Checking what HCP is writing during the WCA (& PIP) assessment

Comrades,

Apologies if this is the wrong place to post this - relates to ATOS assessments (PIP/ESA/UC).

A client asked me whether he could ask to see the HCPs notes/computer screen during his WCA and PIP assessment.  As in, he wants to make sure that the HCP has accurately recorded what his condition is and how it affects him at the time of his assessment.

Thoughts?

In solidarity,

EKS

You can ask for a copy of the assessor’s report once a decision has been made.

I believe they will refuse: but.. I don’t see why you shouldn’t ask to see them and note down any refusal as it’s arguably relevant to their credibility.

He can also ask to have the assessment recorded, he can ask to record it himself, or he can secretly do so.

Having someone looking over his/her shoulder might significantly affect what the HCP writes, so I doubt any of them would allow it, but at least some I’ve met would agree to read out part of what they’re writing.

Within the two local PIP assessment centres all of the chairs surrounding the assessor are placed so as to not allow anyone other than the assessor to see the screen. The view by claimants is the rear of the screen.
When this has been challenged in the past the stock answer has always been that it is the only way that the room can be configured.
However I do have some sympathy for the assessor. Who would want a claimant breathing down the neck of the assessor watching everything that they are typing. That could possibly be a dangerous situation to be in.

I have this vague memory - I may be wrong! - that when PIP was first brought in there were these lovely pictorial representations of an assessment - with the assessor sat next to the claimant at the computer rather than the other side of the desk. And a big deal was made about how it was much more inclusive.

Or was it a different assessment at a different time??

The guidance is just that - https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/personal-independence-payment-assessment-guide-for-assessment-providers/pip-assessment-guide-part-1-the-assessment-process#face-to-face-consultation - but 1.6 onwards makes some unequivocal statements. For example, 1.6.48 clearly states that anyone asking for a copy at that point should be advised that a HCP is not authorised to do so. One para earlier it’s equally clear that no opinion as to entitlement should be given and later on there is reference to the thorny area of the detection of undiagnosed conditions. I think therefore a number of issues fall out of this:

1 - It’s unlikely that a HCP will wrongly record a medical condition. I’m unaware of any claimant having that specific issue. The issue is usually the accurate description of everything which falls out of that. Were there to be some dispute on the day it’s unlikely to end well for a claimant as the HCP line is usually to deem them “unco-operative”, violent or aggressive. Some will even go as far as to inventively translate anything which brings things to a halt as “failure to attend”. If a HCP were to remarkably reinvent a medical condition frankly I wouldn’t be worrying about it provided that a written diagnosis exists elsewhere as it’s instantly the basis for a successful complaint. Ultimately though it doesn’t matter as PIP nor ESA require a diagnosis as such. I would focus my claimant’s energies elsewhere.

2 - I would never prevent a claimant or potential claimant sight of my screen at an appointment. They often find it intriguing anyway as I use an iPadPro and Apple Pencil (what joy). I’ve nothing to hide but equally my notes are for my purposes not theirs. I just think it’s good interview technique that people are clear what you’re doing and why. However, if someone was looking directly at my screen I become incapable of typing without error (and my sight means it’s not great at the best of times). There is also a danger of slowing down and thinking too hard when trying to avoid a claimant seeing a description of what they’ve just said with which they may not agree. That said, I find it grossly offensive; downright rude and simply poor interview technique in terms of putting someone at ease if you face them with your head peeping out above a laptop lid. Find an angle for goodness sake.

3 - I don’t see how you smoothly segue into preventing the claimant from seeing HCP recommendations to a case manager having seen much of what precedes that. It causes the very tensions you were presumably trying to prevent in the first place. Ditto if a HCP is forming a conclusion that a missed diagnosis has occurred or a misdiagnosis. Having personally been on the end of a life changing diagnosis by accident I can vouch that it’s not an experience to be recommended let alone invited.

4 - the claimant needs to be disabused of the notion that accuracy resides in how they are on the day of the assessment. The guidance guards explicitly against snapshots (albeit that it’s the most common error). I understand the impulse to record, especially in those whose MH may lead them forever in that direction, but ultimately that also doesn’t solve what a claimant is trying to solve. What is really happening is a claimant trying to manage risk down to zero and make the outcome a foregone conclusion. That’s simply not how life works.

5 - requesting a report is more than enough but even then I make clear to claimants that it absolutely will not be the focus of any MR or appeal. Claimants want to prove they didn’t say things (tape to their horror often shows that they most certainly did) or that the HCP lied (which of course can almost never be demonstrated legally) but I want to dismiss the credibility of the HCP report quickly with a couple of major and obvious errors and then move on to the evidence which actually matters.

It’s well worth reminding claimants that the purpose of a face to face assessment with a HCP is not to record their “story” or what they say “verbatim”. It’s a focused functional assessment within a limited time-scale.

I always aim to give client’s as much insight into what I do as possible, including seeing my screen at any point when I’m not typing passwords or looking up escalation numbers.
But at the same time I don’t generally type up my notes during the interview. I suppose there isn’t anything stopping the HCP from making further notes after the interview, and anything the claimant saw previously could thus be altered in any event.

There’s been a few threads on Rightsnet where there has been evidence in some form of a HCP lying, but that fact alone doesn’t necessarily add much value other than a further complaint about a system that doesn’t respond to complaints. It certainly isn’t useful in evidencing the real situation for the claimant.

I never do form filling for disability benefits in front of clients. I prefer to take notes; gather anecdotal incidents and then put it all together back in the office. I fully appreciate this is not a privilege extended to all my colleagues owing to the pressures of our various roles but, in doing that, I’m fine with people seeing what I do. I can’t stand the pretence there’s some mystique to it.

I can’t imagine HCPs have the privilege of sufficient time post interview to do similar and indeed it must inevitably be one of the things which influences the standard of recommendations in a negative way. It’s hard to gauge though. On the one hand the average time my claimants get seen for seems to be somewhere between 40 minutes to an hour. On the other hand one of my friends was in there for over 2 hours (not that it made any discernible difference to the quality of the report or the decision) so one might reasonably conclude maybe there is sufficient slack built in but some people choose to not use it.