Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
Video information for ESA Assessments
Handy Q & A’s provided by the Health Assessment Advisory Service delivered via youtube
https://www.chdauk.co.uk/content/special-requirements-your-assessment
And one in BSL
I can see the medical report now.
Level of stated limitation not consistent with medication – only uses low-level pain killers.
Hasn’t seen a specialist, only GP.
Can manage daily living tasks and stairs.
Unloads washing machine and dish washer.
Walks to local shops every day and does shopping.
Watches TV with wife, sits for 30 minutes before moving. Observed to sit for 40 minutes during examination without discomfort.
Wouldn’t bend to the floor, physical symptoms do not suggest functional limitations as claimed.
Able to get up onto couch unaided and raise legs.
No descriptors satisfied, no risk to physical or mental health if found not to have a limited capability for work….
Tough Friday?
Tough Friday?
Behave. That video is shocking tokenistic drivel. Only an MP could find any merit in that. Put it together with actual experience of claimants of these things.
1) We think you need to raise things with us and that these are “special” i.e. that you are a problem. We haven’t noticed that we’re not in Kansas anymore and there’s this thing called the Equality Act and, weirder still, this non-demeaning term “reasonable adjustments”. The “social model”? What’s that?
2) You can bring someone with you but we can ignore them as we will focus on you. Better still we will completely ignore the impact that our ignoring the other person will have on you.
3) You can come in a wheelchair if you really have to but give us some notice so we can sweep the chairs in the corridor into the assessment room so that only one place is uncomfortable and inaccessible. We have no idea whether the route to our centre is accessible or the route through it. We just like using the word “accessible”. It means, er, “something!” We have no interest in any other kind of accessibility either. Large print letters? Sorry, you what?
4) We have a letter that talks about accessibility but only in the sense that it says the building is accessible and ring us once you’ve discovered it isn’t i.e. after you’ve arrived and can’t get in.
5) If English is your second language then, er, there’s a good chance you won’t have even found our web site and certainly won’t be watching this and, hey, that doesn’t matter because we don’t really care else we would produce our correspondence in different languages if we did wouldn’t we!
6) You can book an interpreter but there’s nothing on this web site that will tell you that bar this video in a language you won’t understand on a site you won’t know about. Oh, and when you do book one they will not turn up; will have the wrong language and, better still, will only be paid for a specific time slot so will leave when your appointment is about to start because 30 minutes have gone by and they have to go pick up their kids.
7) You can email customer relations about any of this but how would you ever know? When you do email nothing is ever received in response.
8) You can have someone of your own gender but not on the day we intend to book you in on. We don’t tell you any of this upfront so, realistically, you’re looking to either attend twice or just go through with it anyway and have your discomfort completely disregarded.
9) You can bring your assistance dog but our security guard must have at least one attempt at ejecting you and the dog for loitering because you have the temerity to turn up without dark glasses or a cane. Oh, and we may not be able to fit your dog into some assessment rooms but we won’t tell you. We’ll just tell you we’re accessible!
10) We do home visits but only after we’ve introduced a significant delay by either denying that this is even an option or by demanding medical evidence from someone you’ve already told us you haven’t seen in years. Then we’ll send you a letter for one of our centres anyway.
11) Aw bless us, we’ve done a BSL version. However, anyone who uses BSL to the extent they need a video won’t ever be able to navigate their way through the site to find the video in the first place.
By all means turn the subtitles on the video on. They are brilliantly comedic. Think “Ceefax on Later with Jools Holland” genius level. Their email address is apparently “customer relations at sea”.
You could not make it up.
Thank you Mike, I’ve had a rubbish week and that has proper cheered me up!
Tough Friday?
Behave. That video is shocking tokenistic drivel. Only an MP could find any merit in that. Put it together with actual experience of claimants of these things.
1) We think you need to raise things with us and that these are “special” i.e. that you are a problem. We haven’t noticed that we’re not in Kansas anymore and there’s this thing called the Equality Act and, weirder still, this non-demeaning term “reasonable adjustments”. The “social model”? What’s that?
2) You can bring someone with you but we can ignore them as we will focus on you. Better still we will completely ignore the impact that our ignoring the other person will have on you.
3) You can come in a wheelchair if you really have to but give us some notice so we can sweep the chairs in the corridor into the assessment room so that only one place is uncomfortable and inaccessible. We have no idea whether the route to our centre is accessible or the route through it. We just like using the word “accessible”. It means, er, “something!” We have no interest in any other kind of accessibility either. Large print letters? Sorry, you what?
