walk. He couldn’t see. He was in a terrible state.

“By the end of the week he was back in hospital then he just deteriorated. How was he supposed to work? Something has got to change for people like David.”

Divorced David was nicknamed Dai Poland because he once ran a radio station in the east European country.

When he returned to Wales in 2003 he worked as a football talent scout for Derby County and Burton Albion.

He also threw himself into charity work, collecting hundreds of football shirts to send to orphanages in Moldova and Ukraine for Christmas in 2012.

Alexandra added: “He had a great life, travelling around and helping kids.

“But I would still like some answers from the courts and the judge. Why did they think he could do anything? He could barely walk. I don’t want that to happen to anybody else.”

A DWP spokesman said: “Our thoughts are with Mr O’Mar’s family. It’s wrong to suggest a causal link between the death of an individual and their benefit claim.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/disabled-dad-told-fit-work-6093870#ICID=sharebar_twitter

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:54 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Oh I know you can stand up for yourself Tommy, but that's not the point. The point is that some people here are swanning around this forum with the attitude that they're better than anyone else, and that the opinions of those who disagree with them are invalid.

Oh, that'll be the lefties... who also constantly complain that it is others who are doing that...

Hypocrisy anyone...!!!???

Yes, it is generally the lefties, who then resort to talking about "lack of empathy" when someone disagrees with them.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:54 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

THe starting point of ESA payments is the same as you would have got on JSA, only you don't have to attend any signing on appointments or back to work courses etc... nice!!!

Peace and quiet for a while!!!

What about permitted work? It is possible to do some work whilst claiming ESA, but does that apply to the assessment stage? If it does, what is to stop someone applying for ESA whilst working and getting it at least until the assessment stage is finished?

well that`s fraud for one thing and you could end up prosecuted as some have been

but READ this might help answer your questions
https://www.gov.uk/employment-support-allowance/overview

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:54 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:So let's take the case of someone who applies for ESA because they have depression. There appears to be no requirement for them to try any kind of treatment at the moment, and yet it is a treatable condition. Should it not be a requirement that they seek treatment and are compliant?

perhaps by that you would include enforced abortions on single mothers

compliant eh! ...welcome to raggas fourth reich

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:58 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:So let's take the case of someone who applies for ESA because they have depression. There appears to be no requirement for them to try any kind of treatment at the moment, and yet it is a treatable condition. Should it not be a requirement that they seek treatment and are compliant?

perhaps by that you would include enforced abortions on single mothers

compliant eh! ...welcome to raggas fourth reich

Perhaps you could discuss this without getting hysterical Victor.

I have treatment for a condition - not a mental health one - but without that treatment I may well have been unable to work.

The same is true for things like depression - are you suggesting that someone shouldn't even try to get treatment when they could recover completely and be happy in work again?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:58 pm

I mean perhaps you think I should be forced to take a dangerous drug known to have a high risk of hodgkins lymphoma, not to mention the many other nasty siide effects or one of the "new" biologics whos saftey has yet to be fully eveluated and which are again known to carry a serious risk?

no thanks...psoriatic arthropathy wont kill me.....the drugs have an unacceptable risk of doing so.....

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:58 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:So let's take the case of someone who applies for ESA because they have depression. There appears to be no requirement for them to try any kind of treatment at the moment, and yet it is a treatable condition. Should it not be a requirement that they seek treatment and are compliant?

perhaps by that you would include enforced abortions on single mothers

compliant eh! ...welcome to raggas fourth reich

Christ on a fucking bike! COMPLIANT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Zig Heil Rags.

You vill do as Herr Rags tells you to.

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:59 pm

korban dallas wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What about permitted work? It is possible to do some work whilst claiming ESA, but does that apply to the assessment stage? If it does, what is to stop someone applying for ESA whilst working and getting it at least until the assessment stage is finished?
well that`s fraud for one thing and you could end up prosecuted as some have been

but READ this might help answer your questions
https://www.gov.uk/employment-support-allowance/overview

What about this though?

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/permitted-work-working-while-claiming-employment-and-support-allowance

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:59 pm

korban dallas wrote:
eddie wrote:This is a sad and horrible story. Don't mean to keep harping on but it's the same shit they did to my dad.
It`s NOT harping on
it is completely right and essential that cases like your dads are not swept under the carpet and forgotten about or minimised in any way

Don`t you dare think other wise you have no reason to feel guilty for telling the truth

Thank you KD. You're right of course x

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 8:59 pm

victorismyhero wrote:I mean perhaps you think I should be forced to take a dangerous drug known to have a high risk of hodgkins lymphoma, not to mention the many other nasty siide effects or one of the "new" biologics whos saftey has yet to be fully eveluated and which are again known to carry a serious risk?

no thanks...psoriatic arthropathy wont kill me.....the drugs have an unacceptable risk of doing so.....

