support letters

bro58 wrote:

Derek4 wrote:

Hi Bros58

I can't tell you what the DWP would or wouldn't accept. It's preferable to get an up-to-date letter or an update as you suggested, but if you see your consultant once every 6-12 months and can't get any updated evidence, and I'm aware from these forums how difficult it can be, I would just send the latest supporting letters.

I've fortunately never needed a consultant, but are letters from a consultant so lengthy that they would write a brief update standing by their previous comments but not have the time to write a new letter?

Derek

Thanks Derek,

My comment as to a short update, rather than trying to get an in depth statement, as the one I mentioned (31/03/11), is for obvious reasons, ie the consultant is more likely to provide the update, rather than the in depth statement within any time constraints.

Then of course any letter provided through your NHS clinic has to be typed up and go through the beaurocratic treadmill.

The consultant I mention has treated me for 13 years, and was good enough to actually type the letter up on a typewriter himself, on his private practice headed paper, even though I see him on the NHS, therefore I would not want to have to pester him every 6 months for more or less the same thing. I received it within a week of my request.

On the other hand another of my consultants who is also very good, dictated the support letter that I requested at clinic straight into his dictaphone there and then.

That was 3 weeks ago, rang his NHS secretary today, and she said I would receive it in around a fortnight.

So all good intent from my consultant, and much appreciated by me, but the red tape kicks in, which you cannot avoid.

I am really grateful to both of them as neither charged me.

As an add on, both consultants told me that in principle they agreed with reviewing the long term sick, however they also said that they did not agree with the way it was being done, and was a total waste of money putting people such as me through the ordeal(long term irreversible conditions).

As an update, received the letter of support, as mentioned, a lot sooner than the fortnight his secretary quoted.

I was absolutely amazed at how much my cosultant had picked up from a letter I presented to him which he quickly scanned,gave back to me, and then started talking into his dictaphone.

He has actually stated the mobilising, and the moving from one seat to another next to each other without any help descriptors, and why I cannot do either of the descriptors.

He also quoted the exeptional circumstances with regard to LCWRA, and why I am covered by that.

He went on to conclude that my conditions were chronically progressive with little outlook of improvemet, and summed up by saying that he was conversant with the government programme of reassessing people, but felt that I was exactly the type of patient that ESA was designed for.

He also copied in my G.P., as well as copies to the G.P. and myself of the normal post clinic letter, which was also helpful.

So members should not be afraid to ask for letters of support from their G.P./Consultants, letting them know what is needed. If you don,t ask you won't get, and it saves you relying on ATOS doing it, which they probably won't.

I now have two excellent letters of support from 2 of my three consultants, and intend to gain another from my 3rd consultant, as well as the promise of the same from my G.P.

I certainly don't assume that this written support will guarantee a correct assessment, but it makes it that much more difficult to give me an incorrect one.

cheers

bro58

I feel that it important for anyone claiming benefit to keep into contact with their GP.
A continuing question that arises on every form is 'when did you last see your GP.
We know how we feel and how are condition effects are every day life. If we don't inform our GP when ATOS contact them they will be unable to support our evidence.

bro58 wrote:

He went on to conclude that my conditions were chronically progressive with little outlook of improvemet, and summed up by saying that he was conversant with the government programme of reassessing people, but felt that I was exactly the type of patient that ESA was designed for.

Hi Bro58

What on earth does your consultant mean by 'exactly the type of patient that ESA was designed for'?

ESA was designed to kick claimants off benefit!

If he was suggesting that he has knowledge of the law regarding the WCA I doubt a DM could take that into consideration, as it's the DM's responsibility to apply the law and should only receive medical evidence and opinions from your consultant.

Aside from that I am pleased that you have strong supporting evidence to support your claim.

Regards

Derek

Towser wrote:

I feel that it important for anyone claiming benefit to keep into contact with their GP.
A continuing question that arises on every form is 'when did you last see your GP.
We know how we feel and how are condition effects are every day life. If we don't inform our GP when ATOS contact them they will be unable to support our evidence.

Too true Towser,

I have made sure that my G.P. has put both the letters of support on my files, further I also gave my G.P. a statement of fact, which originaldave suggested, stating all my current conditions and resulting limitations.

I stated that I would update this on a 6 monthly cycle.

The reason that I gave to my G.P. for doing this, was not to do with grannies and eggs, but that I realised that he could only give 10 minutes or so per appointment, therefore could not discuss everything in these time constraints.

