Would this have made you angry or upset or even complain ?

AsknAnswer2

I haven't looked at the statistics so I can't offer an opinion either way on whether the handbook is up to date or not. However the DLA staff must take into account what the handbook states, they have to work with the official materials they are provided with and are often not permitted to "go outside the box". I'm not saying it is right - far from it, I'm saying that it's the way it is.

What I personally disagree with is that they can take a professional's report which relates to an appointment several months previously which doesn't reflect current condition whatsoever and use it to discredit a claim but a claimant cannot use a retrospective report relating to the condition at the date of claim written by a professional. That is ridiculous.

Example: consultant sees client for the first and only time on 01/01/09 and refers client to physical therapy, and never sees client again. Cient's condition worsens and care needs result. Claim is submitted for DLA on 01/10/2009 and DLA write to the consultant for a report which is duly sent, and it is stated in black and white the date that the consultant last saw the claimant, which was 10 months ago. On 01/11/2009 DLA refuse the claim on the basis that the care needs arising from the disability are not severe enough according to the consultant report.

Physical therapist assessed client over a period of time beginning from 03/10/2009 and writes a full report on the varying condition and arising needs on 21/11/2009, which is related to the full period of assessment and clearly disagrees with the consultant's report, which of course it would as the condition has worsened in that 10 + months. Claimant asks for a reconsideration, submitting the physical therapist's report. The claim is still refused. Basis? Yes the physical therapists report shows some care need, but we can't take a retrospective report into consideration.

so in essence, the therapists report which is based upon her continuous assessment of the client from a period where DLA was claimed but not decided cannot be taken into account, but a consulant's report which related to a period 10 months prior to the claim is used to effectively turn the claim down, leaving the client with two options: re-apply or appeal.

That is absolutely crazy. I could understand if in the example, the therapists report related to a time period in whole after the decision of the DLA claim, but not when it was based on a time commencing during the claim awaiting a decision.

loveangel88

ive had the same with phone calls regarding income support & DLA...even though they know im deaf and that my mum is my appointed person to deal with phone calls to do with benefits.....they still ask....can you put your daughter on so i can ask her if you can talk on her behalf :S even though they have letters on file giving permission for my mum to talk....oh dear...lol

sox8369

I agree that the comment made could have been worded a bit better - but i wouldnt waste your engergy complaining - however i think the real issue here is that the DM's seem to rely very heavily on the medical guidebook - that in some case, appears to be inaccurate and could be misleading.

But unfortuantly we are all in the same boat here as far as the DM's source of medical guidance. Hence the need to have as much back up of information as possible (which it appears you did have).

My condition - and my two disabled daughters conditions - do not even appear in the book ! So we have a battle on our hands from the outset.

But i wish you well - and you obviously are a great mum just looking out for her child - and this is admirable - keep smiling x

caela_2

Dude I wouldn't complain- yes if it's annoying you might have stated this on the phone to the guy in the first place and said why if offended you, but seriously, I wouldn't make your life more difficult or stressful over something so small. I know in your eyes it's someone having a go about disabilities and being tactless, but I really don't think they were that rude. Yes, it's a bit callous and maybe offensive, if I had a son and someone suggested usually in their state they would be in a care home I'd probably ask what he was implying, but he's just being honest about why he needs to check up on it. It's not directly insulting. I think people with disabilities as with anything can be over protective, just looking in case someone slips up and says something offensive, but to be honest, no-one can say the right thing all the time. If you want it to be more accepted, just chill out and explain calmly why you think something's offensive, but don't let it annoy you so much. Although, having said that, these things really get to me so I'm no good example lol! Had a tutor at uni compare my sleep disorder to her 'staying up all night marking and still coming in the next day'... er not quite, but whatever. The sad thing was, she was a psychology tutor. You hope somewhere between getting her degree and teaching the subject for years she might have come across sleep disorders... Oh well. We've just gotta rise above it even if it's really annoying!

Yuki60

Telling the OP to 'stop moaning on a forum' made me laugh. Are you for real? Everyone moans on this forum. Almost every post in the disability forums is a moan or complaint about something. We come here to complain about our lot and the way DLA treats us etc. The OP asked a simple question and yet again on this forum it has been taken over and turned into something else. Answer the question or don't but don't tell somebody not to moan here, when that's what 99% of others do.

To the original poster, If you took offence at what the moron at the DWP call centre said hun, then it was offensive. Doesn't matter whether other people say it wasn't, it's your son and you have ever right to be upset. These aren't medically trained people and from my experience most wouldn't be fit to work in Burger King. Get a complaint in hun because maybe it'll stop them from being such morons next time!