Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Thanks dx, will do this tomorrow morning when I have access to a pc (find it easier and quicker than my mobile). Just having a good old read through similar threads atm. Wow some of this jargon is hard to take in 😳.  Thank you for your support x
    • please complete this:   and scan up bothsides of your NTK read upload carefully PDF only please!!   safe to ignore powerless DCA's they are not bailiffs  
    • yes ring the court and get it moved directions might stay the same though for fee/WS exchange mind.   dx   dx  
    • Driver entered car park run by CEL Ltd . Tried to purchase lozenges  at Pharmacy , saw it was busy so left . Time there approximately 5 minutes . Left to go to pick up some goods a couple of miles away .   I have a copy of a collection of goods note with an approximate time on it   Stayed a while to chat with client On return journey stopped  to try again . Bought lozenges and left . There were no restrictions on returning    ANPR cameras registered first entry and last exit    Was sent photos showing vehicle with 2 blown up with the times on them   Company refuses to divulge landlord or show contract ....said it was data protection ! Photo of a sign blown up .....could be anywhere !   Been to site itself . No signs at entrance . When entering from main road nothing !   Where there is parking a few signs visible depending on parking space . Large sign on an external wall which can only be seen when walking out or entering from side road on the left .   After a number of letters  I received demands from ZZPS ....a “debt collector “. They gave up on that !   This incident took pace in February . Now a Letter Before Court requesting details of my salary and how I intend to pay the debt    The length of stay is 40 minutes . Tiny car park !   Do know why there are even limits . Length of stay maybe 15 minutes in total . It is madness   The pack of lozenges cost £185 !   Am 72 years old with multiple health problems ! Cannot let these cowboys win . Feel as though I am being intimida ted . Very stressful ! Any  advice please ? I have drafted  together bits from all over the place ! Need it to stop ASAP !
    • Hi    This is my draft WS, please do let me know of nay changes or additions required, thanks.    IN THE County Court AT                                                                              CLAIM NO:      BETWEEN: CABOT FINANCIAL (UK) LIMITED   -and- (DEFENDANT)     ___________________________________________ WITNESS STATEMENT OF        INTRODUCTION    1. I, XXXX, the Defendant in this case, make this statement in support of my defence against the Claimant, Cabot Financial (UK) Limited.  The matters set out below are within my own knowledge, except where I indicate to the contrary.    THE DEFENDANT’S RESPONSE TO THE CLAIMANT’S WITNESS STATEMENT    2. The Claimant states in Paragraph 3, ‘….refer to various documents, true copiesof which are contained in the paginated bundle to this statement marked “JK”1’, but then states in para 4, ‘Acopy of the reconstituted agreementwith associated terms and conditions….pages 1-10’. There are 3 versions attached of the alleged Agreement and Terms & Conditions and according to para 4 they are not the original but ‘a reconstitutedversion’. They have attached 3 Agreements namely, ‘Original Agreement’, ‘Default Agreement’ and ‘Terms of your Capital One Credit Card Agreement’.  The Claimant has provided 3 sets of generic/reconstituted Agreement and Terms & conditions.     3. The Claimant in Para 4 also states ‘On or around 5thNovember 2012 the Defendant entered into a Credit Card Agreement,’ but Page 2 of JK1 has a date inserted 2/11/2012.  It has my name, address and a date inserted in the form but no mention of how the agreement was made, online, post or telephone, and furthermore not mentioned in the Claimant’s Witness Statement.     4. As a rule of thumb I always ensure that no 3rdparty is to contact me or to send me marketing information via telephone, post or electronically’, but Page 2 of JK1 has an unticked box, another indication that this is not an original agreement.    5. Page 5 of JK1 has too many typo mistakes in the heading as follows: TERMSOF YOUR CAPITALONE CREDITCARD AGREEMENT, furthermore there are no ‘full stop’ punctuations at the end of each sentence, this surely cannot be a document sent out by Capital One.     6. The Claimant states in Para 9 that my defence is a ‘templated defence’, requesting documents pursuant of CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974, this is a defendant’s right for request of information but the Claimant has failed to provide the true original Credit Card Agreement and Terms & Conditions.   7. The Claimant states in Para 25 that, ‘the Claimant allowed the proceedings to be stayed in order to allow the parties to attempt settlement negotiations…..’ this is not correct as the Claim was stayed due to the Claimant not being able to provide the requested documents pursuant of my CPR 31.14 and Section 78 of the Credit Card Act 1974.   8. Para 30 and 31of the Witness Statement requests to restore the proceedings, to strike out the Defence, has requested for a Summary Judgement, together with costs to be assessed summarily by the court. I, the Defendant, strongly object to the Claimant’s Witness Statement requesting to lift the stay and enter Judgement. I believe therefore, that this should be denied and I respectfully ask for you to strike out the claim. My reasons for this have been outlined in points 1 to 7.    9. By the reason of the facts and matters set out above, it is denied that the Claimant is entitled to the relief claimed or any relief and invite the Court to strike out the claim.   I believe that the facts stated in this Witness Statement are true.    Signed:  Dated:
  • Our picks

