Independent Case Examiner (ICE) Correspondence

Agency/Business details - Jobcentre plus
Agency/Business details - Luton BDC

Have you already complained to the Agency/Business - Yes

Reason:
It is over a year.  I have completed in full both the Atos
and the DWP complaints proceedings and there are still matters outstanding.
I have been misled and the Minister has been misled.
For example I am still waiting for a copy of the "sound"
medical report. Maladminstration. Failure to take appropriate action
in respect of a serious assault and injury by Atos personnel
working under contract for the DWP.   

Details of Complaint:
Your Complaint:

1. This is set out in all the correspondence I have published on my website
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatos.html

2. DWP and Atos Correspondence is published on
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosletters.html

3. Government and related correspondence is published on
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatoslettersgov.html

4. The breaches of Contract, implicitly agreed by Atos, (no action by the DWP) 
   are published on
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatoscontract.html#breaches

5. I have not had a satisfactory reply to my letter to Ms Isabel Letwin,
   Acting Director General, DWP The Legal Group dated 10 March 2010.
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatoslettersgov.html#DWP20100310T

6. I have not had a satisfactory reply to my letter to Luton BDC
   dated 11 May 2010 .  I have not had a copy of the medical advice
   provided by Atos that I requested in that letter.
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosletters.html#DWP20100511T

7. I would like you to investigate whether there is undue influence by Atos
   on the activities of the DWP.  In particular I would like you to review
   the members of the DWP who attend Atos functions such as the Atos AGM and
   whether these benefits have been declared and comply with the civil service code. 

Query Information
Your Enquiry:

1. Why is it over a year and my case is still outstanding?
2. Why does the DWP not enforce the contract between the DWP and Atos?
3. Why does the DWP not obtain from Atos refunds for the unsound medical advice it provides?
4. Why does the DWP continue to assume the medical advice it received was sound 
   when Atos has implicitly agreed that they provided unsound medical advice?
5. Why have I not received a full apology, outstanding monies owed and compensation?

How do you want your complaint resolved
Resolution:
1. I would like Atos to refund the DWP for providing "unsound" medical advice.
2. I would like the DWP to remove "approval" from the Atos
   doctor involved.
3. I would like disciplinary action taken against the individuals who misled the Minister 
   and who refused to enforce the Contract between the DWP and Atos.
4. I would like an apology, outstanding monies owed, compensation and confirmation that 
   Atos has refunded the DWP in full.
5. I would like you to recommend to the NAO to review and confirm that the ESA50 medical 
   conditions and the decision for a face to face assessment and the ESA85 produced by 
   Atos have both been produced by a medical practitioner qualified to assess the 
   particular medical condition of the patient.
6. I would like you to recommend that Atos is removed from the 99 supplier organisations 
   appointed to the ASCC Framework on the grounds of multiple breaches of contract.
   
http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatoslettersgov.html#DH20100122T

7. I would like you to provide a detailed explanation why a sick patient has been 
   treated so poorly.

Finally, I saw my neurologist last Friday and as my tumour has grown he is recommending 
me for immediate referral to the brain surgery team.  Please can you write to me as 
I may be in hospital.  I look to you for justice. 
   

 Thank you for responding so swiftly.

My NI number is  ....

My GP is Dr ....
My Consultant is Professor ...
Patient Hospital no: ...
NHS no: ....

At the ... Hospital, ... my
patient ref: ....

The ATOS doctor who decided in breach of contract
that a face to face assessment is unknown though
at one time under FOI I was told this was a nurse Mrs Tanya Catherine Andrews
(Nursing and Midwifery Council Practioner PIN 97C0338E).
The "Atos" Independent Tier claims not to be able to
find who made the decision that a face to face assessment
was necessary.  Thus contradicting the information they
gave to the Minister via the DWP.

The ATOS doctor who assaulted me was Dr Ludmila Semetillo,
GMC number is 6165133

Atos has not confirmed that either individuals were trained
at the time despite an explicit FOI request.  I conclude
they were not trained as the DWP were unable to provide the training
record.

Dr Ludmila Semetillo should have known that the contract
states that a brain tumour requires "Further Medical Evidence"
as specified in the Contract between DWP and ATOS.
She was not qualified to assess a patient with a brain tumour.
She knew this.  I, at the time, did not have access to the contract.
The DWP have consistently refused to publish the contract.
She insisted on the assessment which lasted 110 minutes,
it involved removing some of my clothes and physical movements
that caused me pain.  Thus she was guilty of malpractice.  This was the 
implicit finding of Atos Medical Manager Dr Bruecker who reviewed the matter
and correctly concluded he needed to contact my GP and or Consultant.
The DWP have so far refused to remove these individuals from the "Approved" 
list.

Ms RB... is the Manager for the DWP Luton BDC.
She has still NOT provided me with a copy of the sound
medical advice on which she eventually placed me in the
ESA Support Group.

Ms B..., Ms C... and Mr Brian Pepper
are the individuals from Atos Healthcare who have implicitly
admitted being in multiple breaches of  contract, misled the
Minister and attempted to obstruct justice.  Mr Geoff Hampshire
refused to comply with the NAO recommendation that
the Independent Tier should have been carried out by the ICE.
The "Atos" Independent Tier refused to consider the breaches of
contract.  This is another example of obstruction of justice.

I have originals for all the documents published on the website
except for the original ESA50 (I have a photocopy).
The website is a true, dated contemporary account of all correspondence.
All letters were scanned and optical character recognised (OCR)
to convert to text.

If there is anything more I can assist you with I would be delighted.
I must rest now as the additional pain killer I took to be able to
write this is beginning to fail.

Regards
  

Independent Case Examiner

6 July 2010

ICE Ref No: DWP00316/10

Dear Mr B...

Further to your email to this office on 5 July 2010, I am writing to provide you with an
update regarding your claim.

Once your complaint details have been processed, we will aim to contact you within
the next 25 working days. However, we are currently experiencing a high volume of
complaints, and although we still aim to contact you within that time, this might not
always be possible.

For your information, the Independent Case Examiner looks into maladministration
(poor service) by the Department for Work and Pensions and its Agencies, for
example, delay in taking appropriate action, taking incorrect action, failure to respond
adequately to correspondence, misinforming customers etc. However, this office
cannot look into complaints about legislation or policy. This includes calculations of
maintenance liability and benefit entitlement. Those matters must be challenged via
the appropriate appeal process.

Please let us know if you have any special requirements. For example, if your sight
or hearing is impaired; if English is not your first language, if you are dyslexic. (This
list is not exhaustive.) We will do our best to accommodate your requirements when
we communicate with you.

You can find out more about the Independent Case Examiner in the enclosed leaflet
"The Independent Case Examiner's Office - Our Service".

Yours sincerely

Gateway Team

Address: PO Box 155, Chester, CH99 9SA
Email: ice@dwp.gsi.gov.uk
  

Independent Case Examiner

9 July 201 O

ICE Ref No: DWP00316/10

Dear Mr B...

I am writing to provide an update in respect of your complaint about Jobentre Plus.

I should explain that before we can accept a complaint for examination, we have to
ensure that the complainant has exhausted Jobcentre Plus's complaints procedure.
This usually means that a response to the issues raised will have been received from
or on behalf of the Chief Executive.

In your case, Jobcentre Plus tells me that you have not yet received a final response
to your complaint, within the six months prior to your approach to this office. As
such, we cannot look into your complaint at this stage. We have therefore sent
details of your complaint to Jobcentre Plus Secretariat and asked it to deal with your
concerns in accordance with its standard complaints handling process.

