To want NHS funding spent only on NHS services???

[Tistheseason17]

I'm after your help fellow mumsnettters!

Please bare with me - it was the NHS's 70th Birthday this week and they and us are getting ripped off.

I am furious that a recent change in data law now means that GP practices cannot get payment for providing copies of patient records to insurance companies, solicitors or other 3rd parties preparing medical reports.

So simply put, if you have a car accident or trip at work, the NHS has to spend a tonne of cash providing paperwork to all of these places for FREE whilst money is being made by them, and the patient off the back of it!!!

People think it is just a case of someone sitting at a photocopier or scanning for 5 mins - but that is not how it works. A GP has to also check the record before it is copied to remove anything sensitive that could cause harm/distress to a patient.

There is a fab petition on change.org an NHS colleague has set up. It shows how nationally more than £115M of NHS funding is spent on claims rather than NHS care.

This will mean that your GP practice may not be able to recruit someone as it cannot afford to - it's too busy using NHS money paying insurance companies, medical report companies and solicitors.

This is not right. Can't believe no one thought about this impact before GDPR came in!!!

Please will you sign???

www.change.org/p/matthew-hancock-stop-misuse-of-nhs-funds-for-private-claims-work?recruiter=69615357&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook_link&utm_campaign=share_for_starters_page

NewYearNewMe18 actually the NHS is so squeezed for cash that a bit of photocopying is enough to push it over the edge.
At the hospital in work out we've had most of the printers removed because we can't afford the ink or paper to run them.
Small things add up, most organisations have cut all the big things they can to save cash we're desperately trying to find other savings elsewhere.

I've just been charged 20 pounds for a short to whom it may concern letter for not being able to go on holiday, is that wrong.

It's not just the paper and ink, it's the time spent checking the data and removing some (third party info and the like). At a time when admin and secretarial time has been cut to the bone. The maximum £50 barely covered some of this. Now there's not even that.

HeGotManFlu - that's not wrong, in fact it's a reasonable charge. The OP is talking about costs of accessing data under the new GDPR rules.

It's the same for our profession! We'd have to get files out of external storage, as there is not room to keep all the files for 6 years in the office, before we could even start photocopying.

Salaries have fallen in real terms for us over the last 20 years! Sorry, OP - it's the same for every organisation, that keeps data!

I have no problem with people accessing their records - but if you're financially gaining from it then you should pay for the GP's time spent checking your record before copies whether digital or ink and paper.

Why should the NHS good the bill for admin related to car accidents and trips at work?

People who think the NHS should cover private claims will all be moaning when there aren't the nurses to see them.

It's not 5 mins of photocopying.

It's admin time, GP time, a per, ink, scanner, envelopes.

An average request costs £60.

Now imagine a small practice like mine gets 5 a week (at least) - that's £15k a year.

So when my HCA leaves I won't recruit as many hours as I can't afford to.

It is that bad in GP practices. They are closing every week.

Will the NHS make it to 75 yrs? Who knows.

If we care we need to protect it and speak up.

BTW - NO GP practice charged more than £50 for photopies. Sounds like your solicitor ripped the NHS and YOU off, @NewYearNewMe18

I hadn't thought about this OP but you are right. All GP services ( as everyone knows) are stretched to ( and beyond) breaking point. Mucking about printing , checking and posting records is an extra task with receptionist/ secretary and Dr's time as well as ink/ paper etc etc. No one objects to sharing of information appropriately and particularly not to patients having their own information but I think that most people would be amazed at the admin load in a GP's surgery.

@AryaOfWinterfell

Sounds like it's bad for you, too. I've had some really abusive medical reports companies on the phone. Really classy.

Thanks, Yikes.

I'm just really passionate about patient care x

I have online patient access to my personal data and can print it off if I want. Surely that’s all that’s required to hand over to the organisations wanting it

@nNina22

Depending on your age it is unusual for your entire record to be held online.

I suspect you have a paper record which has not been scanned on, yet.

3rd parties processing claims want it all.

Also, before you were given online access, a clinician should have spent around an hour checking there was nothing on your record that could cause you harm or distress.

It's not as simple as clicking, Print

Ta1kinPeace we have written and called these solicitors and explained that because they are requesting info that it’s not a SAR. They then get really shirty and argue that it is. All of this takes up time and money too.
Tistheseason17 We’ve been lucky that we have only had a few requests come through so far, but other practices in the area have had 20 or 30 requests. There’s also the problem that even though patients may be claiming for say an ankle they broke on a slippery floor, solicitors will request full records and we then have to go to the patient and explain all this. Most of the time they are clueless and just think that the solicitor will get information about the accident and are not happy that they are requesting everything.

