Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
ESA - attendance at face-to-face assessment
I have a client with severe agoraphobia amongst other severe and enduring mental health issues. In the summer he was issued with a new ESA50 for a review as he has been on ESA for years.
He was called to a face-to-face assessment which his carer had to cancel as my client was too mentally distressed to attend. His agoraphobia is so sever he even has problems attending appointments with his local GP.
His carer wrote to the DWP to advise them of these problems, but he has now been called to a 2nd assessment. His carer is concerned that she may not be able to get him to attend yet again. If he doesn’t attend it is highly likely his ESA will be disallowed.
The GP who knows the most about his health problems is on a sabbatical until next year. The carer will try to get another GP at the practice to provide a letter to confirm his mental health issues but this may not arrive in time for his assessment.
Are there any suggestions as to where - if anywhere - else I can go with this? Does it warrant a formal complaint to DWP or Maximus? After all they have ignored evidence from his carer who sees him every day and is best placed to know what ny client can and can’t do.
Does it help to read the following news?
Yes I’ve seen the article ,thanks - but I’m unsure of how long it will take the DWP to get their act together and stop Maximus from continuing to get people in for assessment. And also whether DWP will recognise mental illness as a chronic illness.
Have a look at this from another couple of angles.
1) Equality Act 2010. Client needs to assert that they are covered by EA10 as a disabled person and then request a reasonable adjustment. The two obvious RAs would be a home visit or no HCP assessment. There are a limited number of grounds on which an RA can be legally refused. They’re in trouble from the moment you raise it.
2) From a safeguarding perspective this person would surely be classified as vulnerable. DWP guidance isn’t really about safeguarding. It’s about avoiding liability when things go wrong. Ditto the provider guidance or what’s left of it. However, raising it at all as an issue puts them on the spot as does the EA 10 approach.