4) We have a letter that talks about accessibility but only in the sense that it says the building is accessible and ring us once you’ve discovered it isn’t i.e. after you’ve arrived and can’t get in.
5) If English is your second language then, er, there’s a good chance you won’t have even found our web site and certainly won’t be watching this and, hey, that doesn’t matter because we don’t really care else we would produce our correspondence in different languages if we did wouldn’t we!
6) You can book an interpreter but there’s nothing on this web site that will tell you that bar this video in a language you won’t understand on a site you won’t know about. Oh, and when you do book one they will not turn up; will have the wrong language and, better still, will only be paid for a specific time slot so will leave when your appointment is about to start because 30 minutes have gone by and they have to go pick up their kids.
7) You can email customer relations about any of this but how would you ever know? When you do email nothing is ever received in response.
8) You can have someone of your own gender but not on the day we intend to book you in on. We don’t tell you any of this upfront so, realistically, you’re looking to either attend twice or just go through with it anyway and have your discomfort completely disregarded.
9) You can bring your assistance dog but our security guard must have at least one attempt at ejecting you and the dog for loitering because you have the temerity to turn up without dark glasses or a cane. Oh, and we may not be able to fit your dog into some assessment rooms but we won’t tell you. We’ll just tell you we’re accessible!
10) We do home visits but only after we’ve introduced a significant delay by either denying that this is even an option or by demanding medical evidence from someone you’ve already told us you haven’t seen in years. Then we’ll send you a letter for one of our centres anyway.
11) Aw bless us, we’ve done a BSL version. However, anyone who uses BSL to the extent they need a video won’t ever be able to navigate their way through the site to find the video in the first place.
By all means turn the subtitles on the video on. They are brilliantly comedic. Think “Ceefax on Later with Jools Holland” genius level. Their email address is apparently “customer relations at sea”.
You could not make it up.
Have you passed your comments on to Maximus/HAAS?
Have you passed your comments on to Maximus/HAAS?
Yes, along with an invitation to come talk at a GMWRAG meeting. Funnily enough, no response whatsoever.
I presume you’ve written to tell them how “handy” they were? Perhaps you’d like to explain here :)
Maybe you should try again but on a NAWRA agenda?
I would imagine it is harder to ignore a national association than a regional one?
No I haven’t written Mike.
The word ‘handy’ doesn’t cover perfection, paragon nor excellent.
I don’t remember any thing of the like being issued previously - IMO a start (however imperfect) is better than the nothing it replaced.
Maybe you should try again but on a NAWRA agenda?
I would imagine it is harder to ignore a national association than a regional one?
No I haven’t written Mike.
The word ‘handy’ doesn’t cover perfection, paragon nor excellent.
I don’t remember any thing of the like being issued previously - IMO a start (however imperfect) is better than the nothing it replaced.
I have found it far easier to challenge them on an individual basis. They have less places to hide from complaints. They’re simply not interested in engaging with organisations though. There is no benefit to them as part of the private sector.
Bearing in mind my detailed comments above would you be able to clarify in what specific ways these videos represent any kind of start? They are not an imperfect start. They are exactly the same as the nothing they replaced for all of the reasons I have detailed. This is not the start for them. It represents their end point. They have now “done” accessibility and it is over.
I’m not entirely clear as to how one can deduce they’re at the end point for accessibility?
I’ve written to them and asked for their response.
I’ll let you know when I get a response (or not.)
Hopefully they do engage as I’m sure both they (and we) would benefit from further input and dialogue.
As for the feedback you request
1.) How is anyone to know about my disability unless I tell them?
2.) This depends on what the other person has to say - I’ve had many an appointment where the companion talks about themselves or trivia rather than the matter to hand.
3.) Wholly agree - You shouldn’t need to advise in advance.
4.) Likewise above - all buildings should be accessible as this is their purpose.
5.) This is true - if there is a language barrier then this would be difficult.
6.) https://www.chdauk.co.uk/faq/appointments/do-you-provide-interpreters - It could be flagged up as easier to find I suppose? You would expect an interpreter to have been booked from the ESA50 - presumably if this wasn’t returned and the language hasn’t been indicated by the DWP this is a failsafe? Again, presuming that if there was nothing on the website about interpreters then we would all be complaining about that too?
7.) I don’t know this to be true as yet.
8.) The information is on the website. How was this better communicated previously? How can it be better communicated in the future?
9.) The issue you describe is a very serious one - obviously this should not happen and is wholly wrong. Answers demanded on this.
10.) I’m sure home visits would be a popular option but present a host of problems - security of the interviewer being one.