@AryaOfWinterfell
I'm using part of the law that states if we don't think the patient is aware what they have consented to release then we provide directly to the patient.

Most people have no idea they have signed for records since birth.

I get a new SAR signed by patient and then the 3rd party is livid as they have no way of knowing if a person has forwarded their full record or not.

One solicitor actually asked me to count the pages and let them know..... we, no!

This still loses/uses NHS time but is a slight deterrent for the 3rd party..

The NHS could save millions by using prescriptions that are brought back to the pharmacy because they are not needed or have been prescribed or dispensed in error. Why can’t they use pills that are in blister packs and in date or unopened etc. My uncle was given the wrong asthma inhalers and returned them to the pharmacy they said that as they had left the premises they had to be disposed of.

OP
Your problem is with GDPR
which was agreed in 2013
why are you getting het up now?
its five years old news

@Ta1kinPeace

Why I am getting het up?

Because the law only changed on 25.5.18

Because the law wasn't meant to be used in this way. 3rd parties are supposed to pay using AMRA - tjey are using a loophole

Because profiteering using NHS funding is morally wrong.

And our local MPs have recommended we raise the issue with them

But, hey? I'm sure there are more reasons...

I've been told that Medication which has been dispensed can't be returned and reused because you don't know how it has been stored in the meantime and this may affect its quality.

OP
All it needs is for GP surgeries to get the links and refuse the requests

the law is not at fault
the way the NHS is cowering to it is

The issue of meds wastage is a whole new thread....
Pharmacies "block order" patient repeat meds on a regular basis without checking the patient still wants/needs them.

We are considering only accepting requests directly from the patient to reduce wastage.

And, yes - can't be returned and reused 😥

@Ta1kinPeace

The ICO has confirmed that if we refuse a SAR we are breaking the law.

It was the ICO who advised practices to influence the government to make changes.

I don't fancy a £4M fine going against ICO...

This entire post is an NHS staff member not cowering or cowtailing but seeking support from other NHS users and trying to get our voice heard.

Perhaps you could support this?

OP
If you refuse a SAR from the subject then yes, you are breaking the law
but a firm of solicitors by definition cannot be a "subject"
as they are not an "identifiable individual"

Talking

The firm of solicitors get their client to sign an authorisation form, to say they can request the records.

OP - people sue for damages in personal injury claims, not because they are profiteering, but because they are not confident the NHS and benefits system will look after them!

Be honest, do people get physio or whatever rehabilitation they need straightaway and for as long as they need, after an injury? Presumably you have read in the press, how the benefits system treats the disabled?

@Ta1kinPeace
You aske for the link and I provided it. Can I suggest you actually read the link in full instead of arguing without facts? If a 3rd party has consent from the patient we have to treat the requests as a SAR. If we don't do it we are breaking the law. We can however, provide directly to the patient instead of the 3rd party but that doesn't reduce the cost.

@LadysFingers

I don't think anyone gets anything quick enough in the NHS but that is down to funding policies. Our practice has had a funding cut of £200K which is impacting patient resources. But allowing more money to be taken from the NHS to fund private work is only going to make that worse, don't you think?

Surely, the individual who is suing for (usually) at least £5K can fund the £60 a practice needs to help them provide for this private work?

The point being that a claim of any type is not NHS work, is it?

The patient, insurance company, solicitor, medical report company are all financially benefiting from work the NHS is not funded to undertake.

Another extra squeeze - then poof! less GP practices for the sake of £60 for a 3rd party, but £15K+ loss for a practice.

It really is that bad and anyone who does not think it is should really read about how many GP practices are closing each week.

Yes, other businesses face this cost - but they are not publicly funded businesses paid for by the tax payer with an impact on providing already over-stretched health care services.

Yes, other businesses face this cost - but they are not publicly funded businesses paid for by the tax payer with an impact on providing already over-stretched health care services.
Tell that to councils, to the police, to the whole civil service, to schools to care homes etc etc
the NHS is not alone in facing austerity.
the NHS is not alone in having to deal with GDPR

Ta1kinPeace

You are correct - they all face austerity.

Not sure the police have to release your records.

The council are unlikely to hold up to 90 yrs/6 inches thick of relevent records you will need a copy of

Same goes for schools/care homes.

I doubt these places are receiving the level of requests a GP practice does - we also hold hospital records, school nurse records, social services records... easier to ask a GP for all of this.

Everyone expects the GP to hold most records - which they usually do.

If you agree they are in austerity - perhaps you could support the petition - or set your own up for the other services instead of being all goady on this post?

Or do you specifically hate the NHS and want it privatised?