Well if the alternative is being crippled, is it not worth taking a chance?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:00 pm

eddie wrote:
korban dallas wrote:
It`s NOT harping on
it is completely right and essential that cases like your dads are not swept under the carpet and forgotten about or minimised in any way

Don`t you dare think other wise you have no reason to feel guilty for telling the truth

Thank you KD. You're right of course x

Your Dad and my friend, NEVER keep quiet!

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:00 pm

Oh, and being "compliant" is a perfectly acceptable word - doctors use it all the time. It just means people taking the medication they're prescribed.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:02 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

ohhh and here we see the R/W intent ..

enforced medication...

perhaps even forced experimentation with new and untested drugs.....

bet that would suit you down to the ground ragga

Not enforced as such, but a condition of receiving benefits. I see no problem with this. Such conditions are often treatable with great success. There's no point someone sitting there on benefits being depressed if they can get treatment and get well enough to work, right?

Er...that`s enforced

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:02 pm

compliant
kəmˈplʌɪənt/
adjective
adjective: compliant

1.
disposed to agree with others or obey rules, especially to an excessive degree; acquiescent.
"a compliant labour force"
synonyms: acquiescent, amenable, biddable, tractable, complaisant, accommodating, cooperative, adaptable; More
obedient, docile, manageable, malleable, pliable, pliant, flexible, submissive, dutiful, tame, meek, yielding, easily handled, like putty in one's hands, controllable, unresisting, unassertive, passive, governable, persuadable, manipulable;

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:02 pm

sassy wrote:
eddie wrote:
korban dallas wrote:
It`s NOT harping on
it is completely right and essential that cases like your dads are not swept under the carpet and forgotten about or minimised in any way

Don`t you dare think other wise you have no reason to feel guilty for telling the truth

Thank you KD. You're right of course x

Your Dad and my friend, NEVER keep quiet!

Disabled dad told he is fit to work TWO WEEKS before death - Page 2 2089010162

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:03 pm

korban dallas wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Not enforced as such, but a condition of receiving benefits. I see no problem with this. Such conditions are often treatable with great success. There's no point someone sitting there on benefits being depressed if they can get treatment and get well enough to work, right?

Er...that`s enforced

It's not - it's a condition of getting public money. I see no problem with that. All efforts should be made to improve or stabilise a condition if you want public money IMO.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:03 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:Oh, and being "compliant" is a perfectly acceptable word - doctors use it all the time. It just means people taking the medication they're prescribed.

you cant be force to take medication without a court order

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:03 pm

I see that some people are not familiar with medical speak. That's not my problem ...

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:04 pm

Perhaps Rags would like people on their knees begging as a condition of getting the money?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:04 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

perhaps by that you would include enforced abortions on single mothers

compliant eh! ...welcome to raggas fourth reich

Perhaps you could discuss this without getting hysterical Victor.

I have treatment for a condition - not a mental health one - but without that treatment I may well have been unable to work.

I dont give a toss.....I had bad guts last week and took medication...it worked....surprise...but it wasnt going to come with a potential load of side effects...including addiction

The same is true for things like depression - are you suggesting that someone shouldn't even try to get treatment when they could recover completely and be happy in work again? Or alternatively COULD have nasty side effects....some of which are irreversible...and I suppose if they became addicted you would blame them for that as well....tosser

I'm suggesting twats like you STOP trying to remove the idea of informed consent from the ethics of medicine.

NO-ONE......for ANY reason other than mental incompetancy, should be forced by whatever means (and that INCLUDES the removal of benefits) to take medication...

by Tommy Monk Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:04 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:So let's take the case of someone who applies for ESA because they have depression. There appears to be no requirement for them to try any kind of treatment at the moment, and yet it is a treatable condition. Should it not be a requirement that they seek treatment and are compliant?

A diagnosis of depression might be right or not, a lot of other complaints can also be attributed as symptoms of depression although might not be anything to do with depression.

Any good doctor will first order blood tests and ask about other factors that could be at play before making a final judgement.

Then you have to consider that most (if not all) medicinal treatments for depression will first take a few weeks before starting to work properly and in the mean time will most likely make the patient feel much worse and even suicidal!!!

The occurrence of self harm and/or suicidal thoughts/attempts should be looked into with the patient before prescribing anti depressants of The kind mentioned above... and then probably not given at all.

Some of The other possible/likely side effects can be quite unpleasant too.

Then if one particular type doesn't do the trick then another is tried...

Withdrawal symptoms can also be quite unpleasant.

So no wonder why people don't want to take them and may prefer to just have a bit of peace and quiet from the job centre for a while and try to improve diet and exercise a bit first!!!

