Well, well, well.

Sorry to keep going on but this may help others as well as myself.

 

 

As above I stated that I was intrigued because the Doctor that sat on my Tribunal is down on the General Medical Councils List of General Medical Practitioners as

Not Registered - Having Relinquished Registration

 

 

So I have been doing some research and came across some documents on The General Medical Councils website

http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/information_for_doctors/privileges.asp

and there are some very interesting statements such as :

 

1. Registration with the General Medical Council confers many “privileges” on doctors (as well as a number of duties). Indeed, certain activities may only lawfully be undertaken by medical practitioners that have been duly registered, i.e. Registered Medical Practitioners.

 

 

1. The most important privilege conferred upon a Registered Medical Practitioner is that, unlike unregistered doctors, he or she may perform any duties as a physician, surgeon or other medical officer:

In any other public establishment, body or institution

 

3. Appointments

 

1. Registered Medical Practitioners have important skills and knowledge and therefore there are several appointments that are exclusively reserved to practitioners registered with the General Medical Council and appointments for which registered medical practitioners are eligible, for example:

 

• Employment medical advisors must be Registered Medical

Practitioners.

 

• Special Visitors must be Registered Medical Practitioners; Special Visitors are individuals who assist the court by providing independent advice on matters relating to an individual lacking capacity.

 

• Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible to be appointed as members of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tribunals that determine, amongst other things, appeals against a refusal by the Secretary of State to grant social security benefit).

 

 

2. Further examples of appointments that are either exclusively available to Registered Medical Practitioners and appointments for which Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible, can be found in Schedule 3: Appointments.

 

 

Employment Advisory Service

 

 

Only fully Registered Medical Practitioners are qualified to be appointed as employment medical advisors.

 

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (Section 56)

 

I have attached the documents if anyone is interested and I'll probably get some legal advice on this. Is it one month that I would have to appeal to an Upper Tribunal?

 

Have they all been pulling the wool well and truly over all our eyes for years? How many other retired unregistered Doctors sit on Tribunals?!

 

Ignore Link Toolbar

Trust me, you would be better adviser than your current advisors. Well done!

How to you research about particular doctor whether they are on the General Medical Councils List ?

OK, you need to get back in touch with the court (FTT) and request a copy of the 'record of proceedings'. This will be an exact copy of what the tribunal judges wrote at your hearing.

 

It's been a while since mine, and it took three years of legal arguing to be placed in the SG of ESA, and things have moved on since then.

 

There is no harm in sending the DWP a SAR to get everything they hold on record for you, this will often come in two, if not three separate bundles, and will give you all they have. They have 40 days in which to comply.

 

Whilst that is running, you should get in touch with the FTT to obtain a copy of the proceedings, they will know that you will be appealing further, but you need to look for an error in law, so the way in which they applied the descriptors and/or did or didn't ask you for further evidence in the FTT.

 

To be clear, because you don't agree with their decision does not mean you have the automatic right to appeal to the UTT, there needs to be an error in law.

 

Something as simple as for instance in my case, they were told (FTT) to hold an 'oral' hearing, and it clearly stated on my 'Record of proceedings' that it was indeed an 'oral' hearing, I had an advocate go with me, who confirmed that not only did the hearing take less than 4 minutes, they never once asked me anything, therefore, I was able to show that they had erred in law by failing to carry out an oral hearing.

 

Then things just went from bad to worse for the DWP, even ignoring the judges directions to the extent that he ordered them to place me in the SG of ESA.

I can't see how a SAR would suppose to help winning Upper Tribunal.

The information there are usually basic, short and there is no much reasoning which would help to defend the case.

I can't see how a SAR would suppose to help winning Upper Tribunal.

The information there are usually basic, short and there is no much reasoning which would help to defend the case.

I've been through it, trust me it's an eye opener and provided me with the ammo I needed.

Max did they claim to be a Dr?

I've been through it, trust me it's an eye opener and provided me with the ammo I needed.

 

Max did they claim to be a Dr?

For example?

Max1968

You must request a Statement of Reasons, you cannot pursue and appeal to the UTT without the SofR, the Record of Proceedings is insufficient for this.

Thanks all for the info and kind comments as per usual.