You can reasonably expect to receive an initial response to your complaint within five
weeks, which will include details of how to progress your concerns, in the event that
you are not satisfied with the response you receive. In the meantime, if you do not
receive your initial response within five weeks, or you need any help or information
please get in touch with Jobcentre Plus Secretariat at:

Jobcentre Plus Secretariat
L6 Caxton House
Tothill Street
London
SW1H 9NA

We would expect you to have progressed your complaint with Jobcentre Plus as
detailed in its initial response, before we would consider your complaint.

If having received a reply from or on behalf of the Chief Executive, you remain
dissatisfied with the response to your complaint please let us know, and we will
consider your complaint for examination.

If you wish to discuss this letter in more detail, please contact me in writing or on the
telephone number detailed on the first page.

Yours sincerely

Gateway Team

Address: PO Box 155, Chester, CH99 9SA
Email: ice@dwp.gsi.gov.uk   

Dear Mr B...,

Thank you for your email of 4 August 2010, the contents have been noted and placed on your file for information.

Can you confirm if you would like this office to take forward your complaint at this stage, as you have now received a final response from Job Centre Plus' Chief Executive. Or are do you wish to await a reply to your correspondence of 4 August 2010.

Yours sincerely

ICE REF No DWP00316/10

Dear Mr B...

Thank you for replying so promptly and placing my letter to the DWP on file.

I would like to await a reply from the DWP before requesting further action by the ICE with the following proviso. My medical condition is getting worse. I have been referred to the brain surgery team who have asked me to chase them if I have not heard from them with an appointment within twelve weeks. I could be too ill or have passed away in the mean time. Please could I ask you to take action on my case if you have not heard from me or my executor by the 1st October 2010. I do not believe my wife would be in a fit state to pursue this matter.

Finally can you clarify a point of information as soon as possible. Please can you confirm, if necessary with the NAO, that the procedure described in http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0708/handling_customer_complaints.aspx is applicable to the DWP, its Agencies and includes and covers the operations of contractors of the DWP including Atos Healthcare. In particular I would like such confirmation in respect of the provisions that relate to the independent tier.

Thank you in anticipation

ICE REF No DWP00316/10 Email: 6 August 2010 17:45

You have previously placed my case on file pending more information from the DWP. I would like the ICE to take up my case again. For your reference our previous correspondence, desensitized, is published on my website see Complaining about the DWP - 5 July 2010

As a summary to the situation I provide to you the evidence, as below and attachments, that I have provided to the Prof. Malcolm Harrington CBE Independent Review of WCA.

All DWP and Atos correspondence, desensitized, is published on my website see DWP ATOS Letters

Following my submission of evidence, I have received a further letter from the DWP to which I have replied. Once again I have repeated my claim for compensation and as I have no wish for the taxes and NI that I have paid over the years I have said I will waive my claim on the conditions specified.

I have copied this email to Darra Singh so that both the ICE and the DWP are clear that my request is within the timescale set by Darra Singh see attached letter.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely

ICE REF No DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

Further to your email to this office on 03 July 2011, we are currently processing your complaint.

Once your details have been processed, we aim to contact you as soon as we can. However, at this time, we are currently experiencing a high volume of complaints, and apologise that this might not be for some weeks.

For your information, the Independent Case Examiner looks into maladministration (poor service) by the Department for Work and Pensions and its Agencies, for example, delay in taking appropriate action, taking incorrect action, failure to respond adequately to correspondence, misinforming customers etc. However, this office cannot look into complaints about legislation or policy. This includes calculations of maintenance liability and benefit entitlement. Those matters must be challenged via the appropriate appeal process.

Please let us know if you have any special requirements. For example, if your sight or hearing is impaired; if English is not your first language, if you are dyslexic. (This list is not exhaustive.) We will do our best to accommodate your requirements when we communicate with you.

The Independent Case Examiner service is free to you as a complainant and is designed to be accessible to all. You should not need to employ legal or other third party representatives in order to benefit from the ICE service, though you are free to do so if you choose and at your own expense. You should note that, while the ICE office is happy to engage with your personal or professional representative when asked to do so, we would generally not ask the Department for Work and Pensions to consider reimbursing representatives' fees or other expenses.

If you wish to find out more about the Independent Case Examiner service and standards, details can be found at www.ind-case-exam.org.uk. If you are unable to access the website and would like a copy of our service and standards leaflet please contact us on the number overleaf.

Yours sincerely

... Front Line Administrator

ICE REF No DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

I am writing to provide an update in respect of your complaint about Jobcentre Plus.

I should explain that before we can accept a complaint for examination, we have to ensure that the complainant has exhausted Jobcentre Plus's complaints procedure. This usually means that a response to the issues raised will have been received from or on behalf of the Chief Executive.

In your case, Jobcentre Plus tells me that you have not yet received a final response, to your complaint, within the six months prior to your approach to this office. As such, we cannot look into your complaint at this stage. We have therefore sent details of your complaint to Jobcentre Plus Secretariat and asked it to deal with your concerns in accordance with its standard complaints handling process.

You can reasonably expect to receive an initial response to your complaint within five weeks, which will include details of how to progress your concerns, in the event that you are not satisfied with the response you receive. In the meantime, if you do not receive your initial response within five weeks, or you need any help or information please get in touch with Jobcentre Plus Experience Team at:

Jobcentre Plus Customer Experience Team
L6 Camon House
Tothill Street
London
SW1H 9NA

We would expect you to have progressed your complaint with Jobcentre detailed in its initial response, before we would consider your complaint.

If having received a reply from or on behalf of the Chief Executive, you remain dissatisfied with the response to your complaint please let us know, and we will consider your complaint for examination.

If you wish to discuss this letter in more detail, please contact me in writing or on the telephone number detailed overleaf.

Yours sincerely

... Front Line Administrator

Subject: Request to progress my case

Dear ...,

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11 (replacing previous DWP00316/10).

Thank you for your letter dated 11 August 2011 which has left me in a state of some confusion.

The first point is why the existing reference number DWP00316/10 has been replaced by a new reference number.

The second point is that I have exhausted the DWP, Atos and Jobcentre Plus complaints relevant appeals procedures. If you refer to the letters I attached to my previous email, in particular the letter dated 21 February 2011 from Matthew Nicholas, Employers and Stakeholders Director on behalf of the Chief Executive and the one dated 25 July 2011 from Teresa Chammings, District Manager Jobcentre Plus, Bedfordshire and Hertfordshire, both letters suggest to me that the Independent Case Examiner is my only option left.

May I further clarify that after two years and two months the DWP is finally complying, as I understand the document, with the Contract between the DWP and Atos, in my case. My outstanding issues relate the period of non-compliance and the compensation I believe I am due. The DWP and Atos have implicitly agreed that they were at fault. I cannot see what will be achieved by a further DWP appeal process. As the Executive on behalf of the Chief Executive stated; if I am not satisfied I can contact the Independent Case Examiner. I would like to put on record that I am not satisfied and am seeking redress from the Independent Case Examiner.

I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Thank you for your email of 16 August 2011.

DWP00363/11

Your reference numbers have changed because your first complaint with this office was closed 9 July 2010. At that time you did not have a response from the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus therefore your complaint was closed. We do not keep cases open indefinitely.

You contacted this office on 3 August 2011. A new reference was allocated to you DWP 00363/11. We contacted Jobcentre Plus, we asked if a response had been issued from or on behalf of the Chief executive regarding your complaint, within the last 6 months, they advised that no response has been issued.

You emailed this office on 16 august to advise that you did have a response. I contacted Jobcentre Plus who apologised and forwarded a copy of the Chief Executive response dated 21 February 2011.

Your complaint with this office is waiting to be allocated to our Initial Action Team they will contact as soon as they can.

I hope this clarifies matters.

If you need further assistance please contact me on the number below

... Independent Case Examiners Office ...

I requested all correspondence should be via email or letter. I was told that some elements could be investigated and others were outside the remit of the ICE.