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:04 pm

korban dallas wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:Oh, and being "compliant" is a perfectly acceptable word - doctors use it all the time. It just means people taking the medication they're prescribed.
you cant be force to take medication without a court order

So you think that those with conditions which are perfectly treatable should just sit around getting benefits then?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:04 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
korban dallas wrote:
Er...that`s enforced

It's not - it's a condition of getting public money. I see no problem with that. All efforts should be made to improve or stabilise a condition if you want public money IMO.

It's called blackmail

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:05 pm

So what if person A got cancer and was against chemo?
Would person A not be entitled to benefits? Is that what we are saying?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:05 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
korban dallas wrote:
Er...that`s enforced

It's not - it's a condition of getting public money. I see no problem with that. All efforts should be made to improve or stabilise a condition if you want public money IMO.

It`s exactly the same thing
a condition dependent on compliance

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:05 pm

The question is - why would someone with a condition which makes them so ill that they can't work not want to try treatment?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:05 pm

eddie wrote:So what if person A got cancer and was against chemo?
Would person A not be entitled to benefits? Is that what we are saying?

Sounds like it to me.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:05 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:I mean perhaps you think I should be forced to take a dangerous drug known to have a high risk of hodgkins lymphoma, not to mention the many other nasty siide effects or one of the "new" biologics whos saftey has yet to be fully eveluated and which are again known to carry a serious risk?

no thanks...psoriatic arthropathy wont kill me.....the drugs have an unacceptable risk of doing so.....

Well if the alternative is being crippled, is it not worth taking a chance?
that is for ME...and no one else to decide ....isnt it????

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:06 pm

enforced
caused by necessity or force; compulsory.

condition

have a significant influence on or determine (the manner or outcome of something)

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:06 pm

eddie wrote:So what if person A got cancer and was against chemo?
Would person A not be entitled to benefits? Is that what we are saying?

I'm talking more about things like depression and some chronic illnesses which are very controllable eddie. The article was about mental health issues like depression. There are many drugs which are hugely helpful.

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:07 pm

sassy wrote:
eddie wrote:So what if person A got cancer and was against chemo?
Would person A not be entitled to benefits? Is that what we are saying?

Sounds like it to me.

Well that makes no sense scratch

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:07 pm

eddie wrote:
sassy wrote:

Sounds like it to me.

Well that makes no sense

It does to Herr Rags!!!!!!

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:08 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Well if the alternative is being crippled, is it not worth taking a chance?
that is for ME...and no one else to decide ....isnt it????

Yes, but if you were getting benefits and you could get treatment for your condition, why would you not do so? Would you rather be dependent on the State?

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:09 pm

I see from the replies I'm getting that some people here think it's better to be ill and dependent on the State than to try to get better and have a job.

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:09 pm

Rags, what if person A has cancer and decides that Chemo and/or other treatments aren't the way to go for them...would you consider this reason to NOT give them benefits?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:10 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:I see that some people are not familiar with medical speak. That's not my problem ...

I see that some people are not familiar with English ether

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:10 pm

eddie wrote:Rags, what if person A has cancer and decides that Chemo and/or other treatments aren't the way to go for them...would you consider this reason to NOT give them benefits?

Not sure about that one - in any case, chemo can often make someone more ill than the actual cancer, at least whilst it's going on.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:11 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

Yes, but if you were getting benefits and you could get treatment for your condition, why would you not do so? Would you rather be dependent on the State?

if the "treatment" stood a chance of killing me most certainly I would refuse it...as I said my condition WONT kill me

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:13 pm

eddie wrote:Rags, what if person A has cancer and decides that Chemo and/or other treatments aren't the way to go for them...would you consider this reason to NOT give them benefits?

I'm not on sickness benefit, but would be if I was younger. I had chemo last year and turned down further courses because I thought we had reached a balance.

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:13 pm

korban dallas wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:I see that some people are not familiar with medical speak. That's not my problem ...
I see that some people are not familiar with English ether

You are not familiar with the term "compliant" or "compliance" when speaking of medication? Would the word "adherence" make you feel better?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compliance_%28medicine%29

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:14 pm

victorismyhero wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, but if you were getting benefits and you could get treatment for your condition, why would you not do so? Would you rather be dependent on the State?

if the "treatment" stood a chance of killing me most certainly I would refuse it...as I said my condition WONT kill me

Well not everything is about you, is it Victor? If I didn't take the medication, I would be unable to work now.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:14 pm

and like I said...welcome to raggas fourth reich.....its a simple step from you MUST take this established medication...even though it may do more harm than good" TO

you MUST take this experimental drug, in fact as a disabled person you will now enter the health camp run by (add name of company here) for testing purposes

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:15 pm

victorismyhero wrote:and like I said...welcome to raggas fourth reich.....its a simple step from you MUST take this established medication...even though it may do more harm than good" TO

you MUST take this experimental drug, in fact as a disabled person you will now enter the health camp run by (add name of company here) for testing purposes

So you think it's better for people to be crippled, in pain, and unable to work?

by eddie Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:15 pm

sassy wrote:
eddie wrote:Rags, what if person A has cancer and decides that Chemo and/or other treatments aren't the way to go for them...would you consider this reason to NOT give them benefits?