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 955 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I am starting this thread on behalf of my brother who desperately needs some help.

 

He should've been on Group Income Protection by September

however due to his bad health he never chased that up.

 

He was then invited to attend a functional capacity assessment on behalf of insurer in January which itself was around 4 months later than when he should’ve started on income protection.

 

He gave in his 200% in that assessment to a level that he ended up being with swollen legs and pain for next 2 weeks to follow.

 

His illness started around March last year when he was getting bullied at his work place which caused him work-related stress and depression.

 

The bullying continued and that lead him to a stage that he experienced paralysis symptoms in left side and lost strength in left side of body and he ended up being hospitalised.

 

Subsequent tests and check-ups, physiotherapy (neuro physio), neurology consultants after thorough diagnosis ruled out stroke (luckily) and diagnosis were work related stress that caused his functional hemiparesis (losing strength in left side of his body).

 

During this time, the management were still stressing his through different means while he had been off sick as a result his stress and depression got so out of control that it triggered Schizophrenia in him including hearing voices and hallucinations.

 

Things like not being around for the family and being unable to carry out day to day activities worsening his condition and since then he is in care of Mental Health team.

 

After a month,

he received a letter of rejection quoting my brother doesn’t fulfil definition of incapacity and his claim was getting rejected.

The basis of rejection was they believe there is no evidence of medical condition causing significant impairment in function and his reporting is inconsistent and unreliable (even though he disputes).

 

They cited clinician believed there were number of inconsistencies in my brother’s reporting and his ability of walking and standing during formal testing were inconsistent with his reported left side weakness (even though he pushed himself over pain barrier to carry out these activities).

 

They used around 1-2-day surveillance on him which was done approximately for around 1-2 weeks prior to his assessment and they quoted that surveillance showed him walk and stand unaided whilst grocery shopping and grip items and grocery shopping bags which doesn’t indicate functional loss.

Even though they agree there is evidence that he used walking stick and displayed uneven gait throughout surveillance footage.

 

He maintains that the bags referred to were very light.

He also says that he doesn’t do these as day to day activity

however on that particular day he was severely depressed as this shopping even though caused him physical pain

but he did that as it gave him distraction and mental reassurance that he is not a burden on others.

 

Now his mental health condition has further deteriorated due to further stress hence I am helping him with this and he has been given 90 days to appeal against this decision.

 

I wish to get advice on following:

 

1) What should be his first steps to challenge this?

 

2) Given that he is physically incapacitated (as per treating doctor, physio and consultant) what weight does assessment from functional assessors carry when they say he is not functionally incapacitated considering they are paid by the insurers?