Independent Case Examiner

29 September 2011

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

1. Further to our telephone conversation of 22 September 2011, you have requested the Independent Case Examiner's office contacts you in writing only. As a result of your complaint letter, I am writing to you to clarify the elements of complaint this office will consider.

Jobcentre Plus (JCP) has failed to:

A. provide an adequate response to the complaints you have made about the service you have received from ATOS Healthcare since June 2009; and

B. respond to the request you made for a copy of the medical report on which it based its decision, made in August 2009, to place you in the Employment Support Allowance Support group.

2. The elements of complaint detailed above will form the basis of our examination. For your information, the Independent Case Examiner looks into maladministration (poor service) by the Department for Work and Pensions and its Agencies, for example, delay in taking appropriate action, taking incorrect action, failure to respond adequately to correspondence, misinforming customers etc. However, this office cannot look into complaints about legislation or policy. This includes decisions about benefit entitlement. Those matters must be challenged via the appropriate appeal process.

3. If you agree that your complaint has been accurately defined, please contact me as soon as possible, either in writing or on telephone number ....

4. If I do not hear from you by 13 October 2011, l will assume you no longer wish to use the service of this office and will take the necessary action to close your Case.

5. Once you have confirmed that your complaint has been accurately defined, we will contact you again to discuss matters further and establish your desired outcome.

6. We will then discuss your complaint with JCP and will contact you again when we have received a response from it.

7. We consider complaints in the order that we receive them.

8. We have accepted this complaint on the basis that it has not been the subject of legal proceedings or an Ombudsman's investigation. If this is not the case, you must tell me. Likewise, if you decide to take this action during our investigation, you must notify this office.

9. If you wish to provide this office with any further information or evidence in support of your complaint, please contact me.

Yours sincerely

..., Gateway Officer

To:      ..., Gateway Officer, Independent Case Examiner
Date:    2 October 2011
Subject: Complaint ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear ...

Thank you for your letter dated 29 September 2011 and the opportunity to clarify my complaint.

I would clarify my complaint as follows:

The DWP comprising the Executive, the JCP, the Commercial Management of Medical Services (DWP Commercial Directorate) and ATOS Origin IT Services Ltd (trading as ATOS Healthcare) has failed to:

A. provide an adequate response to the complaints I, Mr B..., have made about the service I have received from the DWP comprising the Executive, the JCP, the Commercial Management of Medical Services (DWP Commercial Directorate) and ATOS Origin IT Services Ltd (trading as ATOS Healthcare) since June 2009; and

B. provide correct information to the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in falsely confirming that the ESA50 was correctly processed in deciding that a face to face assessment was necessary; the Nursing & Midwifery Council (NMC) can provide evidence regarding the veracity of the information provided to the Secretary of State, resulting in failure to take timely and appropriate action by the Secretary of State to my detriment; and

C. comply with the National Audit Office Independent Tier process and thus allow ATOS Healthcare to self regulate, in particular, ATOS decides what is and what is outside their remit, ATOS disallows evidence; and

D. comply with the Contract between the DWP and ATOS Origin IT Services Ltd (trading as ATOS Healthcare) and take action over breaches despite repeated and persistent requests; and

E. respond to the request I made for a copy of the medical report on which ATOS Healthcare changed its decision, made in May 2010, to place me in the the Employment and Support Allowance Support Group when previously, in August 2009, I was, in breach of the Contract, placed in the Employment and Support Allowance Work Related Activity Group; eventually after months of delay I received the medical report relating to the August 2009 decision, I have yet to receive the medical report supporting the May 2010 decision; and

F. remove the Nurse and Doctors involved from the DWP Chief Medical Officer's approved list; and

G. discontinue the use of the terms "customer" or "client", given that the use of these unjustifiable terms belittles my medical condition, insults my intelligence and ignores my inalienable rights under Commmon and Statute Law to be treated with dignity and respect, claimant as used by Parliament and in the Contract should be used; and

H. compensate me for the actual hurt and distress caused, the denial of payments and the excessive delays.

My correspondence has been published on my website (see http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosletters.html). These confirm the maladministration I have received from the Department for Work and Pensions and its Agencies. If it assists matters I could indicate which items of correspondence are apposite.

I confirm my complaints are not concerned with legislation, policy or decisions about benefit entitlement. I further confirm that these complaints have not been the subject of legal proceedings or an Ombudsman's investigation.

I look forward to hearing from you, ideally by email. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Independent Case Examiner

12 October 2011

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

1. Further to your email of 3 October 2011, I am writing to confirm that the additional comments you outlined will be considered when we examine the elements of complaint, as outlined in my letter of 29 September 2011. We do not believe it is necessary, when defining the complaint, to identify each individual instance of claimed maladministration; our experience shows that if the complaints are too rigidly defined it prevents our examination from considering the broader context of the events in question.

2. In my letter of 29 September 2011 I proposed the following elements of complaint:

Jobcentre Plus (JCP) has failed to:

A. provide an adequate response to the complaints you have made about the service you have received from ATOS Healthcare since June 2009; and

B. respond to the request you made for a copy of the medical report on which it based its decision, made in August 2009, to place you in the Employment Support Allowance Support group.

3. The issues you outlined in your points A and B will be covered when we examine element A as detailed above. The complaint you detailed at point E will be covered within element B above. It is not necessary to change the wording of the complaints to reflect the additional information you provided in your summary.

4. This office cannot investigate complaints about legislation or policy, and as such it would not fall within the remit of this office the complaints you detailed at points C, D and G. That said when we are looking at the complaints as detailed above, we would ensure that JCP and ATOS followed the correct procedures in relation to your complaint; this may in turn lead to the ICE identifying failings in the system or procedures that need to be reviewed to try to avoid similar problems for others.

5. Within point F, you ask for the nurses and doctors involved to be removed from the approved list. It is not within the remit of this office to comment on how Jobcentre Plus or its agencies fulfil its responsibility as an employer. It is clear from your correspondence you have already made representation regarding your concerns with the appropriate authorities with regards to medical competency. At point H you detail what you would like to see as a result of our examination and are also as a consequence of the complaints you have made, we would therefore not detail these as specific elements of complaint. They will however be taken into consideration when we consider JCP and ATOS's response to your complaint and what has been done in order to put matters right.

6. The elements of complaint detailed above will form the basis of our examination. If you agree that your complaint has been accurately defined, the above explanation, please contact me as soon as possible.

7. If I do not hear from you by 26 October 2011, I will assume you no longer wish to use the services

8. Once you have confirmed that your complaint has been accurately defined, we will contact you again to discuss matters further to establish your desired outcome and the best way forward.

9. We consider complaints in the order that we receive them.

1O. We have accepted this complaint on the basis that it has not been the subject of legal proceedings or an Ombudsman's investigation. If this is not the case, you must tell me. Likewise, if you decide to take this action during our investigation, you must notify this office.

11. If you wish to provide this office with any further information or evidence in support of your complaint, please contact me.

Yours sincerely

..., Gateway Officer

To:      ..., Gateway Officer, Independent Case Examiner
Date:    13 October 2011
Subject: Complaint ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear ...

Thank you for sending me a printed copy of the letter dated 12 October 2011. I appreciate your detailed response.

I now agree that my complaint has been accurately defined however I feel there may be scope for clarification as below.

Clarification to item B: The date should be May 2010 not August 2009. In August 2009 I was incorrectly allocated to the Employment and Support Allowance Work Related Activity Group. In May 2010 I was correctly allocated to the Employment and Support Allowance Support Group. I asked to receive both medical reports. DWP failed to respond to these requests.

I leave it to you to amend item B if you wish but would like you to proceed as soon as possible.

I remind you that I have published all correspondence on my website http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosletters.html.

