Hope you find help.

Doubt you'll get much help here.

This is a UK site - I presume you are in USA?

What did your insurers say about the stolen car?  My understanding (I may be mistaken) is that if the stolen car is involved in an accident (and there is no other insurance on it) then your insurers will be potentially liable if your policy is extant.  I would have thought they would want you  to "cancel" it straight away..

And yes, AIUI, whatever you do, you still need to pay the full year's premium

Laptop.

I've just posted successfully on the NHS referral nightmare thread, but then when I tried to edit it, my key strikes wouldn't register properly. (Have look at my edit).

Does it depend how I log in? ie either at the top of the page or clicking on the reply button within a thread?

And on the other NHS thread (OP Heckler) I'd typed a detailed and lengthy reply but when I tried to post it it said I didn't have permission to post a reply (I was definitely logged in). I lost the whole reply. on subsequent replies I had to copy from the reply dialogue box into Word, log in again and paste from word back into the reply.

This post is OK.

I agree with Bazza. Most clinical nurse practitioners/specialists will be as knowledgeable as the junior doctor your son will otherwise see. His chances of seeing a consultant might be quite small.

I suffer episodically from a relatively serious eye condition which is treated as a medical emergency. The last time it flared up I had to attend our local Eye Casualty Clinic every other day for four weeks. (And once a week for six months). I was treated mostly by nurses but also by a junior doctor. The only time I saw a consultant was when my junior doctor had given up and he literally went out of the consulting room, managed to button hole his consultant and dragged him into see me. He examined my eye and said "He'll be fine" and left!

(Funnily enough, my eye started to recover after the consultant's "magic touch"!)

EDIT: Ask the GP who yor son's been referred to and for what. It's common to see other clinicians befro a doctor. Sorry -I can't edit his properly!!!!!!!!

Honeybee suggested I post here.

I've been a member or some time. Ive recently had problemsposting. The sie won'tacpt al my key strokes (see?) ori tells I don'have permssio to post.

hat is wrong?

I think there was some maintenance being done yesterday, Manxman, I had problems too.

 

It might be worth retyping your other post if you can, I'm struggling to understand it unfortunately.

 

HB

Hi HB

I'm logging and doing a reply, but when I post the reply it tells me I don't have permission to reply and to refresh the screen and log in again. This has happened with both my posts today.

Am I doing something wrong?

Actually I've just looked again and found Removal of Redundant Fat or Skin. It's not routinely funded.

https://www.knowledgeanglia.nhs.uk/kms/Norwich/Home/ClinicalThresholdsPolicy/OS/RemovalofRedundantFatorSkin.aspx

This may also be useful?

Norfolk and Waveney CCGs

Clinical Policy Development Group

Psychological exceptionality and cosmetic/aesthetic surgery

Position Statement

Introduction

Norfolk and Waveney CCGs aim to commit NHS resources where there is a clear need in terms of health symptoms. Proposed interventions should be effective in relieving symptoms and should be funded fairly for all patients with the same condition. Aesthetic (cosmetic) surgery is not routinely funded.

This statement regarding ‘psychological exceptionality’ and aesthetic surgery has been produced to make clear the position of Norfolk and Waveney CCGs on the funding of aesthetic surgery when patients are suffering psychological distress due to their body image. This statement also aims to support primary and secondary care clinicians in managing the expectations of these patients and in sourcing the most appropriate care pathway for them.

An individual funding request (IFR) can be made for a treatment that is not routinely offered by the NHS when a patient is clearly different to other patients with the same condition or where a patient might benefit from the treatment in a different way to other patients. This is known as “clinical exceptionality”

Clinical Exceptionality

There can be no exhaustive description of the situations which are likely to come within the definition of exceptional clinical circumstances. The onus is on the clinician making the request to set out the grounds for clinical exceptionality clearly for the IFR Panel.

‘Exceptional’ in IFR terms means a person to whom the general rule should not apply.

This implies that there is likely to be something about their clinical situation which was not considered when formulating the general rule.

Very few patients have clinical circumstances which are genuinely exceptional.

