Clarification please?

Hi
Just filling in my ESA50 for review as I am in the support and the review is due.

Not sure wether to answer NO or IT VARIES as I am able to do some things sometimes but on bad days
I can't do any of the discriptors at all as its impossible and also because of substanial risk.
Would I tick it varies and explain in the box or tick no and explain in the box?

You advise is welcome
Bamboozal

Bamboozal wrote: Hi
Just filling in my ESA50 for review as I am in the support and the review is due.

Not sure wether to answer NO or IT VARIES as I am able to do some things sometimes but on bad days
I can't do any of the discriptors at all as its impossible and also because of substanial risk.
Would I tick it varies and explain in the box or tick no and explain in the box?

You advise is welcome
Bamboozal

Hi B,

If you cannot carry out any of the activities for the majority of the time(greater than 50% of the time), and cannot do so repeatedly, reliable and safely, you are quite within your rights to tick "No".

If it is variable, but not for the majority of the time, you can tick "It varies" but make sure you go into detail in the box, (And/or on any added A4 sheets) how and why it varies.

The danger comes if one just ticks "It varies" and does not add further comment.

You do not have to tick any of the boxes if you feel they don't apply.

Simply add comment of None of the tick box options are applicable, then go into details with respect to your limitations.

As I have advised on many occasions, make the ESA50 fit in with your limitations, rather than the other way around.

Finally, don't forget to refer to our "New" ESA Form claims guides :

ESA Claims Guides

You might also wish to consider :

Using The PDF Version Of The ESA50 Questionnaire

bro58

bro58

Hi bro58,

Thanks for your reply.

I have just been looking over a copy of my last esa50 form
from 2011 that I sent in, although a different form to the new esa50 it
appears I must have had the same query when completing it!

I have noticed I had ticked both NO and IT VARIES for all the questions
and also gone on to explain in detail the fact that it varies but am unable
to do any of the discriptors on a bad day.

I was first put in the WRAG group then on reconsideration placed in
support group, do you think I complicated things last time by ticking both
boxes and should I just tick the one box or is it ok to tick the two and go
on to explain?

Bamboozal

Bamboozal wrote: Hi bro58,

Thanks for your reply.

I have just been looking over a copy of my last esa50 form
from 2011 that I sent in, although a different form to the new esa50 it
appears I must have had the same query when completing it!

I have noticed I had ticked both NO and IT VARIES for all the questions
and also gone on to explain in detail the fact that it varies but am unable
to do any of the discriptors on a bad day.

I was first put in the WRAG group then on reconsideration placed in
support group, do you think I complicated things last time by ticking both
boxes and should I just tick the one box or is it ok to tick the two and go
on to explain?

Bamboozal

Hi B,

It may be advisable to either tick none of the boxes, and then give details, as discussed in my previous post, or tick one of the boxes, then give details, rather than ticking more than one of the boxes.

You need to consider why you were original placed into The WRAG. Was it simply that the evidence that you provided was not taken properly into account by the ATOS HCP and the original DM, but was by the reconsidering DM ?

An indication of whether this may have been the case would be if you provided fresh evidence to be taken into account at the reconsideration, or not.

If you did provide fresh evidence, try and amalgamate similar evidence with your ESA50.

The important issue is to show that you still qualify for The SG, as you did when you were awarded SG on reconsideration.

bro58

bro58

My personal approach is to tick ‘no’ for activities where, although I can do them quite a lot of the time, I can never absolutely rely on being able to do them at any given moment and I can’t repeat them – I explain that in the box underneath.

I understand the DWP WCA handbook says if you can’t do something reliably and repeatably and safely, you should be deemed unable to do it at all. But I don’t think the nurse who did my last WCA knew that!

My suspicion is that they skim-read your ESA50 looking for ways to reject your claim, and if they see lots of ‘it varies’ ticks they may assume you are fitter than if they see lots of ‘no’ ticks. But perhaps I’ve developed a nasty suspicious mind...

All the best,
Elaine

elaine wrote: My personal approach is to tick ‘no’ for activities where, although I can do them quite a lot of the time, I can never absolutely rely on being able to do them at any given moment and I can’t repeat them – I explain that in the box underneath.

I understand the DWP WCA handbook says if you can’t do something reliably and repeatably and safely, you should be deemed unable to do it at all. But I don’t think the nurse who did my last WCA knew that!

My suspicion is that they skim-read your ESA50 looking for ways to reject your claim, and if they see lots of ‘it varies’ ticks they may assume you are fitter than if they see lots of ‘no’ ticks. But perhaps I’ve developed a nasty suspicious mind...

All the best,
Elaine

Who could blame us all for developing such cynicism and suspicion ?

If the ATOS HCP's adhered to The WCA Handbook guidance, the WCA may just be that little bit fairer.

bro58