Regarding my desired outcome, I would like a full and detailed acknowledgement that all my complaints have been justified and truely reflect my experience. I would like the acknowledgement to include all the instances when the DWP and Atos have admitted misleading me and others in respect of my case. I would like the National Audit Office to undertake the Independent Tier audit procedure that they mandate that the DWP should undertake and following the audit provide me with the full report. I would like the DWP to compensate me in line with Independent Case Examiner case precedents. I would like the DWP to update their website to include the extract from the Contract between the DWP and Atos that they supplied to me under FOI.

I accept some elements of my desired outcome might be outside the remit of the ICE. If this is the case I would like the ICE to decide what is appropriate as an outcome in my case in line with precedents.

I look forward to hearing from you. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Independent Case Examiner

12 October 2011

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

1. I am writing to provide an update, in respect of the complaint accepted by this office on 3 August 2011 regarding the way in which Jobcentre Plus has dealt with your case.

2. Further to your email of 13 October 2011, I can confirm the elements of your complaint are as follows (with the amendment to element B as you requested):

Jobcentre Plus (JCP) has failed to:

A. provide an adequate response to the complaints you have made about the service you have received from ATOS Healthcare since June 2009; and

B. respond to the request you made for a copy of the medical report on which it based its decision, made in May 2010, to place you in the Employment Support Allowance Support group.

3. When we accept a complaint for examination, our first step is to try to resolve the issues without the need for a full examination of all the evidence. This approach can often lead to a positive and comparatively speedy outcome. Our aim is to mediate and reach an agreement with both the complainant and Jobcentre Plus the steps to be taken to address the complaint to the complainant's satisfaction.

4. Exceptionally, some cases are not suitable for progression by this method. After a review of your case, it was decided that to address your concerns, we need to see the evidence surrounding your complaints. You will wish to be aware that we wrote to Jobcentre Plus on 20 October 201 1 to request your case papers, which will be used to inform our examination of your complaint.

5. Once the evidence is received, the examination of the case will not begin immediately as cases are in a queue and dealt with in date order. Until a case officer is available we aim to keep in touch with you at least every 13 weeks. You should have received information about our service standards when you initially approached this office. If you require further information please contact us.

6. As soon as a case officer can start the examination of your complaint, he or she will contact you direct, to give you the opportunity to discuss your complaint in more detail. In the meantime, ... will be your point of contact for any matters connected with your complaint to the Independent Case Examiner. Should you need any further advice, you can get in touch with ... at the address below or telephone 0151 ... .....

7. Should you wish to provide this office with any further information or evidence in relation to your complaint, we will use the details you provide, along with those provided by Jobcentre Plus, to inform our examination of your complaint.

8. If you are still in contact with Jobcentre Plus you should continue to deal with Jobcentre Plus direct, even when our examination is in progress. This is particularly so for any new issues that may arise while our examination is in progress. It may also be that Jobcentre Plus is able to sort matters out for you in relation to your complaint before our further examination begins and, if this is the case, I would appreciate it if you would let this office know.

9. When we wrote to you on 4 August 2011, we asked you to let us know if you had any special requirements to aid communication. for example, if your sight or hearing is impaired; if English is not your first language, if you are dyslexic. (This list is not exhaustive.) You have not advised us that you require any adjustment to the way we communicate with you, but if your circumstances have changed, and you now have special requirements, please let this office know. We will do our best to accommodate your requirements when we communicate with you.

Yours sincerely

..., Gateway Officer

Independent Case Examiner

25 January 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

When we wrote to you on 20 October 2011 we advised you that we had written to the Jobcentre Plus to request your case papers, and that on receipt of this evidence, your case will be allocated for investigation as soon as an investigation officer is available.

I am now writing to advise you that although we have now received your case papers from the Jobcentre Plus we are still not in a position to commence work on your case. I acknowledge that your complaint is not being processed as quickly as you may like and I apologise for this.

We will write to you again in 13 weeks time to keep you advised of progress, however you may hear from us before this if an investigation officer becomes available, at which time, they will contact you direct, and provide you with the opportunity to discuss your complaint in more detail.

In the meantime, should you need any help or further advice, please contact me at the address below, or telephone me on the telephone number at the bottom of this letter.

Yours sincerely

... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

27 April 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

Further to my letter of 25 January 2012 I am writing to advise you that your case is still waiting to be allocated to an Investigation Officer.

I can assure you that your case will be allocated as soon as an Investigation 0fficer becomes available. If you would like to discuss any aspect of your complaint in the meantime please contact me on 0151 801 8896.

If your case is not allocated within the next 13 weeks I will write to you again to update you on the situation.

Yours sincerely

... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

23 July 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

Further to your email of 23 July 2012, I am writing to tell you that your complaint about how Jobcentre Plus has handled your case has been allocated to me. Mr L..., to start the investigation into your complaint. I apologise for this not happening sooner due to this office experiencing large volumes of work to deal with, in order of date received . I have noted when speaking to a colleague on 22 September 2011 you have indicated that because of your medical condition you find it difficult to talk over the telephone and you have requested that we contact you in writing.

My first task is to log the evidence provided to help determine what has happened in this case. I will continue to provide you with six weekly updates as the investigation continues, until such time the Independent Case Examiner is in a position to report to you. In the meantime, should you have any queries you wish to discuss, please do not hesitate to contact this office via whichever means you prefer, and I will try to help you in any way I can. Whilst understanding you have difficulty talking over the telephone, in the interest of security I would be grateful, if possible, if you could telephone this office so that password security for future correspondence can be set up with you. Our system records indicate a password was arranged with you on 21 October 2011 that was used to protect the most recent emails that were sent to you. I will try to keep any such telephone call as brief as possible. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

5 September 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

Further to my letter of 30 July 2012, I am writing to let you know that our investigation into your complaint about Jobcentre Plus is continuing. I am still in the process of recording the substantial evidence relating to this case. I will write to you again in six weeks time to keep you advised of further progress.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

17 October 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

Further to my letter of 5 September 2012, I am writing to let you know that our investigation into your complaint about Jobcentre Plus is continuing. I have logged the evidence presented in this case and some additional information has been requested from Jobcentre Plus to clarify some aspects of this case. I will write to you again in six weeks time to keep you advised of further progress.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

23 October 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

With regard to your complaint about hw Jobcentre Plus and Atos Healthcare have handled your case; I would be grateful if you would provide the following information:

• On what specific grounds do you feel that Atos Healthcare Professionals have assaulted you and caused you injury?
• How have you calculated the sum of £2,000 that you have requested Jobcentre Plus pay you for what you feel has happened in this case? Please provide copies of any evidence that you hold to support this figure.
• Why have you continued not to appeal the Jobcentre Plus decisions that you have disagreed with in this case.

Thank you. I look forward to your reply.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Dear Mr L... ,

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Thank you for your letter dated 23 October 2012. The information you requested is as follows:

Assault and injury by Atos

This has been documented in the letters sent to the DWP, to Atos and in a submission to Parliamentary Inquiries. References as below.

In summary because the Doctor failed to comply with the Contract between the DWP and Atos, she compelled me to comply with her illegal instructions using the threat of loss of the allowance, she carried out an illegal examination of my person which included compelling me to undress and undertake stress positions despite my protests that was causing me severe pain. She took my blood pressure and it was so high she was taken aback. I was blacking out at times. She pushed me out of the door at the end. Due to the injuries I received it took weeks to recover to the poor state I was in before the illegal face to face assessment.

Compensation Calculation

This has been calculated as a fraction of the time and effort that has been expended in ensuring that, in my case, the DWP and Atos have eventually complied with the Contract between them.

An amount is due in respect of the illegal actions of DWP and Atos in failing to place me in the ESA Support Group and thus my weekly allowance was reduced and I was not paid the Christmas amount.

An amount is due to me for the libel by Atos in the form of the ESA85 which was fabricated and has no basis in fact.