To justify funding for treatment for a patient which is not available to other patients, and is not part of the established care pathway, the IFR Panel needs to be satisfied that the clinician has demonstrated that a patient’s individual clinical circumstances are clearly different from those of other patients, and that because of this difference, the general policies should not be applied.

Psychological exceptionality and aesthetic treatment

Patients experiencing psychological distress or social impairment as a result of their condition cannot be considered to be ‘clinically’ different from other patients with the same condition. Normal psychological and social experiences of illness, impairment or deformity may cause distress, but are not likely to render the patient ‘exceptional’ according to the definition used by NHS England. This is because the definition explicitly states that only clinical factors may be considered.

A diagnosed mental health condition may be considered to be a relevant clinical factor.

Patients experiencing psychological distress as a result of their condition will not normally be considered to be ‘significantly different clinically to the group of patients with the condition in question and at the same stage of progression of the condition’, unless they have a diagnosed mental health condition. Patients with a mental health condition will be considered according to the standard criteria stated above.

Hi OP

Apologies for absence but couldn't log on properly.

First of all, I'm pretty certain you have no hope of suing the NHS in these circumstances.

From what you say it sounds as if your GP has already submitted an IFR (Individual Funding Request) to your local NHS CCG (Care Commissioning group) for a procedure that is not routinely funded, but the CCG has turned it down. You want to appeal against this decision.

If I were you (and you may already have done this) go to your local CCG website and look for something like "Your Health". Here's the relevant link to my local CCG:

https://www.norwichccg.nhs.uk/your-health

On the left of the screen you will see "Clinical Thresholds and IFRs". Get into that part of your CCG's website and it should(?) list what procedures it routinely funds and what it won't. You may need to search a bit as not all CCG sites are set out the same.

I note that my CCG does not routinely fund Cosmetic Skin Removal (although I note it does not specifically refer to excess skin removal following drastic weight reduction.

You should also find some guidance about IFRs. Unfortunately, it seems to me that they accept that certain non-funded procedures may have physical/mental/psychological implications for patients if they don't get done, but that these implications for you need to be worse than what is normal or average for someone else with your condition before an IFR will be granted. Do you follow me?

I can't find anything about appealing against an IFR refusal.

To be honest, if your GP has already done an IFR then they should have made as strong a case as possible, including the recommendations of your consultants.

I think the best you can do is get back to your GP and find out why the IFR was rejected. (I suspect because you don't meet the CCG's required criteria).

Try to persuade your GP to re-submit an IFR. (Whether this is possible or not, I don't know).

As a former NHS manager of over 20 years I don't normally approve of "cosmetic" operations unless there is a clear clinical need. Sounds as if you might have such a need.

Yes - it's bonkers that they won't fund a procedure short- term that might lead to longer-term savings in future years. But that's how NHS funding works

Sorry. I'm trying t respod to you but this sie iscausin meyoadprlems and can't ey propyl. Was also timedout yesterday.

 

Get onto your loa NH Care Commissioning website - look for "You alth" an cinial theshls and thprocedure you eed.

 

Tal opnland fraklywith your GP about whher you meet te xcetional funn criteria foridepe unding st.

 

orry this rubbis -thesit won'tacet y input!

 

Sorry. There is omeng rng wih tssie. it won apt wt I'm tpng

Can somebody tell me what I'm doing wrong? Keyboard strikes are not being accepted. This seems ok though.

Sorry. I'm trying t respod to you but this sie iscausin meyoadprlems and can't ey propyl. Was also timedout yesterday.

Get onto your loa NH Care Commissioning website - look for "You alth" an cinial theshls and thprocedure you eed.

Tal opnland fraklywith your GP about whher you meet te xcetional funn criteria foridepe unding st.

orry this rubbis -thesit won'tacet y input!

Sorry. There is omeng rng wih tssie. it won apt wt I'm tpng

I don't want to get into specifics regarding the procedures on a public forum.... So I'll try to explain as best I can.