Further there could be a scenario where a Locum , or another G.P. in the practice had to provide info to ATOS, and therefore all my conditions/limitations would be there for easy access on 1.5 pages of A4.

I also added, that if he was unaware or disagreed with any of the contents of my statement of fact, we could discuss it at my next appointment.

Well I.ve seen my G.P. since then, he disputed nothing that I wrote, and did not take umbridge at all at me providing this document.

Oh, I checked to make sure it was on my files, he showed it me on screen.

cheers

bro58

Derek4 wrote:

bro58 wrote:

He went on to conclude that my conditions were chronically progressive with little outlook of improvemet, and summed up by saying that he was conversant with the government programme of reassessing people, but felt that I was exactly the type of patient that ESA was designed for.

Hi Bro58

What on earth does your consultant mean by 'exactly the type of patient that ESA was designed for'?

ESA was designed to kick claimants off benefit!

If he was suggesting that he has knowledge of the law regarding the WCA I doubt a DM could take that into consideration, as it's the DM's responsibility to apply the law and should only receive medical evidence and opinions from your consultant.

Aside from that I am pleased that you have strong supporting evidence to support your claim.

Regards

Derek

Look Derek.

You have already "rained on my parade " once today, what are you trying to do now, flood me out !!!! LOL !!!!

No , get you about the D.M. , however he honestly just quickly scanned my request visually, like some super speed reader, then gave it back to me, and yet in his letter he does seem really knowledgable about the WCA process and descriptors/Ex-Circ. He did say he had read up on this.

He is known to be a bit of a boffin, but his patients have only good things to say about him, he is one of the "Good Guys", mind you I think I am lucky that my 3 consultants are very supportive.

I hope you're now going to instigate a whip round for a nice big umbrella for me!!! LOL !!!

cheers

A very wet NONMOD....sorry bro58.

bro58 wrote:

Derek4 wrote:

Hi Bros58

I can't tell you what the DWP would or wouldn't accept. It's preferable to get an up-to-date letter or an update as you suggested, but if you see your consultant once every 6-12 months and can't get any updated evidence, and I'm aware from these forums how difficult it can be, I would just send the latest supporting letters.

I've fortunately never needed a consultant, but are letters from a consultant so lengthy that they would write a brief update standing by their previous comments but not have the time to write a new letter?

Derek

Thanks Derek,

My comment as to a short update, rather than trying to get an in depth statement, as the one I mentioned (31/03/11), is for obvious reasons, ie the consultant is more likely to provide the update, rather than the in depth statement within any time constraints.

Then of course any letter provided through your NHS clinic has to be typed up and go through the beaurocratic treadmill.

The consultant I mention has treated me for 13 years, and was good enough to actually type the letter up on a typewriter himself, on his private practice headed paper, even though I see him on the NHS, therefore I would not want to have to pester him every 6 months for more or less the same thing. I received it within a week of my request.

On the other hand another of my consultants who is also very good, dictated the support letter that I requested at clinic straight into his dictaphone there and then.

That was 3 weeks ago, rang his NHS secretary today, and she said I would receive it in around a fortnight.

So all good intent from my consultant, and much appreciated by me, but the red tape kicks in, which you cannot avoid.

I am really grateful to both of them as neither charged me.

As an add on, both consultants told me that in principle they agreed with reviewing the long term sick, however they also said that they did not agree with the way it was being done, and was a total waste of money putting people such as me through the ordeal(long term irreversible conditions).

If you are not being transferred from IB to ESA as yet, depending on when you eventually undergo the WCA which in theory could be as late as 2014, the ESA decision maker may very well contend that the medical evidence is out of date, and that the ADA medical assessment report is contemporary evidence.

The fact that it lists chronic conditions which may never improve may be dismissed by the decision maker if for example, as ridiculous as it may seem, the ADA says that a return to work could be considered in twelve months. I'm not saying it will happen, but the DWP are obviously under pressure come what may to drastically reduce the number of claimants who are entitled to ESA, despite the fact they are obliged to take into account all the documentary evidence, including reports from a claimant's healthcare professionals.

Worryingly, I can distinctly remember James Purnell when he was Secretary of State at the DWP, saying that ESA was a temporary benefit and even the most severely disabled claimants would be expected to work. That is probably why an unending stream of ESA50s are being issued to claimants, as has already been demonstrated in this forum.