An amount is due to the delay, deny and defer approach of the DWP and Atos which has caused me unnecessary suffering. In this year 2012, the DWP has arbitrarily withdrawn my allowance, reinstated it when I provided the last letter from the DWP which the DWP wrote a few months before and which included the calculations and confirmed my entitlement. The DWP both refused and continues to refuse to explain why the allowance was stopped, why it was reinstated and the calculation used. The last letter I received from the DWP instructed me to ignore all further correspondence from the DWP! I have not received the normal interim and mid year calculations from the DWP. I expect I will not received the Christmas amount should that be paid this year. I regard this as a calculated and a deliberate ploy by the DWP to cause me as much stress as possible to the detriment of my health. Clearly as only around 12 percent of those afflicted with a brain tumour survive five years after diagnosis it is in the interest of the DWP to delay, deny and defer.

An amount is due in respect of the over 200 items of correspondence, from 2009 to date. Each item took at minimum 2 hours to compose. Some of which incurred the cost of paper, envelope, postage and time to post. Assuming an hourly cost of 5 GBP per hour, 200 x 2 x 5 equals 2,000 GBP alone.

All Appeal Processes Exhausted

There are no appeal processes left to me. Please refer to the correspondence with Darra Singh then CEO of the DWP.

I expect the DWP would have provided the ICE all correspondence in full. If this is not the case the following are references to where all correspondence and memoranda has been published:

• All correspondence with the DWP and Atos: http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosletters.html and http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatoslettersgov.html
• The libelous ESA85 medical report: http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosformesa85.html
• The partial Atos Independent Tier report (which agreed with my complaints in the main but my issues were outside their scope): http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosindependenttier.html
• Memorandum to Parliament in 2009: http://www.whywaitforever.com/dwpatosmemo.html (clauses 44 - 70)

On a personal note after two years in which my brain tumour was stable and in which I had a MRI scan every four months I am now in remission and I am required to take a MRI scan every six months. I take twice daily a number of strong anti-convulsant drugs.

Finally I would like to quote from "R v North and East Devon Health Authorty, ex part Coughlan [2000] 3 All ER 850 Court of Appeal". "...Judicial review is available where a decision making authority exceeds its powers, commits an error of law, commits a breach of natural justice, reaches a decision which no reasonable tribunal could have reached, or abuses its powers..."

I hope the above information allows you to progress this matter. If I can assist further please let me know. Thank you.

Yours sincerely

Independent Case Examiner

2 November 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

The Independent Case Examiner's Office acknowledges receipt of your letter dated 28 October 2012.

Please note I have passed your correspondence onto the appropriate officer to action as required.

If you wish to find out more about the Independent Case Examiner service and standards, details can be found at www.ind-case-exam.org.uk. If you are unable to access the wesite and would like a copy of our service and standards leaflet please contact us on the number below.

Yours sincerely

Ms K... , Front Line Administrator

Independent Case Examiner

7 November 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

I am writing to thank you for your response of 28 October 2012 which the Independent Case Examiner will consider before reporting to you.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

7 November 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

I am writing to inform you that with effect from Monday, 12 November 2012, my telephone number will be changing to 0151 221 6539. Our postal address and email contact details will remain the same.

Yours sincerely

Mr L... , Investigation Officer

Independent Case Examiner

20 November 2012

ICE Ref No: DWP00363/11

Dear Mr B...

1. You wrote to my office on 3 August 2011, to complain about the way in which Jobcentre Plus had dealt with this case.

2. I am aware my office has kept you informed throughout the period of this investigation. Notwithstanding this, I apologise for the delay in issuing this report.

Your Complaint

3. You said that:

A. Jobcentre Plus failed to provide an adequate response to the complaints you have made about the servlce you have received from ATOS Healthcare since June 2009; and

B. Jobcentre Plus failed to respond to the request you made for a copy of the medical report on which it based its decision, made in August 2009, to place you in the Employment Support Allowance Support group.

4. Our examination of the information provided by you and Jobcentre Plus is now complete, although I do not always mention every specific part in my report, if I do not think that it will help to explain the reasons for my findings. I have explained some of the technical issues relating to this case in the Annex of this report and will direct you to these explanations at the appropriate points. I have not upheld these complaints.

5. An explanation of the reasons for my findings in respect of each element of this complaint is given in this report. I do not investigate complaints about the credentials of Healthcare Professionals and if you have residual dissatisfactions in relation to these matters you may raise them with The General Medical Council (GMC). Your correspondence with Jobcentre Plus and ATOS Healthcare has referred at times to matters related to that. I note you were given the registration number of the Healthcare Professional with the GMC when you requested that information. You are also at liberty to raise any questions about the information provided to you in pursuit of this complaint to The Information Commissioner if you have not done so already. I find you have been given appropriate responses on both these matters.

A. Jobcentre Plus failed to provide an adequate response to the complaints you have made about the service you have received from ATOS Healthcare since June 2009.

6. On 27 April 2009 you made a claim to receive contributory based Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) from 11 April 2009. On 2 May 2009 Jobcentre Plus said you were to receive contributory based ESA of £64.30 per week from 11 April 2009. As part of the Work Capability Assessment (1) process, on 13 May 2009 Jobcentre Plus referred this benefit claim to its Medical Services provider. ATOS Healthcare, to consider whether a medical assessment was necessary, to help determine your capability to work. The same day an ESA questionnaire was sent to you.

7. On 15 June 2009 you returned the ESA questionnaire to ATOS Healthcare. You said that you had recently been diagnosed as having a primary brain tumour on the left hand side of your bmin and that this was causing you problems, particularlY with the right hand side of your body. You said a recent doubling of anti-fit medication was controlling your symptoms. On 17 June 2009 an ATOS Healthcare Professional decided that a medical assessment was necessary. ATOS Healthcare arranged for you to attend Highgate Medical Examination Centre on 9 July 2009 for a medical assessment.

8. You wrote to ATOS Healthcare on 28 June 2009 to complain (2) about the appointment arranged for 9 July 2009. You asked why a medical assessment was necessary and said information you had provided relating to your heath condition appeared to be getting ignored. You said the suggested journey time of 108 minutes for you to travel to the relevant Medical Centre exceeded the recommended maximum of 90 minutes each way by public transport journey times published by ATOS Healthcare.

9. On 3 July 2009 ATOS Healthcare rearranged the appointment for 9 July 2009 to 24 July 2009 and notified you of this. On 24 July 2009 I note that you attended that appointment and an ATOS Healthcare Professional undertake a medical assessment with you. A medical report relating to that assessment was completed and sent to Jobcentre Plus. The medical report said that your medical condition would be expected to improve with time and with appropriate treatment.

10. On 29 July 2009 a Jobcentre Plus Decision Maker decided that you had a limited capability for work and placed you in the Work Related Activity Group from 11 July 2009, the 92 day of your claim to receive ESA. You were paid the work related component of ESA of £25.50 per week from the same date. Jobcentre Plus notified you of that decision and of your right to appeal the decision.

(1) Please see Annex for an explanation of Work Capability Assessment process.

(2) Please see Annex for an explanation of ATOS Healthcare complaint process.

11. On 29 JulY 2009 you wrote to the Customer Relations Manager of Highgate Medical Examination Centre. You claimed that the Healtcare Professional who had undertaken the medical assessment with you on 24 July 2009 had not been privy to your medical histoy. You said in your opinion the medical assessment had been a waste of time and resources and had been of no medical benefit to you. You said that your appointment, scheduled for 3:30pm, had started 40 minutes late and that your journey to and from the relevant Medical Centre had left you feeling exhausted. You claimed the facilities at the Medical Centre were bleak in nature and you alleged that the waiting room not having any hand cleaning facilities breached Health and Safety regulations. I note you said you had no complains about the Healthcare Professional who undertook that medical assessment, who you said had worked well in difficult circumstances.