 

 

I have a specific medical issue that is causing me significant physical problems as well as the severe mental ones, In terms of Maslows heirachy of basic needs... It leaves me unable to get out of the bottom rung. I was referred to a specialist who then passed to another in a different area... who then confirmed that I may need surgery to correct the problem... But there is a secondary issue getting in the way of that... and until that issue is resolved he cannot do anything about the other. This secondary issue (Which is being looked at as a 'cosmetic one, even though it's stopping an essential medical one being done) isn't something he can deal with, so I was originally referred to the correct consultant in the same area... who said they wouldn't get funding because I am not living in that area. So I was referred back to a similar consultant in my area who said it's not something he can do because they don't have the right facilities for such an operation (after care and all that, they're more of a minor cosmetics place)... So he then referred me back to my GP to apply for funding for this procedure.

 

They immediately denied the funding... and their reasoning for doing so is based upon information that makes no sense, disregards ALL of the 3 consultants recommendations and lays out some demands to qualify for it that are literally impossible for me to meet. The least of which is a demand that I meet a specific BMI criteria that is some 8-10kg below what everyone (surgeons, dieticians) say my idea weight range should be, however... because I have lost in excess of 75kg, according to the surgeon and dieticians, I have been left with between 20-25kg of excess skin hanging around... So that added to the weight range I have been told is my 'IDEAL' weight... I am anywhere between 30-35kg above what they claim I need to be... and am only between 5-12kg (depending on which figures you use) away from meeting that target set by the surgeon and dieticians who have treated me for the last 3yrs. I have lost some 80% or more of my excess weight and it is physically impossible for me to lose 'skin'.

 

I am not asking for all of this excess skin to be removed, I am asking that they remove only that which is causing me physical impairment and pain and denying me the ability to lead/live a normal life... I am asking that they listen to the recommendations of the consultants instead of looking at a spreadsheet and simply refusing it based on the inaccurate guidelines they stick to and not use impossible to achieve restrictions to justify it.

 

I am quite litterally living on a knife edge here... This has been on going now for 2yrs and I've been passed around from consultant to consultant, each one saying I need this.. and then passing it off to some one else. No one is willing to take any responsibility for it and are simply denying me any chance of having a normal life... They are effectively telling me that my life is worthless and I am not worthy of being allowed to live a normal one.

 

I have put all of this into a letter to appeal the decision... but I fully expect them to refuse the appeal because that's what they do... they don't care about the people their decisions impact, they only care about blindly following some rules that make it impossible for people to get the help they need... they have made me feel that my life is no longer worth living if it has to be lived like this... because this isn't life... it's torture.

OK. 'm trying to repy but y keyoa is playng up wil try oorro

Sorry to hear of your predicament.

I'm afraid I'm not clear what the problem is.

You need to have two procedures carried out, one more serious than the other, but the more serious procedure is dependent on the other one being done first? Over two years you've seen four different consultants who have confirmed this. They have now referred this back to your doctors (do you mean GP?) but you are being told that you cannot have the first procedure. Don't quite get this as in my experience (25 years in the NHS) I would expect the consultants to be deciding about this, not your GP. That's why your GP refers you to a specialist.

Who has told you that you can't have the first procedure and what reason did they give for this? Are there medical reasons or has your local Care Commissioning Group simply decided not to fund this procedure? You need to get your GP to explain clearly what the problem is and whether you have any other options. You haven't provided enough detail for me to understand what is happening.

I'm not sure you'll get anywhere with suing the NHS, unless you can establish some sort of medical negligence or unlawful discrimination. Even then I don't think you will get anywhere - sorry.

Some firms of solicitors will offer 30 mins free legal advice - but I wouldn't hold out much hope.

I would not follow King's advice.

Why did you take a photo of the barrier before the incident?

What a nightmare. I would be talking to the police more regularly - each time he harasses you. I wonder if more frequent reports would help.

 

You could consider taking civil action as well, under the Protection from Harassment Act? Though this would be to claim monetary damages rather than a criminal sentence.

I may be mistaken but I thought the police did have a role to play in cases of harassment?

It may only be a civil matter, but couldn't the OP get an injunction against the neighbour?

EDIT: You need to follow that police force's complaints procedure and/or write to the Chief Constable and/or Crime Commissioner (or whatever they are called). There is no point going to IPCC until you have done this.