I'm not on sickness benefit, but would be if I was younger. I had chemo last year and turned down further courses because I thought we had reached a balance.

Why wouldn't you be entitled to sickness benefits?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:15 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
korban dallas wrote:
well that`s fraud for one thing and you could end up prosecuted as some have been

but READ this might help answer your questions
https://www.gov.uk/employment-support-allowance/overview

What about this though?

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/permitted-work-working-while-claiming-employment-and-support-allowance

Er what about it

Generally, you are not allowed to work while you are getting Employment and Support Allowance because of an illness or disability.

You may be able to do some types of work and within certain limits. This is called 'Permitted Work' and it allows you to test your own capacity for doing some work and perhaps gain new skills.

You must check that the work you want to do is allowed under the Permitted Work rules. You should discuss this with your Employment Service Adviser in your local Social Security or Jobs and Benefits office.

sorry what`s your point ?

by Tommy Monk Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:15 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

THe starting point of ESA payments is the same as you would have got on JSA, only you don't have to attend any signing on appointments or back to work courses etc... nice!!!

Peace and quiet for a while!!!

What about permitted work? It is possible to do some work whilst claiming ESA, but does that apply to the assessment stage? If it does, what is to stop someone applying for ESA whilst working and getting it at least until the assessment stage is finished?

The assessment stage, as KD called it, is just meaning the time it takes between you first making your claim and the time it takes to book you in to atos for a fit to work assessment...

You get same money as JSA straight away and then if you pass the assessment then your money goes up to the higher rate of ESA and you can also claim other benefits if qualify.

You can do a few hours work on JSA, don't know how many, but you will lose money out of your overall claim to compensate for earnings...

If You Are on ESA then you won't be fit for work, unless assessed as being so, and won't want to work... and if you Are fit to work any hours then you shouldn't be on ESA... although I think that you can be in a ESA assisted work group thing after being assessed whereby you Are assisted to do a little bit of work to support your want to do work and also to help you start getting back into the routine of work when you may be on The mend so to speak... If that makes sense?

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:16 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

if the "treatment" stood a chance of killing me most certainly I would refuse it...as I said my condition WONT kill me

Well not everything is about you, is it Victor? If I didn't take the medication, I would be unable to work now.

well when it give you another head, some form of cancer or dissolves your liver/kidneys......I will nod knowingly and mutter another poor sod in the tory grave yard.......

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:16 pm

korban dallas wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What about this though?

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/permitted-work-working-while-claiming-employment-and-support-allowance
Er what about it

Generally, you are not allowed to work while you are getting Employment and Support Allowance because of an illness or disability.

You may be able to do some types of work and within certain limits. This is called 'Permitted Work' and it allows you to test your own capacity for doing some work and perhaps gain new skills.

You must check that the work you want to do is allowed under the Permitted Work rules. You should discuss this with your Employment Service Adviser in your local Social Security or Jobs and Benefits office.

sorry what`s your point ?

The point is that some people can do permitted work whilst on ESA, hence my question.

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:17 pm

of course if you...PERSONALLY have "risk assesed" it then fair enough, you pays your money you takes your chance.....

by Guest Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:17 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
victorismyhero wrote:

if the "treatment" stood a chance of killing me most certainly I would refuse it...as I said my condition WONT kill me

Well not everything is about you, is it Victor? If I didn't take the medication, I would be unable to work now.

hold on i thought you didn`t give out personal information ?

by Raggamuffin Sun Jul 19, 2015 9:18 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

What about permitted work? It is possible to do some work whilst claiming ESA, but does that apply to the assessment stage? If it does, what is to stop someone applying for ESA whilst working and getting it at least until the assessment stage is finished?

The assessment stage, as KD called it, is just meaning the time it takes between you first making your claim and the time it takes to book you in to atos for a fit to work assessment...

You get same money as JSA straight away and then if you pass the assessment then your money goes up to the higher rate of ESA and you can also claim other benefits if qualify.

You can do a few hours work on JSA, don't know how many, but you will lose money out of your overall claim to compensate for earnings...

If You Are on ESA then you won't be fit for work, unless assessed as being so, and won't want to work... and if you Are fit to work any hours then you shouldn't be on ESA... although I think that you can be in a ESA assisted work group thing after being assessed whereby you Are assisted to do a little bit of work to support your want to do work and also to help you start getting back into the routine of work when you may be on The mend so to speak... If that makes sense?

So after the assessment stage, if you're found fit to work, they don't make you pay the money back? Is that because it's almost the same as JSA anyway?

by Sponsored content