To myself this is not just misconduct, but gross misconduct and the panel only gave a caution order for 5 years and he lost his job a CAPITA.
It was also said he stated ‘lauded by Capita for the high percentage of excellent reports he produced and was well paid. He had allowed all this to “go to his head”.’ But his ‘high percentage of excellent reports he produced’ was down to lies, so his reports were not excellent.
To me the least he should have been given would a life-time sanction or even complete dismissal from any form of health related employment.
panel said that ‘although Barham’s behaviour was not sufficient to warrant being struck off the professional register, and this was an isolated incident for which he had shown remorse,’
As I have said above I completely disagree with the panels first part of the statement and in fact the next part of their statement ‘this was an isolated incident’, by their own admission ‘several members of the public filed complaints about his conduct following the broadcast of the Channel 4 Dispatches programme in April 2016.’. So it was not an isolated incident, as the incidents were not isolated but did from the one court prosecution and if there were this number how many were they from persons who have not come forward.
In fact, it surely does not need aggrieved claimants to come forward, for should this not also be part of the Appeals process. The process includes the evidence produced by the claimants and the report from the assessor. The appeal process should be 2 fold. checking that the PIP assessment looked at all the evidence and the also the conduct of the assessor. Unfortunately it appears the process is only concentrating on the former and not the latter, or is intentional by the DWP.
Where a decision has been concluded incorrectly then should the assessor receive payment for producing the report, for surely, payment is not only for producing a report but it should be for producing an accurate report. If it is not, then surely fraud is being committed by the assessor and therefore a refund of the appropriate payment should be the case from the assessor.
This is accountability, something that is sadly lacking in all aspects of Government, whether it be local or central and should also apply to health when relevant.
A benefits assessor who was caught on film mocking disabled claimants of personal independence payments and suggesting they were liars has been found guilty of misconduct by a professional standards tribunal.
Alan Barham, a paramedic who carried out PIP assessments for Capita in Northampton, brought his profession into disrepute and undermined public confidence in the integrity of the PIP assessment process, a health and care professions disciplinary panel found.
It issued a five-year caution order, meaning any prospective employer will have access to details of the case on an online professional register for that period.
Barham was covertly filmed by a Channel 4 undercover journalist. Footage showed him boasting that he would largely complete assessment forms before meeting the claimant, and afterwards would often disregard the evidence they gave during their assessment.
He told the reporter he would “completely dismiss” claimants’ explanations for why they needed disability benefit, and rely…
View original post 468 more words