I have looked into this because I felt that I was pushed into the corner a bit at the Tribunal and always felt that both the Judge and Doctor were against me from the start. That's the problem with a fluctuating condition like Vertigo. I wasn't too bad that day so to a person just looking at you they probably think you are perfectly ok. What they can't see is that they move when I look at them and as I have said before I see the world like through a hand held camera, and that's on a good day!! Unfortunately I didn't have a full blown attack whilst I was there, although again unless I am walking about at the time someone else wouldn't notice because it's not a noticeable condition. That's the problem.

Anyway as I say I just didn't think that they were coming across as impartial and I did the worst possible thing that I could do and that is that I veered off the script. The best piece of advice I can give someone is that if you have set your stall out prior to the Tribunal with a written statement that you are happy with then don't get involved in long dialogue at the Tribunal. I had sent off an 11 page statement where I had literally picked through every DWP inconsistency, every bit of info from my GP, consultants, the whole lot and was extremely happy with it. The error I made was at the Tribunal I got involved in dialogue and started to try and explain things and once you do that you can veer away from what is important from your side and what is not. I therefore came across as cool, calm and collected, three things that will definitely get you diagnosed as fit for work!! I should have made yes/no answers and let them know that anything they wanted to know was in the statement.....

Anyway Re The Doctor. The first thing that I noticed was when he asked me if I had any manoeuvres done by a consultant with regard to my vertigo. I knew he was talking about Epley and Semont manoeuvres for example which are used to treat benign paroxysmal positional vertigo (BPPV). However I don't have BBPV, I have probable Basilar Migraine and those manoeuvres don't effect vertigo due to basilar migraine. I had already written that in my report anyway so firstly I thought it strange that a doctor wouldn't know that and secondly he probably hadn't read my report. So I did a bit of research on what sort of Doctor he was, really just trying to find out what he specialises in because if he say was a midwife I could probably try and argue that how would a midwife sit on a tribunal for someone with vertigo!! I found him quite quickly on the internet because his name is quite unusual and found that he was a retired GP. So I did a bit more research and I checked the General Medical Council List of Registered Medical Practitioners which you can find here http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/medical_register.asp I found that he came off the register around 5 years ago so whilst he is qualified he is no longer registered.

I then looked at this page http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/information_for_doctors/privileges.asp which is where they state that Doctors who are registered without a licence to practise cannot exercise these privileges. And as per the examples I showed on post 239 it looks like that it's possible that an unregistered doctor cannot sit on a tribunal.

I emailed the General Medical Council to enquire if a Doctor needs to be registered with the General Medical Council to work for an Independent Tribunal Board as a Doctor (obviously I didn't name him, or me for that matter) and received this reply.

"Thank you for your email asking if a doctor needs to hold registration with a licence to practise to work for an independent tribunal board.

The GMC do not advise a doctor when they need to hold registration with a licence to practise. We ask doctors to speak to their employers or the organisation they are providing their service for to see if they need to hold registration and a licence for the work they are doing.

We also ask doctors to read our privileges and duties of doctors guidance for information on when a doctor needs to hold a licence to practise.

If you would like to discuss this further, please reply to my email or call me on the number below."

I have emailed back quoting some of the privileges and asking for further clarification.

Now it may be that the Independent Tribunal Board doesn't require an "advisor" to be registered but take a look at post 239 and see how you read it. I mean under Appointments it says :

1. Registered Medical Practitioners have important skills and knowledge and therefore there are several appointments that are exclusively reserved to practitioners registered with the General Medical Council and appointments for which registered medical practitioners are eligible, for example:

• Employment medical advisors must be Registered Medical

Practitioners.

• Special Visitors must be Registered Medical Practitioners; Special Visitors are individuals who assist the court by providing independent advice on matters relating to an individual lacking capacity.

• Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible to be appointed as members of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tribunals that determine, amongst other things, appeals against a refusal by the Secretary of State to grant social security benefit).

I mean surely that says it all. The closest I have found on any tribunal service site is that there can be a Doctor on the tribunal. Now as I have said before I am a qualified Football Coach but not registered these days with the FA. If I wanted to coach again then I would have to re register.

So for me it's just a case that the Tribunal is taking advice from someone who by the looks of it quite possibly shouldn't even be there from the General Medical Councils Rules and Regulations.

Capt Scarlet. Done and sent tonight, thank you...

