1.Was Tax Payers Hard Earned Cash Used to Pay for the Compensatory

1.Was Tax Payers Hard Earned Cash Used to Pay for the Compensatory

Dear Mr Reynolds

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request received on30 May 2013. You asked:-

1.Was tax payers hard earned cash used to pay for the compensatory

awards after the disgusting treatment that you dished out to this

poor lady, one of your own employees?

2.You were fined an extra £17500 for not re-employing the lady

because you claim the Aspergers Syndrome made her unemployable.

How many persons suffering from the same syndrome have been found fit for work by ATOS HCPs?

3.The judge said you treated the claimant extremely badly and yet

you say you work hard to commit to good practice in employing and

working with disabled people.How many disabled personnel have you made redundant and how many are taking/or sought action against you?

4.Was there any input from the National Autistic Society when

formulating PIP examinations or ESA?

5.What was the total cost of the case, including specialists and

lawyers and the tribunal bench and other associated staff?

6.Aspergers Syndrome shows no outward signs. How does an ATOS HCP, whose qualification and title is not recognised by any medical

organisation, evaluate on this condition if it is not visible, especially if important medical notes have not been submitted in the first instance

And our reply is:-

  1. A compensation payment resulting from the Employment Tribunal judgement was paid from the Department for Work and Pensions' accounts.
  1. We are unable to provide this information. Atos’s current reporting system records mental and behavioural issues. It does not record individual illnesses.
  1. From 1 June 2012 to 31 May 2013, 17 people were made compulsorarily redundant within the Department for Work and Pensions. Of those, 1 person had a disability declaration and they are not taking formal action.We are not able to provide the total cost of the case information. It is not readily available from current reporting systems. The cost of extracting the information would exceed the appropriate limit of £600 as specified under section 12 of the Freedom of Information Act.
  1. The development of the PIP assessment criteria was an iterative process, and significant changes were made following feedback received through our consultation activity. DWP met with the National Autistic Society during both the 2011 informal consultation on the first draft of the PIP assessment criteria, and the 2012 formal consultation on the second draft of the criteria. Furthermore, the National Autistic Society providing formal responses to each consultation.
  1. All Atos practitioners are registered with either the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) or the General Medical Council (GMC) and have Occupation Health qualifications, all of which are recognised medical qualifications. The Atos practitioner will request further medical evidence from the treating medical practitioner if they think that they have insufficient evidence during their assessment. In response to Q2, I can advise that this information is not held.
  1. Healthcare Professionals (HCP) have diagnostic information based medical evidence provided by the claimant’s GP.Claimants are encouraged to provide additional medical evidence as part of their claim to benefit.Claimants are requested to complete the questionnaire (ESA 50) which provides information on the functional effects of the claimant’s condition.HCPs receive guidance and training in the assessment of people with Aspergers Syndrome.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact us quoting the reference number above.

Yours Sincerely,

DWP HR Central Freedom of Information Team


Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act

If you are not happy with this response you may request an internal review by e-mailing or by writing to DWP, Central FoI Team, Caxton House, Tothill Street, SW1H 9NA. Any review request should be submitted within two months of the date of this letter.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF