Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
‘Instructions ’ from DWP to GP Surgeries
Uh oh ....
Ministry of Truth?
Is this another case of the DWP (and its ministers)“Inadvertently” misleading the House and the nation? If so, it would seem to be indicative of the department having a severe, enduring and recurrent problem with honesty and transparency.
No surprises there, then!
hardly inadvertent, one wouldn’t have thought, given their record
hardly inadvertent, one wouldn’t have thought, given their record
Far be it from me to accuse ministers of mendacity! (Note sarcasm!)
This is hopeful. O
ESA65B wording has been changed but no link to actual text in this written answer yesterday from Justin Tomlinson -
The revised version of the ESA65B letter went live from 3rd June 2019. The revised letter states clearly the circumstances in which fit notes are required including to support Employment and Support Allowance appeals, where a claimant’s condition has worsened or if the claimant has developed a new health condition or disability.
ESA65B wording has been changed
I note no mention of a GP thinking the capability for work decision might be wrong.
I’ve put in a FOI request for a copy of it to see exactly what it does say…
Here’s my response on the FOI request - the letter now says -
This means you no longer need to provide fit notes for their Employment and
Support Allowance (ESA) claim.Providing fit notes in the future for their ESA claim
Subject to your clinical discretion you may issue further fit notes in the future to your patient if:
- their condition gets worse
- they develop a new disability or health condition
- they ask you for evidence for a reconsideration or appeal against our decision.
I think it would have been clearer if the first sentence was followed by ‘unless they ask you for evidence for a reconsideration or appeal against our decision’...
Revised ESA65B letter also now added to DWP guidance The benefit system: A short guide for GPs
From the Mirror on the revised guidance:
The Department for Work and Pensions has withdrawn “misleading” letters it sent to more than 150,000 benefit claimants’ GPs.
Almost two years after it launched, welfare chiefs have replaced the standard letter they send to family doctors every time a patient is found ‘fit for work’.
But the DWP faces a new row after a charity attacked the replacement letter, claiming it “continues to be actively misleading”.
More: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/dwp-finally-scraps-misleading-fit-17491626:
ICO has said DWP should have claimant’s consent that their doctor can be informed about any WCA determinations before the ESA65B can be sent - ESA1, ESA50 and UC50 do not obtain that consent.
Update -
The ICO has clarified its opinion about the ESA65B letter and has told the DWP it can no longer issue the letter, unless it obtains the “opt-in” consent of claimants for past and new Employment Support Allowance and Universal Credit (UC) claimants that could be subjected to an adverse WCA decision and a subsequent ESA65B or UC letter informing their GP.
Update: ICO tells DWP to stop issuing the #ESA65B ‘fit-note’ letters – #ScrapTheLetters
Revised ESA65B letter also now added to DWP guidance The benefit system: A short guide for GPs
Just a point for discussion rather than a query;
I had a look at this guide, on p.7 (in relation to PIPS claims) it says;
‘As the patient’s doctor
Your patient should complete the forms to support their claim using information that
they have to hand, and should not ask you for information to help them do this, or to
complete the forms yourself….......’
I was particularly interested in the ‘should not ask you for information to help them do this’.
As far as I know there is no explicit prohibition to stop a claimant asking a GP for evidence to go with a claim, and it is,as we all know, often a very sensible thing to do.
Although the phrasing is mild in tone I would be doubtful that any attempt to fetter the claimant acting in their own best interests or the doctor acting in their patients best interests could ever be lawful.
It may be that in the real world this has had no effect at all but it concerns me that DWP could suggest that the claimant should not be asking for information.
Any thoughts?
It may be that in the real world this has had no effect at all.
Quite.
GPs invoice - I think at £33.50 - for completion of PIP further evidence reports to the DWP so they are usually quite happy to do so.
Individual GPs are perfectly entitled to provide evidence to claimants for PIP claims if they so choose. Certain GPs will and certain GPs won’t. I doubt very much that their decisions are influenced by a clumsily worded paragraph in a guide which nobody reads.
And of course all GPs must provide the full medical records for free at the claimant’s request.
I think the purpose of the quoted paragraph is to differentiate PIP from AA or DLA where a claimant might well ask a GP to complete and sign the supporting statement.