I think you will find that a large number of tribunal medical panel members employed by HMCTS are retired who no longer are licenced some may have been out of the job for 20yrs or longer , So them being licenced and practising can't be a requirement, The Retired unlicenced DR at my last esa appeal had been out of the job since 1995 and had specialised in orthopaedics & trauma according to the GMC site

I think you will find that a large number of tribunal medical panel members employed by HMCTS are retired who no longer are licenced some may have been out of the job for 20yrs or longer , So them being licenced and practising can't be a requirement, The Retired unlicenced DR at my last esa appeal had been out of the job since 1995 and had specialised in orthopaedics & trauma according to the GMC site

There is a difference between having a licence and being registered. Think about yourself with a driving licence. You pass the tests and gain your licence but if your licence expires you are still qualified to drive but unable to do so until you re register your licence with the DVLA.

I don't doubt that there are probably hundreds of retired Doctors possibly unregistered working for the Tribunals Service. My point is that if they are it looks like they are doing so unlawfully regarding the privileges act of the GMC.

There is a difference between having a licence and being registered. Think about yourself with a driving licence. You pass the tests and gain your licence but if your licence expires you are still qualified to drive but unable to do so until you re register your licence with the DVLA.

 

 

I don't doubt that there are probably hundreds of retired Doctors possibly unregistered working for the Tribunals Service. My point is that if they are it looks like they are doing so unlawfully regarding the privileges act of the GMC.

Your argument seems to be logical but the DWP may have internal policies which would allow retired doctors to be working for the Tribunals Service. Why don't you ask the DWP directly about the ground of their practice?

Your argument seems to be logical but the DWP may have internal policies which would allow retired doctors to be working for the Tribunals Service. Why don't you ask the DWP directly about the ground of their practice?

The Dr on the tribunal has nothing to do with the DWP as they will be employed by the HM Tribunal Service because of course these tribunals are meant to be independent.

Well I signed on for JSA today and went through all that rigmarole about searching for work and allowing them access to your Universal Job Match account. To be fair she wasn't too bad for a JC representative and seemed to accept the limitations I am under. She even said even if I don't get offered anything as long as I can prove I am looking I'll get a quiet life on JSA and she seemed sympathetic that there is no line between JSA and ESA. Suspect her sympathy may dwindle over the next weeks and months I suspect.

By the way she kept me on Income based JSA rather than contributions based which I now qualify for. Is there a difference between the two? and also I read somewhere that if you have been unable to work for more than a year you may be entitled to disability premium. She said I didn't qualify as you have to be on PIP or something similar?

Contribution-based JSA

You may get contribution-based JSA if you’ve paid enough Class 1 National Insurance contributions in the 2 tax years before the current benefit year.

National Insurance Credits can count for part of this, if you get them.

A benefit year starts on the first Sunday in January and ends a year later.

You make a claim on 20 February 2016. This falls in the 2016 benefit year. This means your entitlement will be based on your National Insurance record for the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 tax years.

You can get contribution-based JSA even if your partner works or you have savings.

Class 1 - these count towards your State Pension, bereavement benefits and some other benefits, eg Jobseeker’s Allowance

Income-based JSA

You may get income-based JSA if all of the following apply:

• you work less than 16 hours per week on average
  
• your partner (if you have one) works less than 24 hours per week on average
  
• you have £16,000 or less in savings
  

https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance/overview

Which jobtitle you signed?

Then Check Dr with Tribunal Services.

There is a difference between having a licence and being registered. Think about yourself with a driving licence. You pass the tests and gain your licence but if your licence expires you are still qualified to drive but unable to do so until you re register your licence with the DVLA.

 

 

I don't doubt that there are probably hundreds of retired Doctors possibly unregistered working for the Tribunals Service. My point is that if they are it looks like they are doing so unlawfully regarding the privileges act of the GMC.

Just re checked the GMC site and the status is this: Registered without a licence to practice and also found this info in a pdf

http://www.gmc-uk.org/Patient_leaflet__Low_res___English_Version__28153330.pdf

It would appear that they only require a licence if they want to practice, And according to the GMC info they can only revoke a DR's licence if they step out of line

So all those now retired DR's (some senile) who are sitting at appeal hearings can't be touched by the GMC that would get confusing if the DR was also licensed , because they will be sitting in at appeals as a second job, but not practising ,but using there knowledge /understanding of clinical terminology ect , they don't give advise or diagnose issues , so ??? i don't see what the problem is, apart from them being out of touch with medical advances and changes within the NHS

I think perhaps a more concerning thing is that some DR's who have worked for Atos /Maximus carrying out the WCA are also sitting on panels at appeal hearings

Well it's funny you say that Tommy because I did check out the Health Rep at my WCA. He is Registered with a licence to practise but he is not on the Specialist Register or the GP Register and his primary qualification was Doctor - Medic 1986 Cluj.