12. On 14 August 2009 Jobcentre Plus received a letter from you (dated 11 August 2009). You said you disagreed with the decision of 29 July 2009 to place you in the Work Related Activity Group. You said you wished to defer any decision about whether to appeal that decision pending you receiving a copy of the medical report relating to the medical assessment of 24 July 2009. On 15 August 2009 you asked Jobcentre Plus to provide you with a copy of the medical report of 24 July 2009 and an appeal form. You said you would decide whether to appeal the decision of 29 July 2009 within one month of you receiving the requested documentation. Jobcentre Plus delayed in providing you with a copy of the relevant medical report until 23 November 2009 and an appeal form was not sent to you at that time. You did not appeal the decision following receipt of the medical report (I consider this matter under element B of this report).

13. On 22 September 2009, ATOS Healthcare issued a comprehensive reply to your letters of June and July 2009 and apologised for the delay in doing so. ATOS Healthcare told you that it had not initially referred your letters to the correct department to deal with and that it had taken longer than anticipated for it to gather the necessary information to reply to all the matters raised by you. ATOS Healthcare apologised for this and for any inconvenience this had caused you. ATOS Healthcare accepted that it had not explored other options for conducting the medical assessment as your travel time to the medical assessment centre was outside of 90 minutes; apologised and explained why there was a wait of 4O minutes in you being seen and that this had been explained to you on the day; explained the facilities available and why these did not breach Health and Safety regulations; and why access to your NHS medical history was not part of the medical assessment. While outside of the published response time I find that this letter responded to the matters raised by you.

14. On 24 and 28 September 2009 you wrote to ATOS Healthcare. You asked whether it was acceptable for an ATOS Healthcare Professional to make a diagnosis without a patient's medical history and claimed that the medical assessment that had been undertaken with you on 24 July 2009 was not valid. ATOS Healthcare told you on 7 0ctober 2009 that its Senior Medical Adviser would be reviewing matters in light of the comments you had made.

15. On 9 October 2009 your MP, Mr Charles Walker, wrote to the Secretary of State for the Departmemt for work and Pensions (DWP), enquiring on your behalf about the validity of the medical assessment. On 28 October 2009. Mr Jonathan Shaw MP, Minister for Disabled People, wrote to you and explained the Work Capability Assessment process and the purpose behind its implementation. He said that ATOS Healthcare Professionals received relevant training before undertaking medical assessments and that checking systems were in place to ensure high standards were met. He explained to you that it was important to recognise that such medical assessments were function based, rather than condition based, and focused on a claimant's ability to perform work related activities rather than their particular illness or disability.

16. On 7 January 2010 ATOS Healthcare replied to your letters of September 2009 and apologised for any poor service you considered you had received. ATOS Healthcare told you that it had undertaken a valid medical assessment with you on 24 July 2009 and explained to you that there was no requirement for it to have had your NHS medical records at that medical assessment. You were given a further explanation that such a medical assessment was not a diagnostic consultation in relation to your illness. ATOS Healthcare told you that it considered that it had not breached any statutory requirements in dealing wim this case. ATOS Healthcare said it recognised that the arrangements it had put in place for your appointment, particularily with regard to travelling time, had not been well managed and it offered to make a Special Payment(3) of £100.00 to you to reflect that. This payment was sent to you on 6 MaY 2010 following receipt of your signed acceptance of that payment by ATOS Healthcare.

17. 0n 11 January 2010 you expressed dissatisfaction with ATOS Healthcare's response of 7 January 2010 and on 22 January 2010 this case was referred to the Independent Tier(4) for investigation.

18. On 27 January 2010 another Healthcare Protessional who had reviewed the medical assessment completed in this benefit claim said that ATOS Healthcare Professionals had dealt with this case within stipulated medical standards and procedures and in a professional manner, and that the ATOS Healthcare Professional who had undertaken that medical assessment with you on 24 July 2009 had completed a detailed medical assessment with you under difficult circumstances. It was noted that you had said the same thing on 29 July 2009.

19. You emailed ATOS Healthcare on 1 Februay 2012 and alleged that the ATOS Healthcare Professionals who had considered and had assessed this case had assaulted you and had caused you injury by their actions (I note that claim was completely contrary and at total variance to what you had said on 29 July 2009, as noted in paragraph 11 of this report).

(3) Please see Annex for an explanation of Special Payment.

(4) Please see Annex for an explanation of Independent Tier.

20. On 3 February 2010 I note that the Independent Tier fully support ATOS Healthcare's handling of your complaints, accepting that there had been some delay in ATOS Healthcare responding to your concerns within its published timescales for doing so. The Independent Tier notified ATOS Healthcare of its medcal and administrative findings on 9 February 2010 and you were provided with copies of the same information on 15 February 2010. ATOS Healthcare told you that the Independent Tier had fully supported how it had handled the medical assessment and that its complaint process was now concluded. ATOS Healthcare referred youu to the Chief Exexcutive of Jobcentre Plus if you remained dissatisfied.

21. You wrote to Jobcentre Plus on 22 March 2010 and said that your medical condition had deteriorated. On 19 April 2010 Jobcentre Plus referred your letter of 22 March 2010 to ATOS Healthcare, to assist in a review of your work capability situation. An ATOS Healthcare Protessional liaised with your GP and your GP said that your brain tumour had not yet reached the criteria for being classified as a terminal illness. Your GP confirmed that your medical condition had deteriorated and said that this posed a risk to you. On 23 April 2010 an ATOS Healthcare Professional noted that the circumstances of this case met the special descriptors for you having a limited capability for work and limited capability for work related activity.

22. On 5 May 2010, Jobcentre Plus reviewed your entitlement to receive ESA and placed you in the Work Related Support Group for 12 months from 29 April 2010. Your entitlement to receive the worked related component of ESA was increased by £5.45 per week effective from 29 April 2010. Jobcentre Plus notified you of that decision that day and of your right to appeal that decision.

23. You wrote to Jobcentre Plus on 11 May 2010 and asked for a copy of the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2010. You claimed that the same conclusion reached in that note should have been reached in July 2009. You asked Jobcentre Plus to make this happen and to pay you a sum equivalent to arrears of ESA trom July 2009. You said that you would make a decision about whether to appeal the decision of 5 May 2010 once Jobcentre Plus had dealt with your request.

24. On 16 July 2010 Jobcentre Plus asked ATOS Healthcare to look again at the medical assessment undertaken in 2009. ATOS Healthcare told Jobcentre Plus on 22 July 2010 that it had taken appropriate action in 2009 which had been fully supported by the Independent Tier. ATOS Healthcare said that in helping Jobcentre Plus to review your work capability situation in April 2010, it had given consideration to you and your GP saying that your medical condition had deteriorated and posed a risk to you.

25. Jobcentre Plus wrote to you on 29 July 2010 and apologised for any delay in doing so. Jobcentre Plus said that on receipt of your letter of 11 August 2009, indicating your disagreement with the decision of 29 July 2009, even though you had said that you wished to defer appealing that decision, it ought to have reconsidered that decision at that time. Jobcentre Plus told you that it had now investigated the decision of 29 July 2009 and that it was unable to change that decision. Jobcentre Plus told you that it could send your letter of 11 August 2009 to the Tribunals Service for consideration and that it would be up to a Tribunal to decide (if accepting a late appeal from you) if there were grounds for the decision of 29 July 2009 to be amended. Jobcentre Plus provided you with a copy of the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2009 and told you that it was unable to add anything further to the investigation that had already been completed by ATOS Healthcare and the Independent Tier into your claims about the service you had received.