11.) Yes BSL users can find it difficult to use the internet - for some yes it may be impossible - Equality for BSL users has in my opinion taken a retrograde step since the 70’s/80’s. Progress has been dented somewhat by the technology used - i.e BBC News and their translation of Chinese Year of the Whores. That’s a YOUTUBE failure and one that requires addressing by the producers. Why have separate versions of anything?
Claimant is directed to the above video by me. Contacts said organisation by phone and email and says “I need accessible parking” and “I would like to record my assessment and I am giving you 4 days working notice, which is in excess of the period you ask for”. Details given over the phone of what accessible parking will mean i.e. not just marked. Confirms that fine with cassette or CD. Some weeks after the HCP assessment the client is still waiting for the email response!
Claimant advised that no recording will be possible as they require five working days notice regardless of format. Presumably they either need to buy a twin cassette recorder off Ebay or employ UPS to move their one recording device across the country? Maybe an 8 track cartridge has been sourced or a wire recorder?
Claimant arrives at venue. Sure enough there is accessible parking. It is across a main road. It is marked as accessible (well “Disabled”) and there are several spaces but one is occupied by a non-blue badge holder who has also parked in part across the hatching belonging to the next space. They have been ticketed but that doesn’t remove the vehicle from the space. Claimant parks in the space next to the other vehicle. The space is not flat and it is poorly maintained. It has pot holes. They cannot locate their vehicle as they need in order to get out safely into their wheelchair. Their wheelchair has to be dropped onto a narrow pavement next to a main road in order for them to do this. Wheelchair takes several attempts to be set up correctly with traffic passing very close by.
As you can imagine, claimant quite rattled by all of this, although in some senses absolutely used to it. Par for the course for anyone with accessibility issues. The pavement outside is in a poor state of disrepair and there’s no crossing point immediately next to it. When a crossing is found the tactiles are loose and uneven. The road has potholes in. The claimant is both literally and metaphorically shaken by the time they arrive at the building itself. The building, when the claimant gets there, is physically accessible. It’s hardly relevant by that point. The claimant did note, for my benefit really, that there was inadequate small signage throughout the building and a lack of contrast as you moved through the building.
You will be pleased to hear that when they came to discuss mobility the HCP opened with words to the effect of “you can clearly get out of your car okay and walk to your wheelchair”. Obviously said organisation describes their building as “accessible”.
Claimant is considering a complaint but wants to get a response to their original email and see what the outcome of the claim is.
TBH they haven’t replied to my email yet.
It’s been over a week now and nothing.
It’s disappointing to not got a reply to say the least.
I’d have to dismiss the roadside parking, pothole, and pavement issues as they’re public realm issues.
Maybe all venues should have off road parking?
The centre in Stoke-on-Trent has it’s own car park - https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@53.0288206,-2.1927738,3a,75y,245.58h,88.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sAkHVHR_8jMkT6SzjwiMsXA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
The one in Stockport has does not -
Both have equal problems as to the method of how the assessee gets to the centre.
TBH they haven’t replied to my email yet.
It’s been over a week now and nothing.
It’s disappointing to not got a reply to say the least.
I’d have to dismiss the roadside parking, pothole, and pavement issues as they’re public realm issues.
Maybe all venues should have off road parking?
Only a week! And you sounded so confident of a response :)
The problem with dismissing public realm issues is they’re of absolute relevance to a disabled person and the phrase “accessible” is meaningless without that additional information. This is why there has been such a growth in web sites and apps. that address accessibility through lived experience/user reviews. Telling me your building is accessible and there’s a car park nearby is nothing to do with accessibility.
However, to clarify, in this instance the car park is off road and next to the narrow pavement. It is opposite the assessment centre but over the road from it. It’s not public realm as it appears to be owned by the building owners. They have no excuse for the poor maintenance; the lack of information about that and the lack of policing. There was not a pot hole. There were multiple pot holes and uneven surfaces on the pavement and at the crossing point. There’s no excuse for specifying that the crossing point is not directly between the car park and the building and no excuse for failing to mention the poor surfaces. Who maintains them has nothing to do with who knows about them. A failure to provide that level of information is an absolutely lovely illustration of how lip service is paid to accessibility.
As the HCP could spend time looking out of the window to see the claimant approaching, and appeared to be parked in the same car park along with their other staff, I wonder what prevents the staff writing about stuff they must walk on or past every time they are there into their accessibility information. Perish the thought that their powers of observation may be somewhat limited!!!
I’ve clicked on the link for Stoke, and ended up at Water World. Surely they don’t do assessments there? Some people can’t swim.
Ooops.
That should do it.
and for Stockport
Just past the orangey chairs
Oh I give up - they don’t work….