In the end - They werent prepared to do anything... Which i understand completely.

The agency tried to step up and put me on their payroll for 2 months but it can go wrong in so many ways... So...

Ive turned down the company...

This can be a problem with monthly payrolls where the cut-off date may be a couple of weeks before month end. If you miss the cut-off you may not get paid that month and have to wait 'til the following month.

Having said that, I worked in the NHS with sufficiently flexible and sophisticated payroll systems to cater for these situations - late payments for new starters could be actioned quite easily. I presume this company doesn't have that flexible a system?

Is it worth turning the job down because they won't pay you 'til next month? You may have the same issue with future jobs.

But I'm not sure I'd want to work for an employer who couldn't sort this out for me.

You have documented evidence (diary, logs, cctv) of over 500 incidents? I'm not sure about the criminal damage but surely this is a case of harassment?

If you are not happy about the police's response to this I would be making a complaint to the Chief Constable. Check their complaints procedure.

If you are a victim (and you would appear to be) you should probably check the CPS complaints procedure too.

The judge can only work with the evidence provided. The judge may have been wrong, but it sounds more to me as if the police and CPS have not done a good enough job.

I worked (non-clinician) in a mental health NHS trust for 25 years.

May I ask is there any particular reason why you are so keen to move your father out of NHS care into a care (or should it be nursing) home? Or is it the trust that wants him out?

Although I've had family experience of excellent homes, they are not all like that. On the balance of probability I would wager that NHS care would be better. (unfortunately there are poor NHS trusts out there too.)

If a home is found I would try to ensure you visit first and form your own opinion. My MiL wasn't in NHS care but was suffering from Lewy Body dementia and eventually had to go into a care home. My wife and her two brothers visited half a dozen homes before choosing one.

I know this thread is a couple of weeks old, but thought my experience might be helpful to the OP

Very distressing situation -I'm sorry.

Unfortunately I fear you may be confused about the contents of the original letter from TFL (but I may be wrong).

Rather than asking if he "wanted to appeal and if he did not to ignore the letter" I suspect it was simply asking him for his version of events, otherwise they would consider prosecution.

If he'd replied with a grovelling apology, an explanation of the "mistake" he had made and offering to pay reasonable admin costs plus the original fare, that may have worked - even if he knew he had done wrong.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you mean about the bedsit and mail that you sent him.

What address did he give when caught by TFL?

I don't know how to advise now with an attachment of earnings order.

Others here will be able to advise better.

I think OP is suggesting the net "cash" payments made outside of the payslip (and hence outside of the payroll system) do not properly account for tax and NI deductions(!).

If it were me I'd be reconciling my wife's payslips plus "cash" payments against her annual P60. If I found a discrepancy, I'm not sure how I would approach it. Wouldn't sound like a good employer to me.

OP - are you happy your wife's NI contributions are being accounted for correctly?

Regarding the missing days pay - I'd be waiting longer before a LBA.

This might be better posted on the Employment Board?

Just to add - I think OP has come to this board from MSE because I suggested it.

OP paid cash, has no receipt and does not know who carried out the repair. (It would appear, perhaps, to be a sole trader who was renting a space in a 'phone repair "shop".)

OP obviously knows the name of the "shop" (if I understand the OP correctly) but doesn't know who actually did the repair or who she paid.

I suggested she come over here because I know you guys can sometimes give good advice about identifying whom exactly to claim against.

But I fear it's going to go nowhere.

This in reply to mariner51's post #23.

Looking at the first google hit there, from Nottingham university:

"Previously, part-time staff who worked, for example, on Mondays would have benefited from taking off all Bank Holidays falling on Mondays, and therefore may have taken off more days than someone who did not work on Monday. By calculating pro rata entitlements, all staff are able to take off their pro rata entitlement whatever days of the week they work."

OK - that makes sense, although it seems unfortunate that it takes a five page document to explain how to work this out.

Looking at the .gov website, I think what has confused me (and probably many others) is the question of whether BHs are included as part of your holiday entitlement or not. It all seems unnecessarily complicated to me (coming from the public sector as opposed to the private).

