Has anyone else noticed that fewer IB decisions are being overturned by the DM on reconsideration? Our local JC+ tell us that,where new medical evidence is submitted, their guidance requires that the case is referred to medical services, whose usual response is that evidence from a GP is not impartial and that a GP is not trained to carry out the assessment for the PCA. The DM appears to accept the advice of med services, regardless of what common sense says about the merits of the case. I thought that the dispute period was there to resolve cases so as to avoid expensive and time-consuming appeal hearings. From recent experience, it seems this is not the case. It also seems that medical services are, in effect, making the decision on incapacity for work, rather than the DM.

I THINK THE ANSWER IS WELL COVERED IN TODAYS UPDATE ON DECISION MAKING AND THE STANDARDS COMMITTEE REPORT.

When did you last see the DM's score differ from the BAMS/SEMA/ATOS ORIGIN (zzzz!) doctor's score?

could anyone spare me a copy of the above and Rightsnet news story
andympennington@yahoo.co.uk

yours everso humbly

anned
a couple of years back, someone from the IB section phoned me to give a fairly convoluted explanation to the effect that they had some instruction not to revise IB decisions following a commissioner's decision. it sounded like absolute rot, and i asked for a copy and the reference, which she said she would send if she had time to find it,,, needless to say,,, and i didn't have time to chase it, and the case trundled to appeal. it stuck in my mind, and i resolved to challenge this more strenuously if it arose again, feeling fairly sure commissioners had held quite the opposite to what she was saying - but it hasn't arisen again. our local IB section fairly whizz out the appeals, and few clients come to me with med ev already.

if there is an instruction to refer to medical services, it effectively means the decisions are being made by doctors, which should not happen. it would be nice to get to the bottom of this.
i would bet the instructions to DM's are worded so that nothing comes back to the DWP, but if training to D-Ms doesn't give them knowledge and confidence of their powers, (and limitations), it's not really good enough, is it?

There's definitely a DMG bulletin thing on this - to refer any FME received to MS and effectively follow it. And they have definitely tightened up.

They'll soon be getting the receptionists to give advice to DMs as well as conduct the examinations.

They are already getting receptionist to do it, I recollect a posting on this recently I believe. Also Nevip as for the last time I know a DM disagreeing with a Doctor was 1999( I checked the date). Alas it was not in the clients favour they reduced the clients points awarded as the Doctor duplicated two points on the mental health test.

That sounds about par for the bloody course!!