Re the rest of what you say ok it might not bother some if the Doctor on their Tribunal isn't reregistered. But as I said it states on the GMC Website under privileges.

Registered Medical Practitioners have important skills and knowledge and therefore there are several appointments that are exclusively reserved to practitioners registered with the General Medical Council and appointments for which registered medical practitioners are eligible, for example:

Employment medical advisors must be Registered Medical

Practitioners.

Special Visitors must be Registered Medical Practitioners; Special Visitors are individuals who assist the court by providing independent advice on matters relating to an individual lacking capacity.

Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible to be appointed as members of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tribunals that determine, amongst other things, appeals against a refusal by the Secretary of State to grant social security benefit).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Further examples of appointments that are either exclusively available to Registered Medical Practitioners and appointments for which Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible, can be found in Schedule 3: Appointments.

Employment Advisory Service

Only fully Registered Medical Practitioners are qualified to be appointed as employment medical advisors.

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (Section 56)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All I am saying is that if as claimants we are meant to be honest and do everything by the book then why should the same apply for bodies such as the HM Tribunal Service? That Doctor has advised the Judge about my case and he is not registered so he shouldn't be there.

Well it's funny you say that Tommy because I did check out the Health Rep at my WCA. He is Registered with a licence to practise but he is not on the Specialist Register or the GP Register and his primary qualification was Doctor - Medic 1986 Cluj.

 

Re the rest of what you say ok it might not bother some if the Doctor on their Tribunal isn't reregistered. But as I said it states on the GMC Website under privileges.

 

Registered Medical Practitioners have important skills and knowledge and therefore there are several appointments that are exclusively reserved to practitioners registered with the General Medical Council and appointments for which registered medical practitioners are eligible, for example:

 

Employment medical advisors must be Registered Medical

Practitioners.

 

Special Visitors must be Registered Medical Practitioners; Special Visitors are individuals who assist the court by providing independent advice on matters relating to an individual lacking capacity.

 

Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible to be appointed as members of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tribunals that determine, amongst other things, appeals against a refusal by the Secretary of State to grant social security benefit).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Further examples of appointments that are either exclusively available to Registered Medical Practitioners and appointments for which Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible, can be found in Schedule 3: Appointments.

 

Employment Advisory Service

 

Only fully Registered Medical Practitioners are qualified to be appointed as employment medical advisors.

 

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (Section 56)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

All I am saying is that if as claimants we are meant to be honest and do everything by the book then why should the same apply for bodies such as the HM Tribunal Service? That Doctor has advised the Judge about my case and he is not registered so he shouldn't be there.

Yes agreed, but all i said was that because they aren't licensed to practice wouldn't make any difference ,as them being registered makes it easy to establish that they are a qualified DR ., but are there any other organisations that they can register with ? so they can be checked up on

http://lawvolumes.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a1-6179.pdf

Yes agreed, but all i said was that because they aren't licensed to practice wouldn't make any difference ,as them being registered makes it easy to establish that they are a qualified DR ., but are there any other organisations that they can register with ? so they can be checked up on

 

http://lawvolumes.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a1-6179.pdf

Fascinating Document Tommy. Where did you find that? That seems to suggest that the medical practitioner on a Tribunal has to be registered which is what I said. BTW I understand what you are saying about whether it matters or not but obviously I failed my Tribunal therefore I obviously did not convince those present to overturn the DWP decision. My only opportunity then is to appeal to an Upper Tribunal and the only way to do that is to prove an error of law. If it is therefore law that the medical practitioner on a Tribunal has to be registered and the Doctor on mine wasn't then that's probably the only way that I can appeal, hence why I want to get my facts straight before I even consider it.

I did in fact receive the below this evening from the General Medical Council responding to my email. It seems that all these big organisations just seem to pas the buck!!

"Thank you for your email about whether a doctor would need registration to undertake work for an independent tribunal board.

