ATOS don't decide if the applicant is fit for work, so your whole argument is incorrect. .
Surely ATOS do decide if an applicant is fit for work? OK they follow a script, but asking someone if they can make a cup of tea unaided, isn't really a way of deciding medical fitness to work. Neither is the ability to dress oneself in the morning an indication. Neither is the ability to sit without discomfort. When my partner had her assessment, at no point was she asked anything remotely connected with her condition, therefore, the system ATOS are using is seriously flawed.
Atos as far as I'm aware, are supposedly carrying out "Medical assessments." (note the word "Medical".) My partners Medical assessment consisted of a set of questions, but no physical examination took place. At her appeal, the tribunal stated that she'd been
hopelessly assessed by ATOS. Therefore the assessments are not fit for purpose, and ATOS by the same token are not fit to do the assessments. ATOS should have realised very early on that these assessments were designed to fail the vast amount of genuine claimants, and should have said something. But no,,,, ATOS are paid by results, so they kept quiet. And no one can blame them. Getting money so easily off the government, for asking stupid questions. I'd like to know how much per claimant , ATOS get for assessing them as fit for work,,,, and how much they get for assessing them as unfit for work.