ESA/SDP/Health Charges Penalty increase

Client has received   letter detailing penalty increase for claiming free prescriptions/dental treatment when on contr based ESA.  She will qualify for m/t on inclusion of SDP

HEr ESA will soon   include SDP, we   have submitted   low   income claim re dental , has anyone else come across   increases re failure to pay HC bill (£50 a time increase) and   via which Regs?

Do HC have to trigger another   penalty ( and again   under which Regs?) Do they   have   no ability to place   matter   on hold ?

If she   has to pay   bill eventually so   be   it but their lack of response when she detailed   how   litttle she had to offer to pay was   interesting.

Also has anyone dealt with   backdated claim re HC?

Thanks   in advance - it would seem to be a fairly obscure query but she   is finding   it very stressful

Thanks   in advance

I’ve come across it a few times. They’ve always agreed to waive the penalty & charge following a letter from us. So far at least.

They were   not   interested in even trying and were about as   unhelpful as they could   be .  As I said   in the original   post t they refused to even consider a stay   of action

MP intervention perhaps? Might help…

Yes I’ve suggested that and   i also   pointed   out that as   her health problems are of a   long term,  persistent nature so her   her   income   is   unlikely to rise”.

There seemed to be   no   prospect   of   negotiation at all from the Health Care Authority ( if I’ve got that right)

The letters cite the regulations under which penalty charges are levied. In those regs it holds that no penalty charge can be levied if the person did not act without due care or somesuch.

Have a gander; I too have found NHSBSA are pretty good at negotiating. If you can provide a sample letter with “how do you think a person of average literacy is supposed to comprehend this jumle of nonsene” then you’re half way there.

Receintly we’ve   had   four   more   instances of this   occurring - mine was the first I’d come across - it seems to be something what   is being worked   on

I’ve had two overturned this week. One was “how do you think…” as above with a severe and enduring diagnosis, the other was a person who’d been given a genuine impression they’d be entitled to IS but as it turned out they weren’t.

I did send   in another   post last week to the effect that DWP seem to be paying this topic some attention - have distributed   leafelts re claimants rights and resposibilities.

Also client has   heard   nothing   more since she   originally wrote   in asking for fine to be written off.