 

3) Does just lifting some light grocery bags justify him not being incapacitated? Even though he says it is not one of his regular activities and he did that to fight his depression and it caused him significant pain and distress? Considering that even they mentioned that surveillance shows him using walking stick and maintaining uneven gait throughout the surveillance footage)

 

4) Even if we ignore him moving with support and with uneven gait for the sake of argument agree with insurers no functional loss argument does high degree of depression and Schizophrenia including voices and hallucination not constitute incapacity considering his job involves high physical activities and care?

 

5) Considering he was supposed to be on Income Protection in September was it a fair practice from the company to get his evaluation done in January (approximately 4 months later)?

 

6) Is assessing someone nearly 4 months after they should’ve been on Income Protection good indicator how their condition was 4 months ago?

 

7) What should happen for the time between when he was due to be on Income Protection and till they assessed him?

 

Any help is highly appreciated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Will subject access in this case will be relevant? I am thinking subject access might show their accessor's medical reasons and observations and my brother's own medical records that we can possibly challenge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello there.

 

I was wondering if a SAR could be a good move, let's see what the forum guys think though.

 

Not many people here know about group income protection, unfortunately. However I know someone who had dealt with these in the past and will try to ask their views.

 

HB

Edited by honeybee13
Duplication.

Illegitimi non carborundum

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Problem is the definition of Incapacity they quoted as "if you are unable to carry out material and substantial duties" I am baffled as he is in physically and mentally ill But their assessor thinks different to his treating doctors and consultants. They've also mentioned we agree he is stressed but stress itself is not a disease. But what they don't realise that he is so bad that he is not even physically and mentally around for his family so how on earth will he be able to perform material, substantial or even any duties specially knowing his condition is driven from work related stress in first place

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't had much advice so I am likely to proceed by making a SAR request tomorrow and hope to see their evidence for rejection

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I haven't had much advice so I am likely to proceed by making a SAR request tomorrow and hope to see their evidence for rejection

 

I think your problem is that giving advice on these matters is exceptionally difficult if someone does not have full disclosure - we don't have the details available to help. We never could have. I don't deal with these sorts of insurances, but they are not dissimilar to our ill health retirement policies, and those are some of the most complex things to deal with because every case is totally different. The job someone does makes a difference. The possible option of other employment, perhaps even with a different employer makes a difference. The medical conditions are all different. There is no one size fits all. For example, I also walk with a stick over short distances, but need crutches for anything over about 100 ft. But that doesn't stop me from working. Someone else it might. And there are so many variables on that spectrum. But you have one very huge problem - they clearly don't believe him. Surveillance is not a standard procedure, and it's actually a very expensive one (i know someone who does this for a living so I know what it costs!). They are not spending that money unless they have serious doubts that he is telling the truth. And there is some measure of material in that which casts doubt on the veracity of his claims.

 

What you need to be clear about is that there is no reason why they must accept the view put forward by his medical practitioners. Their job is to report and act on what he tells them, not to doubt they are being told the truth. If his own medical practitioners get to that stage, it is likely to be a long way down the road - their first and foremost duty is to thoroughly investigate and treat medical complaints, not decided if they are real or not. But from what you have said, It appears that there is no actual physical evidence of any issue, so it comes down to a mental issue, which is much harder to prove and easier to fake. So the assessor, whose job is for the company, not your brother, is obviously going to test that. And what he has found, and what the surveillance has found, has led him to believe he is not being told the truth. They are also correct- stress isn't a medical condition. Without a clear medical condition, there is always going to be a question over his claim.

