Received TWO callbacks from assessor following one-and-a-half-hour-long WCA assessment

calcotti

Completely agree with that last post by spoonie.

Muttleythefrog

It does sound somewhat sinister to me... either they're trying to establish facts for their assessment and trying to manipulate those.... or they're indeed concerned for your welfare and are ignoring the possibility that in keep calling you unexpectedly they could be causing you harm. Seriously we need to improve the welfare system for disabled and vulnerable people.

phillw

Muttleythefrog said:

It does sound somewhat sinister to me... either they're trying to establish facts for their assessment and trying to manipulate those.... or they're indeed concerned for your welfare and are ignoring the possibility that in keep calling you unexpectedly they could be causing you harm. Seriously we need to improve the welfare system for disabled and vulnerable people.

It sounds to me like they were either trying to embarrass the OP into saying they could do something, which they would ordinarily say that they cannot do. Or by constantly phoning, create some evidence that the OP could cope with the interaction.

Of course, if the OP had refused to answer the call then that would have been evidence of something else.

I agree that the system needs to be changed so that it's less adversarial.

huckster

Never heard of repeated calls after the assessment before. I thought that normally the assessors have back to back assessments all day, so they would not be able to make the additional calls.

The example discussed in this thread is likely to be an assessor who is going through a training process and they have been asked to make the additional calls, as their report produced after the first call missed important information.  

Muttleythefrog

huckster said:

Never heard of repeated calls after the assessment before. I thought that normally the assessors have back to back assessments all day, so they would not be able to make the additional calls.

The example discussed in this thread is likely to be an assessor who is going through a training process and they have been asked to make the additional calls, as their report produced after the first call missed important information.  

Could be.... given that lying is part of the job Re: "Welfare check"

Robbie64

It would be interesting to see if both callbacks are referred to on the PA4 form (the consultation report that the Health Care Professional has to complete). If I was the thread starter I would contact PIP to obtain a copy of the report.

CMB3

The example discussed in this thread is likely to be an assessor who is going through a training process and they have been asked to make the additional calls, as their report produced after the first call missed important information. huckster said:

Never heard of repeated calls after the assessment before. I thought that normally the assessors have back to back assessments all day, so they would not be able to make the additional calls.

The example discussed in this thread is likely to be an assessor who is going through a training process and they have been asked to make the additional calls, as their report produced after the first call missed important information.  

Interestingly, when I Googled the assessor's name, I found her on LinkedIn - she is a physiotherapist who has worked for Maximus for 4 years and prior to that, she worked for Atos for 2 years also as a functional assessor. So, she is not trainee which is what I had originally thought as well. 

CMB3

T.T.D said:

poppy12345 said:

HillStreetBlues said:

My take on it that both the second and third calls should have been recorded as well, as they would form part of the assessment.

The OP recorded the calls their self. You can't use a recording for the MR or Tribunal anyway.

Wrong, you can, MR & tribunals, you absolutely can if it has evidentiary value to use it in your own case, it is totally the discretion of the head of the presiding panel (usually district judge or magistrate), usually it is wise to transcript and chapter the recording for ease of reference for all in the tribunal, but there is no law prohibiting anyone from recording anything, 

case laws behind my post are 

Singh v Singh [2016] EWCH 1432 (Ch)

Mustard v Flower [2019] EWHC 2623 (QB)

You May state Article 8 of Human Rights Act 1998 would cover covert recordings and make it illegal, it doesn’t it come’s with a caveat:

Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (currently incorporated into the Human Rights Act 1998) provides a right to respect for private and family life, home and correspondence. At present, the court, as a public body, is required to uphold these rights. The court must therefore consider Article 8 when determining whether a covert recording is admissible. However, a breach of Article 8 rights does not in and of itself prevent the court admitting covert recordings into evidence, provided it is still possible to conduct a fair trial.
This usually points to a private individual not one employed or contracted by a public body in a domain where being recorded is common place and even offered.

But data rights? Even then…:

Covert recordings made after 25 May 2018 come under the ambit of the Data Protection Act 2018 (“DPA”), which implemented the European Union General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”). The GDPR will apply if a recording contains personal data, i.e. information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person. Recording personal data without the data subject’s consent may amount to a breach of the DPA and the GDPR unless the recording is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the data controller or a third party. One example of a legitimate interest is the prevention of fraud.

The legitimate purpose here is to ensure fairness in the assessment and not to have a he said she said debate over the phone assessment details of who said what to who, to ensure data is being conveyed and administered in its intended form, and not used to compile an illegitimate report for the subject user the DWP to make a decision on a very important matter, everyone knows including tribunal judges, that reports from HCP’s from the companies used by the DWP are historically problematic, therefore the legitimacy for recording “covertly or overtly” is more justifiable, plus as a company you would expect to be recorded for training and monitoring purposes anyway and transparency and should therefore be able to conduct a S.A.R for the telephone recording of it was company recorded by capita.

Could the HCP sue the OP? Yes of-course they can but must have deep pockets though because of a HM Courts and tribunal service accept (or even not accept) the recording for its legitimate interest and evidentiary value, that’s a massive hurdle to get past a High court judge for error in law or Article 8 breach.

This is not legal advice but advice of my own research and personal experiences and knowledge.

Edit: also last time I went through this and checked the policy and handbook, ringing multiple times to check a persons capacity for coping with change, did not include multiple calls as part of assessing their ability to cope with change, It’s not a formal process therefore if used in their report can be pointed out to the case managers for DWP in the MR. When it comes to tribunal if the MR relied upon the report as evidence, this non formal process they conducted can be stricken as evidence and you can guide the tribunal panel to use only parts of the report that do conform to the policy adopted by DWP to assess claimants using the guidance for HCP handbook itself or you can discredit the HCP for their nefarious actions and direct the tribunal to rely upon you own medical reports that support the descriptors you match and to what level and degree but here’s the caveat: the tribunal could adjourn pending another HCP assess you again in compliance of the guidance the DWP set them. 

That what I was doing before UC came into force with ESA.

Thanks for this information - very helpful.