SDA-ESA: Successful Outcome

MariW wrote: It’s now 57 calendar days since I submitted a clearly written Subject Access Request to my DWP Benefits Office. It was received next day. My SAR followed my being placed in the Support Group of ESA for the legal maximum of 3 years. I did not receive the documents requested within the statutory 40 calendar days from receipt.

On day 45, when I still hadn’t received my documents, I wrote a polite letter reminding the DWP of its legal obligation to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998. I included complies of the SAR, proof of posting, and proof of delivery. I suggested 14 calendar days for them to expedite my SAR and briefly made mention of my contacting the ICO in the event of ongoing non-compliance with a legal obligation. The DWP received this 10 calendar days ago. There’s still hope, I suppose, but it’s looking as though I shall have to contact the ICO after the Christmas break. I have two concerns:

1. Retention of data to which I am legally entitled.
2. Possible loss of sensitive data.

Hence, two questions:

1. How effective is the ICO in dealing with the DWP?
2. Is there another way forward? The DWP are in breach of the DPA 1998. Would I be entitled to legal aid to take action against them?

Mari W

Hi MW,

As the DWP's failure to provide you with the personal information that you have requested would be a flagrant breech of DPA 1998, and The ICO is the National Governing Body covering this, I would be really surprised if The DWP continued with their failure to comply once The ICO were involved.


The ICO does have the power to issue "Notices" to an offending body/organisation, then the offending body/organisation can appeal this "Notice" to : The Information Tribunal if necessary.

See also : Information rights/General Regulatory Chamber.

I really cannot see this getting that far.

bro58

Gordon and Bro58,

Thank you for your input.

I don’t want to contact the DWP by phone about this issue. Both my carer and I had a difficult time in the excessively long spell between the Atos recommendation and the DM’s conclusion. The first-liners seldom have a clue and call-backs result in non-committal answers. Moreover, a phone call could result in confusing a situation that must be kept as clear-cut as possible if I’m to pursue it to the bitter end. I’ll have given the DWP every opportunity to comply with the law by the time I contact the ICO.

I’m probably entitled to legal aid but I’d be prepared to query the cost of a solicitor’s letter if the ICO fails to conclude the matter satisfactorily. I trust they will live up to their reputation!

Thanks again,

Mari

After a 61-day wait, I have received a response to the Subject Access Request submitted after I was placed in the ESA Support Group for three years.

The information is sketchy despite everything I requested being included. The HCP appears to have made her recommendation on the mobilisation question alone. Comments include reference to both upper and lower limb disability. It was fairly obvious I met the Schedule 3 descriptor. There are no remarks about other major functional limitations such as manual skills. Somehow I don’t think my ESA 50 was read beyond the mobilisation question.

So pleased I don’t have chase this up further.

Thanks to Bro58 and Gordon for their advice.

Mari

MariW wrote: After a 61-day wait, I have received a response to the Subject Access Request submitted after I was placed in the ESA Support Group for three years.

The information is sketchy despite everything I requested being included. The HCP appears to have made her recommendation on the mobilisation question alone. Comments include reference to both upper and lower limb disability. It was fairly obvious I met the Schedule 3 descriptor. There are no remarks about other major functional limitations such as manual skills. Somehow I don’t think my ESA 50 was read beyond the mobilisation question.

So pleased I don’t have chase this up further.

Thanks to Bro58 and Gordon for their advice.

Mari

I am glad that you have finally received the information requested !!

Yes, unfortunately, once it has been decided that you have fulfilled at least one of :

The SG (LCWRA)Schedule 3 Descriptors , which in your case was Activity/Descriptor 1., they tend to stop assessing.

This does not mean that you did not qualify on any of the other descriptors, and should therefore give details of all your limitations when the time comes for your reassessment.

At least you now know how and why you qualified which should be of help in the future.

Wishing you all the best for Xmas & New Year !!!

bro58