There are several hundred privileges that are restricted by law to licensed doctors, and they are set out in over 400 pieces of legislation in addition to the Medical Act. Those privileges include prescribing, signing death or cremation certificates, and holding certain medical posts (such as working as a doctor in the NHS). If their work involves any of these activities, or they hold any of these posts, they must hold a licence to practise.

The law in this area is highly complex and often changes, so we may not always be able to tell a doctor definitively whether they need to hold a licence or not.

Section 47 of the Medical Act does outline a number of appointments that are not to be held except by fully registered practitioners who hold licences to practise, though this list is not exhaustive. It is a doctor's responsibility to ensure that they are complying with any legal requirements related to their work. If a doctor isn't not sure whether they need to hold a licence for the work they do, they should contact the organisation or individual to whom they provide services. If necessary, they can also seek independent legal advice.

For an overview of the current legal situation you may wish to read the following:

• The privileges and duties of licensed medical practitioners - Summary
  
• Schedule 1 - Medical practice
  
• Schedule 2 - Writing medical certificates
  
• Schedule 3 - Appointments
  
• Schedule 4 - Assessing the suitability of individuals to perform certain activities
  
• Schedule 5 - Assisting public bodies and other persons
  
• Schedule 6 - Mental health
  
• Schedule 7 - Matters of discipline
  

Please note that this is only an overview and we cannot offer definitive advice on the law.

Other organisations in the medical sector may be in a better position to advise you on the specific legal requirements relating to the work they do. Organisations that may be relevant to a doctor's role, or may be able to advise you further, could include:

• The Care Quality Commission
  
• The General Pharmaceutical Council
  
• The Ministry of Justice
  
• The UK Royal Colleges
  
• The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (BAAPS)
  

While the above list is not exhaustive, I hope it indicates how the medical profession is not wholly overseen by us and why we cannot always confirm whether a licence is required or not.

It is also important to note that a doctor may be contractually required by their employer, or the organisation to which they provide services, to hold a licence to practise. This may be the case even where there is no legal requirement to do so. This would be a contractual agreement and should be discussed directly with that organisation, to ensure they are meeting their contractual requirements.

You may also wish to contact your medical defence organisation for further advice on what a doctor can undertake without a licence to practise.

If you would like to discuss this further, please reply to my email or call me on the number below."

Contribution

 

 

I signed for income based in the end because she said that I was on that before so it just continues that way,. I didn't argue.

Yes agreed, but all i said was that because they aren't licensed to practice wouldn't make any difference ,as them being registered makes it easy to establish that they are a qualified DR ., but are there any other organisations that they can register with ? so they can be checked up on

 

http://lawvolumes.dwp.gov.uk/docs/a1

 

 

Fascinating Document Tommy. Where did you find that? That seems to suggest that the medical practitioner on a Tribunal has to be registered which is what I said. BTW I understand what you are saying about whether it matters or not but obviously, I failed my Tribunal therefore I obviously did not convince those present to overturn the DWP decision. My only opportunity then is to appeal to an Upper Tribunal and the only way to do that is to prove an error of law. If it is therefore law that the medical practitioner on a Tribunal has to be registered and the Doctor on mine wasn't then that's probably the only way that I can appeal, hence why I want to get my facts straight before I even consider it.

 

I did in fact receive the below this evening from the General Medical Council responding to my email. It seems that all these big organisations just seem to pas the buck!!

 

"Thank you for your email about whether a doctor would need registration to undertake work for an independent tribunal board.

 

There are several hundred privileges that are restricted by law to licensed doctors, and they are set out in over 400 pieces of legislation in addition to the Medical Act. Those privileges include prescribing, signing death or cremation certificates, and holding certain medical posts (such as working as a doctor in the NHS). If their work involves any of these activities, or they hold any of these posts, they must hold a licence to practise.

 

The law in this area is highly complex and often changes, so we may not always be able to tell a doctor definitively whether they need to hold a licence or not.

 

Section 47 of the Medical Act does outline a number of appointments that are not to be held except by fully registered practitioners who hold licences to practise, though this list is not exhaustive. It is a doctor's responsibility to ensure that they are complying with any legal requirements related to their work. If a doctor isn't not sure whether they need to hold a licence for the work they do, they should contact the organisation or individual to whom they provide services. If necessary, they can also seek independent legal advice.

