I am very new to welfare rights advice and have found the advice on this site invaluable, but am at a brick wall with this appeal.

Client scored 7 points on the PCA for mental health. Trying very hard to find at least another 3. Two problems:

1. Medical examiner took only 10 minutes to examine a client who has had a mental health problem for the past 5 years.

2. GP report was signed by senior partner in the practice. When I wrote to her for more details she said she had not seen my client since 2005 and could not provide more evidence. She said that the other doctor may provide further details.

Bit of a struggle to get an adjournment, but felt I had to - too many questions unanswered. Tribunal told me that length of time was irrelevant and that it was OK for a GP to fill out a report from a computer screen without actually seeing a client. Eventually persuaded that evidence was coming from the other partner in the pratice, but I have my doubts about how good that will be.

I know that there is caselaw about the length of an examination, but surely a GP who fills out a report has to see the patient!

Any help on either issue would be appreciated.

Hi Frances,

I'm all over the place geographically at the moment, so any responses from me would be intermittent, but hopefully my rushed bumblings will start a discussion with others joining in.

What's your clients diagnosis and symptoms, details of any treatment and how do they impact on her day-to-day life/activities of daily living? For example any issues relevant to your client such as poor self care, poor sleep, self harm, any social phobia's, social isolation/social withdrawal, mood swings, disinhibited behaviour, problems engaging with the wider community, etc etc etc.

Also which specific MH descriptors has she been awarded points so far for?

The reason i ask is to paraphrase some caselaw i've long forgotten - that the appeal will be an exercise in credibility in relation to the disputed descriptor (i.e. your clients testimony's credibility) against a background of medical evidence, so don't get bogged down worrying about obtaining specific medical evidence specifically addressing each specific descriptor, use any med evid you've got and can get from the GP, laterally in addressing each of the disputed descriptors you're arguing for, including the IB85 completed during the medical examination.

I suspect the fact your client has got 7pts, may well mean there will be some inherent contradictions with in the IB85 (hence it would useful if you identify the ones your client got points for, i.e. points awarded for one descriptor and not for another descriptor despite evidence supporting points for both descriptors if that makes sense.

10 minute examination is minimal, and the findings may well reflect it wasn't a thorough medical, and lend credence to arguments against disputed descriptors, but don't rely on it as the first Tribunal comments make clear.

andy

You would have to look carefully at the statement of reasons because if the tribunal stated that the length of time of the examination was irrelevant, as a matter of law, then that is an error of law and, if material to the case, capable of having the decision set aside (on leave to appeal). If the tribunal stated that the length of time of the examination was irrelevant, as a matter of fact (in that particular case), then it was entitled to do so if supported by reasons.

Hi Paul,

It sounds like the first tribunal actually agreed to Frances request for an adjournment so she could obtain more med evidence for a subsequent tribunal to hear the appeal, and their comments about the length of time the examination took place were the musings of a tribunal.

Andy

Whilst 10 minutes is a ridiculously short time to carry out a medical, the client did score 7 points. To dismiss the medical entirely may be throwing the baby out with the bath water. It is far better, I would suspect, to point out shortcomings in the report - maybe a lack of detail about the client's lifestyle or the effects on his/her daily life - and suggest that they came about because of the rushed nature of the examination.We sometimes find statements from family members, relatives or even friends can be of invaluable assistance in providing a fuller picture of how the client is affected by mental health problems.

(Brian)

Sorry, I overlooked the fact of adjournment. I was thinking more in terms of a final decision.

Many thanks for all the good advice. We've been told the new date could be up to 8 weeks away - will let you know how I get on.

Given that the problem has existed for 5 years any previous medical assessment papers could be very helpful. The current assessment is only a 'snapshot' on the day.