 

To be honest, I can't see a SAR having much impact. This is a specialised area - a lawyer who deals with personal injury and income protection claims is really what you need, but they don't come cheap. Not the best ones anyway. On the other hand, you may have no choice but to try an ambulance chaser. Just go in with eyes open and clarity about what you will pay them when and if you win. But something is better than nothing, and right now he has nothing. And, I suspect, no impetus to tackle this. It's a lawyer or a union, and you wouldn't be here if he were in a union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think your problem is that giving advice on these matters is exceptionally difficult if someone does not have full disclosure - we don't have the details available to help. We never could have. I don't deal with these sorts of insurances, but they are not dissimilar to our ill health retirement policies, and those are some of the most complex things to deal with because every case is totally different. The job someone does makes a difference. The possible option of other employment, perhaps even with a different employer makes a difference. The medical conditions are all different. There is no one size fits all. For example, I also walk with a stick over short distances, but need crutches for anything over about 100 ft. But that doesn't stop me from working. Someone else it might. And there are so many variables on that spectrum. But you have one very huge problem - they clearly don't believe him. Surveillance is not a standard procedure, and it's actually a very expensive one (i know someone who does this for a living so I know what it costs!). They are not spending that money unless they have serious doubts that he is telling the truth. And there is some measure of material in that which casts doubt on the veracity of his claims.

 

What you need to be clear about is that there is no reason why they must accept the view put forward by his medical practitioners. Their job is to report and act on what he tells them, not to doubt they are being told the truth. If his own medical practitioners get to that stage, it is likely to be a long way down the road - their first and foremost duty is to thoroughly investigate and treat medical complaints, not decided if they are real or not. But from what you have said, It appears that there is no actual physical evidence of any issue, so it comes down to a mental issue, which is much harder to prove and easier to fake. So the assessor, whose job is for the company, not your brother, is obviously going to test that. And what he has found, and what the surveillance has found, has led him to believe he is not being told the truth. They are also correct- stress isn't a medical condition. Without a clear medical condition, there is always going to be a question over his claim.

 

To be honest, I can't see a SAR having much impact. This is a specialised area - a lawyer who deals with personal injury and income protection claims is really what you need, but they don't come cheap. Not the best ones anyway. On the other hand, you may have no choice but to try an ambulance chaser. Just go in with eyes open and clarity about what you will pay them when and if you win. But something is better than nothing, and right now he has nothing. And, I suspect, no impetus to tackle this. It's a lawyer or a union, and you wouldn't be here if he were in a union.

 

Thanks Sangie your comment really helps as it gives another point of view. I am however not sure what you meant about there is no physical evidence of any issue? (he is been accessed by his doctors, physios and consultants and they all agree on his condition)

 

To answer First and foremost on his condition and job which was your biggest area of concern. His job involves physically handling and caring for people some of them at high risk. There is no doubts on his physical ability as I can assure he can only do small distances that too with his stick and cant walk distances at all with or without crutches/stick. This is backed up by treating doctor, physio and consultants and even insurers say that in throughout surveillance he was seen to be walking with a stick and with an uneven gait. Therefore I was considering the SAR route to check what evidence is the insureres considering to decide this claim and what exactly does their accessor's report says about my brother?

 

On his mental health side he has a long history of mental health issue since his probably his pre teenage days so its not something he started faking. This was quite bad at one stage however it receeded and merely bothered him later on. After this bullying and stress incident his condition has worsened and is currently back to its peak days including hallucinations and for this he is been under the care of Mental Health team for last 5-6 months uptil now and this includes various teams such as CBT (Cognitive Behaviour Therapy) and others something that seems to be clearly disregarded by his accessor.

 

What is bewildering me is that knowing his job involves high level of care and physical activities how can insurers physio deem him fit for work when he cant walk without stick and is suffering from hallucinations? Also if his condition is triggered by work related stress (even though stress not being a medical condition) how will he recover if he is put back in same environment that caused him this issue in the first place?

 

Other points I need to seek clarification is Considering he was supposed to be on Income Protection in September was it a fair practice from the company to get his evaluation done in January (approximately 4 months later) and how can assessing someone nearly 4 months after they should’ve been on Income Protection good indicator how their condition was 4 months ago? Finally what weight does company's insurers assessment carries over his own treating doctors, physios and consultants?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a broker and work with these sort of products. There will be no need for a SAR, if he speaks with his employer they will be able to arrange for all the medical notes to be sent onto his GP. The insurers will not send it anywhere other than the registered GP.