 

For an overview of the current legal situation you may wish to read the following:

 

 

 

• The privileges and duties of licensed medical practitioners - Summary
  
• Schedule 1 - Medical practice
  
• Schedule 2 - Writing medical certificates
  
• Schedule 3 - Appointments
  
• Schedule 4 - Assessing the suitability of individuals to perform certain activities
  
• Schedule 5 - Assisting public bodies and other persons
  
• Schedule 6 - Mental health
  
• Schedule 7 - Matters of discipline
  

 

 

Please note that this is only an overview and we cannot offer definitive advice on the law.

 

Other organisations in the medical sector may be in a better position to advise you on the specific legal requirements relating to the work they do. Organisations that may be relevant to a doctor's role, or may be able to advise you further, could include:

 

 

 

• The Care Quality Commission
  
• The General Pharmaceutical Council
  
• The Ministry of Justice
  
• The UK Royal Colleges
  
• The British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (BAAPS)
  

 

 

While the above list is not exhaustive, I hope it indicates how the medical profession is not wholly overseen by us and why we cannot always confirm whether a licence is required or not.

 

It is also important to note that a doctor may be contractually required by their employer, or the organisation to which they provide services, to hold a licence to practise. This may be the case even where there is no legal requirement to do so. This would be a contractual agreement and should be discussed directly with that organisation, to ensure they are meeting their contractual requirements.

 

You may also wish to contact your medical defence organisation for further advice on what a doctor can undertake without a licence to practise.

 

If you would like to discuss this further, please reply to my email or call me on the number below."

though that e-mail from GMC does make several references to licensed DR's but i don't think that they need be licensed to do FTT-UTT work, but they would appear to have to be registered or did from 2008, unless the law has since changed ,

I found the pdf on Google ,

Although your medical member wasn't registered ,the problem you may have is being able to show how this would affect the outcome, it would be more of a procedural issue , you would need some one who is well versed on that to know if it has legs or not , although if they indeed should not be doing FTT work if not registered then it would make bad press for them and may result in checks by HMCTS

Yep of course. I have sent off for a statement of reasons from the HMTS and I am seeing the CAB next week and have sent a letter to my MP (although haven't mentioned the Dr bit to my MP as yet). So I'll see what the CAB say and if they can't help they may be able to point me in the direction of a lawyer with regard to Doctors on Tribunals. Not sure how much input a Doctor has on a Tribunal but if he doesn't do anything then what exactly is the point of having one there?! However the fact that he asked me questions suggests some input on a professional level. If had known he wasn't registered I would have refused to have answered him.

Well it's funny you say that Tommy because I did check out the Health Rep at my WCA. He is Registered with a licence to practise but he is not on the Specialist Register or the GP Register and his primary qualification was Doctor - Medic 1986 Cluj.

 

Re the rest of what you say ok it might not bother some if the Doctor on their Tribunal isn't reregistered. But as I said it states on the GMC Website under privileges.

 

Registered Medical Practitioners have important skills and knowledge and therefore there are several appointments that are exclusively reserved to practitioners registered with the General Medical Council and appointments for which registered medical practitioners are eligible, for example:

 

Employment medical advisors must be Registered Medical

Practitioners.

 

Special Visitors must be Registered Medical Practitioners; Special Visitors are individuals who assist the court by providing independent advice on matters relating to an individual lacking capacity.

 

Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible to be appointed as members of the First-tier Tribunal and the Upper Tribunal (tribunals that determine, amongst other things, appeals against a refusal by the Secretary of State to grant social security benefit).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Further examples of appointments that are either exclusively available to Registered Medical Practitioners and appointments for which Registered Medical Practitioners are eligible, can be found in Schedule 3: Appointments.

 

Employment Advisory Service

 

Only fully Registered Medical Practitioners are qualified to be appointed as employment medical advisors.

 

Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 (Section 56)

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

All I am saying is that if as claimants we are meant to be honest and do everything by the book then why should the same apply for bodies such as the HM Tribunal Service? That Doctor has advised the Judge about my case and he is not registered so he shouldn't be there.

Health and Safety at Work could be compromised by somebody with sever vertigo. It seems like your case is a one off so the lawyer should be able to explain in a detail whether your argument would stand.

Well I have applied for a job as DWP Appeals Presenting Officer . Wonder if I'll get an interview!!!!!

Well I have applied for a job as DWP Appeals Presenting Officer . Wonder if I'll get an interview!!!!!

