Your feedback is important to us!

We are looking to run a short online forum/focus session to gather feedback from our customers.  If you would like to take part, please sign up here: Customer forum sign-up

Case study

  • Date:
    September 2017
  • Category:
    Medical exclusion

Example

Mrs C's applied for a community care grant for an electric rise and recline chair for her husband (Mr A). This was due to the fact that Mr A had a serious progressive disease and the sofa they had was in poor condition due to Mr A’s involuntary movements and double incontinence. Mrs C explained that occupational therapy (OT) had assessed that Mr A required this chair but the social work department were unable to provide this item. Mrs C had tried to source the item second hand but had been unable to afford it and also approached a charity but they were unable to assist.
 
The council declined the application as they considered an electric rise and recliner chair to be an excluded item .The council referred to Annex A, point 10 of the SWF guidance which is regarding a medical, surgical, optical, aural or dental item or service. Mrs C submitted a first tier review providing further details about her husband's need for this item, however the council did not change their decision and reiterated this was an excluded item.

Mrs C asked us for an independent review of the council's decision. We considered the particular facts and circumstances of his application. This included information provided by Mrs C and her husband’s OT. We disagreed with the council's assessment and did not assess that this item was a medical item. We considered that an electric rise and recline chair is not required by Mr A for on-going treatment of his condition, nor does it provide a medical function in regards to his health issues. We deemed that this chair would allow Mr A to sit comfortably and provide support to him. We consider this item to be similar to a waterproof mattress which SWF awards regularly as it is not a medical item, but does assist with on-going ill health. We therefore changed the council's decision and asked them to award this item. We provided feedback to the council about their decision making and also noted that their decision letters could have provided further details to allow the applicant to fully understand the decision making process.

Updated: July 17, 2019