26. You wrote to Jobcentre Plus on 4 August 2010 and claimed that the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2009 was poorly written. You asked for that note to be rewritten in an acceptable format and for you to be provided with a copy of any rework. You said you would then consider if you wished to appeal the decision of 5 May 2010.

27. On 6 August 2010 Jobcentre Plus gave you a Special Payment of £75 in recognition of it not dealing with your correspondence of August 2009 properly; its delay in providing you with a copy of the relevant medical report; and delay in investigating your claims about the service you had received from ATOS Healthcare.

28. On 3 September 2010 Jobcentre Plus told you that it considered that the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2010 was fit for purpose and you were given the General Medical Council number of that individual. Jobcentre Plus asked you to provide proof of any communication costs you had incurred in pursuing your complaints.

29. Jobcentre Plus wrote to you on 6 September 2010 and told you that it was unable to change the decision of 29 July 2009 and that if you wished to appeal that decision, it would support any case there might be for the Tribunals Service to accept a late appeal from you.

30. You wrote to Jobcentre Plus on 29 September 2010 to disagree with its letter of 6 September 2010. I note you said that you would continue to deter appealing the decision of 29 July 2009 until such time you received what was, in your opinion, a medically sound copy of the medical report that was completed in 2009, which you continued to allege was not valid. You said your incurred costs up to September 2010 were difficult to calculate. You said you would accepl a nominal sum of £2,000 from Jobcentre Plus in respect of ATOS Healthcare Professionals allegedly assaulting and injuring you and for any communication costs you had incurred.

31. On 31 December 2010 Jobcentre Plus replied to your letter of 20 September 2010 and apologised for any delay in doing so. Jobcentre Plus told you that it would not review this case until it received an appeal from you. You emailed the Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus on 1 February 2011. Jobcentre Plus told you on 21 February 2011 that you had a right to appeal any decisions that it made. Jobcentre Plus asked you again to provide proof of your alleged costs of £2,000. You told Jobcentre Plus on 15 March 2011 that you would not provide such proof and that in your opinion Jobcentre Plus should pay you this sum without wasting any further public resources. Jobcentre Plus told you on 18 April 2010 that it considered that it had fully investigated your concerns and referred you to my office if you were dissatisfied.

32. You emailed Jobcentre Plus on 31 July 2011 and asked it again to pay you £2,000. You said you were willing to waive this request if Jobcentre Plus took steps to remove the approval of the ATOS Healthcare Professionals who had considered and assessed this case in 2009. On 12 August 2011 Jobcentre Plus asked you again to provide proof of your alleged costs of £2,000. You did not provide Jobcentre Plus with any proof of your alleged costs and you brought this complaint to my office on 3 August 2011.

33. From June 2009 onwards you contacted ATOS Healthcare on many occasions to complain about the service you were receiving. Your complaint about ATOS Healthcare was your contention that you felt that a medical assessment should not have been required at the start of this State benefit claim because of the information you had provided about your medical condition. You sought to claim that the medical assessment that was undertaken and the related medical report were not valid.

34. All claimants making a claim to receive ESA may be required to participate in the Work Capability Assessment process. The purpose of that process was made clear to you by ATOS Healthcare and by Jobcentre Plus. ATOS Healthcare explained to you that it had considered and had undertaken the medical assessment with you on 24 July 2009, to assess your capability to work in relation to your illness and your claim to receive ESA, and not to reassess your medical condition or to challenge any information you had provided. Your medical condition was not under dispute. ATOS Healthcare followed procedures in considenng and undertaking a medical assessment with you, and in completing a medical report relating to that medical assessment. That was a valid process.

35. As part of ATOS Healthcare's complaint process you asked the Independent Tier for an Independent Healthcare Professional to investigate such matter. I note the Independent Tier found that ATOS Healthcare Professionals had correctly followed procedures and had acted professionally. It was noted that the ATOS Healthcare Professional who had undertaken the medical assessment had worked well with you and had completed a detailed medical report in difficult circumstances. I note that you had come to the same conclusion on 29 July 2009 before changing your position on 1 February 2010 and alleging that the same individual had assaulted you and when you sought to purport that individual had caused you injury. You alleged that the ATOS Healthcare Professional who had considered that medical assessment was necessary was also wrong.

36. ATOS Healthcare sent appropriate and comprehensive replies to your complaints. There was some delay in ATOS Healthcare doing that. Part of that delay is attributable to the volume of information that ATOS Healthcare had to gather to reply to all the matters raised by you. I note that the Independent Tier found this to be the case when investigating how ATOS Healthcare had handled your complaint. I note the Special Payment of £100 that ATOS Healthcare gave you for that delay and to reflect where you were required to attend for that medical assessment to be undertaken with you.

37. In March 2010 you asked Jobcentre Plus to investigate the service you had received from ATOS Healthcare. During the course of Jobcentre Plus investigating your claims I note ATOS Healthcare assisted Jobcentre Plus in reviewing your capability to work, the result of which was that Jobcentre Plus placed you in the Work Related Support Group from 29 April 2010. I note your subsequent comtention with Jobcentre Plus that it should have reached the same decision in July 2009. Jobcentre Plus made enquiries with ATOS Healthcare and considerd your letter of 11 August 2009. I note Jobcentre Plus gave you a special Payment of £75 for not dealing with that letter in a proper and timely manner and for not reconsidering the decision of 29 July 2009 at that time. Having done that. Jobcentre Plus found that there were no grounds for it to amend the decision of 29 July 2009. That decision was based on the evidence provided at that time and the decision made in April 2010 had regard to you and your GP having provided new information relating to your medical condition having deteriorated.

38. I note that in your letter of 11 August 2009 you told Jobcentre Plus that you wished to defer appealing the decision of 29 July 2009. until such time you were provided with a copy of the medical report of 24 July 2009 relating to that decision. You said once you were in receipt of the requested document you would decide within one month if you wished to appeal the decision of 29 July 2009. There was a delay before Jobcentre Plus, in November 2009. provided you with a copy of that medical report, which I consider later in this report. Having been provided with a copy of the relevant document by Jobcentre Plus, I note that, despite that, yDu have never sought to appeal the decision of 29 July 2009, despite Jobcentre Plus telling you that it would support any case that there might be for the Tribunals Service to accept a late appeal from you. This is because you have sought to claim that the relevant medical report is not a valid document and you want that medical report amended to reflect your view on matters. That medical report of 24 July 2009 is valid. It was for you to appeal that decision if you wished to challenge that decision made as a result of the medical report and for the Tnbunals Service, if such an appeal had been made by you, to decide whether there were grounds for accepting a late appeal from you. You have never lodged such an appeal and I note that the absolute 13 month time limit for you to submit a late appeal to the Tribunals Service for consideration has expired. I note that you have adopted a similar position with regard to you exercising your right to appeal the decision of 5 May 2010, based on you wanting the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2010 to be rewritten, which I also consider later in this report. That note is a valid document. It was for you to appeal the decision of 5 May 2010 within the relevant timescales included in the notification accompanying that decision. You did not do so.

39. I have found that ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus have both responded to your complaints in a comprehensive and satisfactory manner. I have noted the redress ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus made to you to reflect the delay in responding to you as noted in this report. I do not uphold this complaint.

B. Jobcentre Plus failed to respond to the request you made for a copy of the medical report on which it based its decision, made in August 2009, to place you in the Employment Support Allowance Support group.

40. It was in July 2009 (not in August 2009) that Jobcentre Plus decided to place you in the Work Related Activity Group, after considering the medical report of 24 July 2009, rather than you being placed in the Work Related Support Group, as stated under this element of complaint. You asked for a copy of that medical report on 15 July 2009, which was not provided to you until 23 November 2009. Jobcentre Plus acknowledged that delay in the apology and the £75 Special Payment that it gave you in August 2010.