Congratulations! You're silencing them so nobody can hassle you! Did you get legal advice regarding your Tribunal

?

Congratulations! You're silencing them so nobody can hassle you! Did you get legal advice regarding your Tribunal

?

I must say you have to be a rocket scientist to complete their application forms so I just put the basic stuff in considering I have absolutely no desire to work for the DWP! Waiting to see the CAB first next week and then depending on what they say I'll see if I can take it further. At the very least I may just write to the HMTS eventually politely reminding them that unregistered doctors shouldn't be on tribunals.

I must say you have to be a rocket scientist to complete their application forms so I just put the basic stuff in considering I have absolutely no desire to work for the DWP! Waiting to see the CAB first next week and then depending on what they say I'll see if I can take it further. At the very least I may just write to the HMTS eventually politely reminding them that unregistered doctors shouldn't be on tribunals.

I don't thing the HMTSwould take seriously any polite reminder of their practices

I don't thing the HMTSwould take seriously any polite reminder of their practices

You are probably right.....

Well I signed on for the first time proper today and was interested to say the least. When I asked for my claimant commitment to be revised to include stating that there is a limit to what I can do (I asked last week but it was left off the paperwork) my work coach said that I would need medical evidence from my GP stating that. I said I had a fit note anyway that is current because my GP doesn't think I am fit for work so how was I meant to ask him for a fit note stating I am eligible only for certain types of work and conditions if he thinks I am not fit?! She then said Doctors fit notes aren't worth the paper they are written on and I am perfectly capable of some sort of work. Obviously JCP advisors now have medical knowledge!! So now I need a GP's fit note declaring I am fit for some types of work despite my GP thinking otherwise!! When I asked about using up sick leave whilst on JSA she said I would need a fit note from the Doctor!! Huh, You can't win!!

She then said I have to sign on weekly because it's a new rule for all claimants to do that and it returns to two weekly after 13 weeks. Is that true? When I asked her to send off my SAR (you are asked to take it to a JCP on the form) I think she said it will take 14 weeks to hear back. I thought she might have said 48 weeks but that's probably my hearing. Although 48 weeks wouldn't surprise me.

It's quite clear that the government are phasing out any GP's opinion and it's only a matter of time that a Doctors fit note will no longer have any standing at all.

You are probably right.....

 

Well I signed on for the first time proper today and was interested to say the least. When I asked for my claimant commitment to be revised to include stating that there is a limit to what I can do (I asked last week but it was left off the paperwork) my work coach said that I would need medical evidence from my GP stating that. I said I had a fit note anyway that is current because my GP doesn't think I am fit for work so how was I meant to ask him for a fit note stating I am eligible only for certain types of work and conditions if he thinks I am not fit?! She then said Doctors fit notes aren't worth the paper they are written on and I am perfectly capable of some sort of work. Obviously JCP advisors now have medical knowledge!! So now I need a GP's fit note declaring I am fit for some types of work despite my GP thinking otherwise!! When I asked about using up sick leave whilst on JSA she said I would need a fit note from the Doctor!! Huh, You can't win!!

 

She then said I have to sign on weekly because it's a new rule for all claimants to do that and it returns to two weekly after 13 weeks. Is that true? When I asked her to send off my SAR (you are asked to take it to a JCP on the form) I think she said it will take 14 weeks to hear back. I thought she might have said 48 weeks but that's probably my hearing. Although 48 weeks wouldn't surprise me.

 

It's quite clear that the government are phasing out any GP's opinion and it's only a matter of time that a Doctors fit note will no longer have any standing at all.

Your advisor has no authority to decide about the sick note whatsoever. If you choose to submit it, just hand it to them, it has to be taken no matter what the advisor think. With her coment about your work capability she clearly overtepped her area of competence. At least you know who you're dealing with. If I were you, I would record it on the Universal Jobmatch-conversation you had and her response. Although you may want to tread carefully as this can potentially anger her. -Advisors are not decision makers, but I would advise you to have enough job - applications while you sign on so she can't have anything against you. A one week signing on seems to be the internal policy of your particular Job-centre Plus, they have right to make appoitment as they wish so I don't think you've got any ground against them there. There are claimants signing forthnightly from the very beginning in different Job Centre Plus. The DWP wouldn't be able to phase GP's opinions entirely, their fit note will always count as it will always count with any potential employer.