- Posts: 2022
Doctors support
- Crazydiamond
- Offline
Nothing on this board constitutes legal advice - always consult a professional about specific problems
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- billkruse
- Offline
- Posts: 280
BB
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- cdcdi1911
- Offline
- Posts: 2522
Is this it?sorry it might have been they work for you
www.theyworkforyou.com/whall/?gid=2011-05-10b.403.0
I haven't had time to read the full article but the quote below suggests to me that, as you have said, he's decided that medical reports should not have been rubber-stamped.
That's not really a change as it has never been lawful to rubber-stamp medical reports. Decision makers have always been required to consider all the evidence in front of them, so the only change is that they intend to do their job properly!
We have changed that totally and have created a process through which the decision makers are told not only that it is their decision, but that they have to look at other evidence—for example, the hon. Lady referred to GPs’ evidence. Our decision makers are expected to look at other medical evidence submitted by the individual concerned and at the GP’s and consultant’s comments to form a rounded view. Indeed, if they believe that they do not have enough evidence, they have the freedom to go back and ask for more. That is a big change. We have effectively downgraded the role of the work capability assessment in the process. It is an important part of the decision, but it is no longer the only part of the decision. That will make a big difference.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- originaldave
Dont think ordinary claimants can subscribe. Its for advice staff only
there is a charge of £83 for someone who is just a claiment to join its not made that clear
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- lisa234
Thought i'd dreamt it.
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.