41. Following Jobcentre Plus deciding in May 2010 to place you in the Work Related Support Group from 29 April 2010. You asked Jobcentre Plus on 11 May 2010 to provide you with a copy the relevant ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2010 relating to that review. On 29 July 2010 Jobcentre Plus provided yoU with a copy of the ATOS Healthcare Professional's note of 23 April 2010. On 4 August 2010 you alleged to Jobcentre Plus that that note had been pooly written and you asked for it to be rewritten in an acceptable way for you. Jobcentre Plus told you on 3 September 2010 that the relevant note was fit for purpose and no rework was necessary. That note from the ATOS Healthcare Professional has been considered as part of the investigation of this complaint. While there are grammar and spelling mistakes in that note, the message conveyed in it about your medical condition is clear. Jobcentre Plus has provided you with copies of the particular medical report and note that were completed by ATOS Healthcare in this State benefit claim. There were delays in doing so. Jobcenlre Plus gave appropriate redress to you to reflect those delays and offered to support any appeal to the Tribunals Service for any perceived delay due to a copy of the medical report not being sent to you earlier. Jobcentre Plus reviewed the State benefit decisions made on your State benefit claim and decided they were not to be changed. You were told the appropriate way to challenge those decisions was by you making an appeal to an independent Tribunal if you wished to contest those decisions further. You were given two opportunities to appeal the decisions made in this case and took neither. I do not uphold this complaint.

42. You have said that you want Jobcentre Plus to pay you £2,000 for ATOS Healthcare Professionals having allegedly assaulted you and for purportedly having caused you injury by their actions, and for alleged communication costs. I note you said that you were willing to waive this request if Jobcentre Plus took steps to remove the approval of the ATOS Healthcare Professionals who had considered and had assessed this case in 2009.

43. One of my investigating officers wrote to you on 23 October 2012 and asked you to expand on the allegations you have made. You replied on 28 October 2012. You allege that, despite your protests, the ATOS Healthcare Professional carried out what you claimed to be an illegal examination of your person on 24 July 2009. You said you were compelled to undress and to take up stress positions that caused you pain. You allege that you were blacking out at times during the medical assessment and that the ATOS Healthcare Professional pushed you out of the door at the end of that medical assessment. You alleged that the medical report of 24 July 2009 is libellous towards you.

44. You said that the £2,000 payment that you want Jobcentre Plus to pay you is based around a fraction of the time and effort that you allege you have expended in trying to ensure that the Department for Work and Pensions and ATOS Healthcare complied with the contract between them. You allege that to the present day you have correspondence with ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus on more than 200 occasions and that each item of correspondence took you two hours to compose. You allege that Jobcentre Plus should pay you £5 per hour the composition of correspondence.

45. I make it clear to you that the ATOS Healthcare Professional who undertook the medical assessment with you on 24 July 2009 and completed the associated medical report followed a valid and legal process in completing that medical assessment. Five days after the completion of that medical assessment I have noted that you said that you had no complaints about the conduct of the ATOS Healthcare Professional, who you said had worked well in difficult circumstances. I find the allegations you are now making about the conduct of that ATOS Healthcare are not credible.

46. Dunng the course of a claim to receive ESA I would expect to see a certain amount of correspondence between a claimant and Jobcentre Plus and ATOS Healthcare, regarding a claim to receive ESA. You made your position clear at the outset with ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus and you asked to be provided with substantial information by both ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus, particularly with regard to contractual matters. There was delay in you receiving a reply to those requests, for which ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus have apologised to you several times and given you redress of £175. I find that you did receive comprehensive replies to matters raised by you and that you also received the information you asked for. Any further correspondence you entered in to is as a result of you continuing not to accept the explanations that you haue been given that both ATOS Healthcare and Jobcentre Plus have followed procedures in dealing with this State benefit claim. The correct route for you to have challenged the decision made on that State benefit claim following the medical assessment in July 2009 was through the appeal process. You were told that and given the opportunities to appeal the State benefit decisions as noted in this report. I find your claims that Jobcentre Plus pay you an additional £2,000 are spurious, as do I find your allegation of assault upon your person by ATOS Healthcare.

Closing remarks

47. If you need any further information about this report, please contact us at the telephone number on the first page. However, if you are dissatisfied with any aspect of service, or wish to provide any feedback regarding our service please write to our Customer Service Team.

48. We welcome feedback on our service and we regularly contact a sample of complainants either by telephone or in writing to seek their views. These views are important to us and ensure that the high standad we aim to reach is being achieved.

49. I may raise issues ansing from the investigation of complaints with senior Jobcentre Plus Managers. I may also refer to cases in my Annual Report without naming the parties involved.

50. A copy of this report has been sent to Jobcentre Plus.

Yours sincerely

John Hanlon, Independent Case Examiner

Complainants who wish to take their complaints further can ask a Member of Parliament to approach the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman. The Ombudsman would then consider if an investigation is appropriate. More details can be obtained from: Office of the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, Millbank Tower, Millbank, London SW1P 4QP or at www.ombudsman.org.uk. We would co-operate with any future Ombudsman investigation by providing a copy of our report and other relevant information.

Annex

1. Work Capability Assessment

To be entitled to receive ESA a claimant must have a limited capability for work. related to their physical or mental condition. The Work Capability Assessment determines whether a claimant has limited capability for work (LCW) and limited capability for work related activity (LCWRA). The work Capability Assessment is completed by questionnaire and a face to face medical assessment where necessary. The Department for Work and Pensions has a contract in place with its Medical Services provider, ATOS Healthcare, to complete that process and to conduct such a medical assessmem where it has been determined more information is required relating to a claim to receive ESA. When undertaking a medical assessment, a Health Care Professional assesses the effect a a claimant's illness or injury has on their ability to perform a range of everyday activities. Where it is determined that a claimant has LCW, they will receive a component of ESA from the 92nd day of their benefit claim. The type of component a claimant receives depends on whether or not it has also been determined that they have LCWRA, in addition to LCW. Claimants assessed as having LCWRA are placed in the Work Related Support Group and receive the Support component of ESA. They are not required to participate in work related activity as a condition of their entitlement to receive ESA, although they may participate in such matters if they so wish. Claimants assessed as having only LCW are placed in the work Related Activity Group and receive a Work Related Activity component of ESA. They are required to attend Work Focused Interviews (WFI) to continue with their entitlement to receive ESA.

2. ATOS Healthcare complaint process

ATOS Healthcare aims to acknowledge receipt of a complaint within two working days. The first stage of the complaint process is for a Customer Relations Manager to conduct an investigation into all the issues raised and where possible, to try to provide a written response to the customer within 20 working days. If the customer remains dissatisfied with that response, the next stage of the complaint process is for the complaint to be passed to either a Medical Manager to respond to a complaint relating to the service provided by a Healthcare Professional or to a Site Manager to respond to a complaint relating to administration matters. If a customer remains dissatisfied on receipt of the final response from ATOS Healthcare, a customer can request that their case be referred to the Independent Tier for consideration.

3. Special Payment

ATOS Healthcare can make a Special Payment for financial loss caused by its maladministration. It can also make Special Payments for maladministration which has caused gross inconvenience, serious distress or gross embarrassment. These payments are exceptional, and cover the more serious cases where errors were persistent, or over a protracted period of time. Special Payments are not large, and do not put a value on the distress suffered. They are made to acknowledge and apologise for very poor service and are made in accordance with Treasury Guidance.

4. Independent Tier

The Independent Tier considers whether ATOS Healthcare has adhered to its complaints process in dealing with the complaint. The Indepedent Tier will consider whether ATOS Healthcare has properly identified, investigated and addressed the customer's complaint relating to the elements of service under its control. A parallel independent medical quality review will be conducted by another qualified Healthcare Professional in cases where issues relating to the medical quality of the medical report produced have been raised.