Apologies if I've wasted posters' time, but perhaps it may help the OP too.

No one should gain time off or paid holiday by not workng a Monday or Friday Bank Holiday. Otherwise few part time people would want to work Mondays or Good Friday.

 

What Sangie is saying is that some companies might not be open on bank holidays and they therefore deduct the relevant hours from everyone. This means that whatever hours you work say 7 hours full time of 3.5 hours part time, that is deducted from total holiday entitlement including BH hours. The staff then get this holiday as paid holiday time.

 

I repeat, people need to remember this is paid holiday time. You get your contract holiday hours pay, plus bank holiday hours pay, both of which will be pro-rata for part timers.

Sorry - I'm not trying to derail this thread (apologies honeybee!) but I am trying to understand this for my benefit and hopefully the OP's.

Para 1: If I were working two days per week, I think I would rather be working Mondays and Fridays as that would give me more paid holidays(?) than working say Tuesday and Wednesday. You seem to be saying the opposite, and this is the bit I find really confusing (and perhaps OP does too).

Para 2: Yes, but what if you work in a sector where staff do routinely work on BHs (eg NHS)? If you don't work on Mondays and Fridays how is the BH part of your holiday entitlement accounted for? (Mondays and Fridays taking up at least half of BHs - more when Christmas day and New Years day fall on a Monday or Friday).

This whole area seems unnecessarily complicated to me. (Perhaps I'm being stupid).

When I started work in the NHS you had a holiday entitlement and BHs were outside that - they were taken for granted. If you had to work on a BH that was dealt with separately under T&Cs. (Edit: and if you didn't work Mondays or Fridays, it didn't affect your holiday entitlement re BHs because you weren't working those days anyway).

It is straightforward. Employers are supposed to ensure all staff are treated equally, whether they are full time or part time and whether they work any bank holidays or not.

 

So the employer just works out the full time normal holidays + bank holidays entitlement in hours. This might be say based on a Mon to friday 7 hours per day i.e 35 hours a week. The normal holiday entiltlement is say 23 days x 7 hours = 161 hours + say 10 bank holidays x 7 hours = total entitlement 231 hours.

 

Now it then depends on whether part time hours are a fixed contract arrangement or not.

 

If part time hours are flexible someone working say 17.5 hours a week would be entitled to 115.5 hours holiday including bank holidays. If they were scheduled to work 4 hours on a bank holiday monday they would have to book 4 hours holiday. This is unlikely because work schedules are normally agreed in advance and holidays are unlikely to be agreed.

 

If the hours were fixed by contract, then the employee would have to book whatever hours holidays required to cover the hours they were contracted to work.

 

If an employee is part time never working a bank holiday then for the days they normally work Tues, weds etc they are are still having to book holiday out of their total entitlement. If say for example a brand new bank holiday was created by government for a major event on a Wednesday when an employee worked, then if that day was given as extra entitlement, they would only get entitlement for their part time hours. If the business was open, then they would book holiday for the hours required, based on their revised pro-rata entitlement.

 

Remember that holidays + bank holidays is paid entitlement, so important everyone is treated the same, irrespective of normal working days/hours.

Cheers Womble - I'm off now to a Carol service but will read what you've said. When I left the NHS we calculated annual leave in hours (so much easier for part-timers). My wife has moved from FT to PT and does not work Mondays (like OP).

I think the issue is that for FT workers their contractual holiday entitlement includes Bank Holidays, but for PT workers who do not work Mondays (when several BHs occur) how exactly is their entitlement calculated? Are the BHs subtracted from their allowance or not? I'm probably mistaken but I don't understand how it works.

It seems strange to me that an employee can use up their holiday entitlement on days that they wouldn't work anyway. (Which seems to me to be what sangie is suggesting).

It all seems needlessly complicated to me. The legislation ought to say that if you are FT you have so much holiday entitlement, if you are PT, then it's pro-rarat. Talk about BHs is unneccesarily muddying the waters.

ETA: What I'm trying to say (perhaps not clearly) is the question: how can you use holiday entitlement (eg BHs on days that you don't work anyway? Would PT workers be better advised to work on Mondays rather that say Fridays?.