 

You have every right to appeal and from experience they are successful. But you MUST provide additional information along with the appeal such as GP notes and other evidence.

 

J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm a broker and work with these sort of products. There will be no need for a SAR, if he speaks with his employer they will be able to arrange for all the medical notes to be sent onto his GP. The insurers will not send it anywhere other than the registered GP.

 

You have every right to appeal and from experience they are successful. But you MUST provide additional information along with the appeal such as GP notes and other evidence.

 

J

For now I am not even sure if insurers even considered his mental health side of illness therefore I wanted to see at their medical notes and video surveillance as even insureres maintain he used walking still with uneven gait all along.

How will I be able to receive from GP? Will they still send everything to GP if I requested a SAR. I want to see all the medical notes and evidence they have considered including their notes from their accessor which they have based their decision on so it can be appropriately challenged? I am also thinking of saving some time by doing this.

Do you believe that there is any element of breach as insurers were suppose to payout from September and it was not until January this year they decided to access him? If it is a breach then in your experience can we force them for a payout for such breaches?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't take this the wrong way, but being the devil's advocate, and as I said above, the doctors have found, from what you say, no actual evidence of anything. You say he hears voices and hallucinates? Prove it. You can't. And neither can any medical professional. They have to take his word for it because there is no empirical evidence of what he says. He walks with a stick and his gait is uneven. Impossible to fake? No. And they have found no physical reason for this or the weakness and paralysis - both of which are easy to fake too. There's no evidence he's faking it per se, but there's no evidence he isn't either. And the doctor for the insurers had clearly said he doesn't believe that what he says is true. The insurers have the money. So if they continue to be advised that the claim is false, they won't pay.

 

If I were to be in the position of making this claim, there would be clear evidence of a replaced hip, a severely arthritic hip, arthritis in the spine and a deformed ankle. There are x rays and MRI s to back up what my specialists are saying. But in his case there is nothing they can point to to say "that's what the problem is".

 

If you are going to help him here, you need to be more objective. Your relationship blinds you to that. It actually IS possible that he is faking it. That is your starting point - what do you need to prove he isn't? Stop thinking like a brother, and think like a rep. And if you can't do that, find someone who can. There's no shame in not being able to do it - but if you start from a position of being partisan, you aren't helping. Think about lawyers. They don't care whether you are guilty or not. They don't want to know whether you are or not. The defence is the defence - it's not about guilt. That's about objectivity. So you need to be his brother or be his representative - you are taking on an impossibly difficult task trying to be both.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree you been devil's advocate but in that case it would be between their Physio and my brother's treating Physio, doctor and Consultant etc. But thinking in a least optimistic way I am thinking down the route of SAR to understand what have they based their decision on. To understand all medical history and evidence they considered to make this decision and their own observations. That way it won't be any feelings but only medical evidence vs medical evidence?

Once I got that I will get him a solicitor or someone that can help may be from his own union. I also wonder the appropriateness of accessing him too late and if that could be a ground for challenge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree you been devil's advocate but in that case it would be between their Physio and my brother's treating Physio, doctor and Consultant etc. But thinking in a least optimistic way I am thinking down the route of SAR to understand what have they based their decision on. To understand all medical history and evidence they considered to make this decision and their own observations. That way it won't be any feelings but only medical evidence vs medical evidence?

Once I got that I will get him a solicitor or someone that can help may be from his own union. I also wonder the appropriateness of accessing him too late and if that could be a ground for challenge?

 

He is in a union? Get to the union straight away. You don't get a solicitor or the union can't represent him. He should have got on to the union right away.

 

I honestly don't know the rest. Some policies actually have waiting period in them anyway - someone I know who retired on one of these policies had to be off for six months before it would pay out. We don't know the terms of the policy here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...