Client was turned down for IIDB on basis he did not have VWF. Client has been awarded civil compensation from British Coal.

Have got copy of British Coal report. I have not interpreted one of these before!

On sensorineural staging, he scores
Right Hand: "2 Sn (early): Intermittent or persistent numbness, and/or tingling, reduced sensory perception with a score of >6 <9"
Left Hand: "2 Sn (late): As 2 Sn (early) but with a score of >9 <16"

On vascular staging, he scores (both RH and LH)
1V: "Attacks affecting only the tips of the distal phalanges of one or more fingers and usually a blanching score of 1-4"

Any help would be very much appreciated.

Hi Jo,

your client will have problems with the claim for IIB, the DWP and NCB criteia are different. The civil claims consider the sensory loss, the IIB only consider the amount of blanching.

The degree of the condition is usually given as a 'stage' of between 1 and 4, blanching of the fingers is usually only severe enough to meet the IIB criteria at stage 3 or 4.

The other problem tends to be the statement given by the client at the time of the IIB medical, and the symptoms set out on the original claim forms, as well as the statement recorded in the civil medical reports.

In my experience very few clients actually make any comment on colour changes with in their fingers, and if the do they will usually speak about any colour other than white.

May be worth while appealing but the MAT will tend to look closely at any statement that suddenly starts talking about 'blanching'.

Although in effect both the civil and DWP claims are for the same condition the civil claim usually refers to the condition as 'hand/arm vibration syndrome', and it's the DWP prescribed disease that is known as 'vibration white finger' the clue being in the name. The prescription is set out on page 1459 of the CPAG hand book.

Dear Jo,
I also have a client turned down for IIDB who got civil compensation from NCB:- interesting point that may capture your imagination, an official error may have occurred if client showed evidence to EMP from NCB then EMP decided that this evidence was inaccurate, the crux of the matter being that if the doctors from the NCB are more qualified than the EMP to judge the disability then an official error has occurred, just a thought. Will get back to you regarding the sensory readings as I'm struggling myself, okay?

Should keep in mind that the criteria for the NCB claim and that of the IIB are different. The civil report obtained for the NCB claim most likely will have focused on the sensory changes, numbness, loss of dexterity, tingling etc, and the IIB PD A11 'Vibration White Finger' will be focused on the 'episodic blanching of the fingers - through out the year'. In my experience most people with this condition are more concerned about the numbness, pain and discomfort and so tend not to say anything about the blanching.

Hi Jo,

Possible way forward for your client, I believe there are plans afoot to alter the prescription of PDA11 to include sensory changes... may grounds to review (unforseen aggr?) the changes due for April this year.

May be worth contacting the IIBen section and asking whether they are planning to review/revise decisions in the light of changed prescription, or will they expect 'fresh' claims?

Suspect there will be the same back logs and delays as for CBEmph claims as every one who has been turned down for PDA11 for lack of episodic blanching go for reviews (supersessions?)

Good Luck.

Neil

re the new rules from april 2005 ... more info @

http://www.rightsnet.org.uk/cgi-bin/forwardsql/search.cgi?template2=user_details2.htm&output_number=1&sort=news.submission_date+desc&news.ID=121515527106

Dear Neil
After reading your remarks and the reports about the changes to VWF I contacted the IIB section no-one knew of the changes immediately however someone now says that the decision to implement changes has been defered to October 05 can anyone onfirm this.

I too have an appeal due end of March the description on my clients report is very similar to yours Jo.

Kind regards
Nigel

That's news to me, but now I'm working as a generalist advisor I have dropped out of the loop on specialist disability issues. However, will start shaking a few trees and see what I can come up with.

Dear Neil

Represented at VWF appeal last Wednesday, LOST!

It wasn't unexpected as I know the remit for VWF re DWP is so tight where as the remit for civil cases is alot wider.

As you are aware civil cases always go down the route of HAVS whereas the DWP want VWF. I argued after doing some research that HAVS and VWF are he same. Unfortunately Social Security Law dictates otherwise.

The district chairman who was in charge of precedings did know that the new wider remit was comming in poss. October, he said they are expecting an avalanche of appeals and suggested to my client to watch this space and as soon as the law changes re submit his claim.

Speak to you later .

regards
Nigel

Nigel and Neil. I spoke to DWP D.M's dept at Sutton in Ashfield office (main IIDB exponent in our area) yesterday. They replied after searching their Intranet and are under the impression that April 2006 will be the likely date for the change in prescription of VWF. So it's all up in the air.

A similar situation arose some years ago in relation Bronchitis and Emphysema, where IIAC reported that the Cotes scale used by the DWP to measure lung capacity, volume, etc was somewhat dated and should be changed to the more favourable European Standard scale. Lots of talk ensued and then it all disapeared without a trace. So I'm keeping my tingling fingers crossed that we do actually see the changes to VWF at sometime in the future.

Jo, I'm guessing that you have had quite a few responces to this already. Rather than go into lots of detail here, you are welcome to call me regarding this issue. I have been dealing with Industrial Injuries appeals for a good 6 years and VWF is one of most common claims I deal with. I'm 01773 728272.

Joe Knight, Derbyshire County Council, Welfare Rights Service.

Hi Jo, it's Joe again. Forgot to mention about the supposed new April expansion of the criteria for VWF. Just to let you know, nothing has been detailed yet and the DWP's that deal with IIDB have not been given any information about the inclusion of sensorial loss. So as things stand vascular staging at 3 to 4v are the only claims likely to stand any chance of success.