Right. But, you still need your GP to sign you as unfit for work after a certain period of time? My situation actually worked the other way around. My GP said he couldn't sign me off work because I didn't have a diagnosis (that is actually stated in my medical records) and that he thought my symptoms were emotionally based. It only transpired months later that my symptoms were in fact based in a physical problem - which, had he read my blood test results, would have proven that my illness was not emotionally based. Hence I was left with an untreated degenerative condition that prevented me from functioning properly, but was still expected to support myself because my GP refused to believe my symptoms were 'real.'

No. I'm not unemployed. I'm still classed as self employed. This is mainly due to the fact that I have never been diagnosed as being ill. Plus, my medical records still show all my symptoms as being related to emotional issues rather than the illness that was missed. Which doesn't help when you go to see a GP who will go by what your medical records state. As I said earlier, I went to the Ombudsman to try and get the facts right so I can get my medical records put right and then any doctor I go to see will treat me accordingly. And, although I do tend to 'waffle' I'd really appreciate a little bit of courtesy in your postings. I waffle sometimes because, and this is the bit I'm now trying to prove, my central nervous system was damaged due to non-treatment. Also, I did manage to diagnose myself, treat myself and take on and win against a health authority despite the fact I was very ill and the thing I have the most trouble with is comprehension and paperwork.

The other thing, of course, is not related to benefits but to when a doctor is negligent. That in itself means nothing. A doctor can be negligent till the cows come home but unless you actually prove causation - ie an injury or harm resulting directly from that negligence, then you are still on a hiding to nothing on the financial front. You simply cannot pursue monies under negligence. You can take a GP to the medical council for them to make a decision on it and impose whatever sanctions they see fit, but it still doesn't help the person the GP has been negligent toward.

Hi Speedfreak, Sorry, I missed your posting. Where are we now, is even more complicated, so it's probably better to focus for the moment on what happened regarding the missed diagnosis. I don't have an official sick note for the year the condition was missed. However, as I mentioned in the first post, I took my case to the Ombudsman and it was upheld. They have medical specialists look at it, who decided there could be no doubt my symptoms at the time were related to the missed condition. Plus, they have upheld the fact that I discovered the missed deficient blood test and therefore the GP practice were negligent in this. As I also said earlier, I don't have it all in writing yet and would think some things depend on the exact wording. As for trying to claim from the practice for any lost income - haven't got a clue how that would work. I was told that I could claim back sickness benefits but only up to 3 months. These would have to be supported by my GP but the forms they sent didn't seem to relate to it at all! If you think of this situation as somebody who had a case of diabetes missed because test results weren't examined, then it gives you a general idea of the type of case we are looking at.

Hang on I think I've got what you mean. You mean that you could have a diagnosis of say, bone cancer, but that in itself is just a diagnosis. As long as you are fit to work with the condition then you can't have a sick note? My problem is that although I did have a blood test showing the cause of my symptoms, my GP didn't read it. Therefore he put all my symptoms down to 'being in the mind,' and refused to sign me off sick. The fact is that he was later proved wrong and my symptoms should have been put down to my condition which he would have recognised had he actually read the blood test results. There is no argument from the medical profession now that my symptoms were related to a condition identified in the blood test.

Could you clarify this for me please, Nystagmite. You seem to be saying that you don't need the GP to say you are unfit for work, you just need yourself to state you are unfit for work? However, if the posters in the GPs surgery are anything to go by, I think it states that if you are sick for 7 days or less then you can self certify. If it's anything more then you have to have a GPs note to say you are unfit for work. What do you mean exactly by

I think I should just clarify here: What option did I have other than to remain self-employed and at least try to muddle through. My GP wouldn't sign me off sick and so I couldn't claim any sickness benefits (even though it was later proven I was very sick) CAB told me I needed a sick note to claim benefits and that if I simply sign off as self employed and as a jobseeker then I would have made myself unemployed without good reason. Plus, if I did sign on as a jobseeker I would still have to look for work even though I most certainly wasn't fit to do it. I was caught between a rock and a hard place.

If we just take the situation during the time I was definitely ill but the diagnosis was being missed. The GP wouldn't sign me off to help me claim any benefits because he said I had no physical illness. I phoned CAB and they said to claim benefits I needed a sick note. Therefore I was still registered as self employed but couldn't earn anything (much) because I was too ill. I also understood that if I simply decided to stop being self-employed, then, because I had 'officially' no particular reason I would have made myself unemployed and not entitled again. Instead I just lived off my savings. When they were gone, I sold my house. There is now no question that during the year I was very ill and my symptoms were directly related to the deficient blood test recorded in my notes. I must point out here as well that I know nothing about benefits. I've worked for over 30 years and never claimed. So I don't understand any of the acronyms being mentioned on the site. Sorry!

Hi, The upshot is that I was, and still am, self-employed. I went to the GP because I was ill and over the course of a year they did various blood tests but I was told all was normal. During this time I asked to be signed off sick and was told I could not be because I hadn't been diagnosed with an illness. Basically I was told it was all in my mind. After a year I asked to see my blood test results and picked up on one that had been done a year earlier that clearly showed I was ill. I then started receiving treatment. I moved house/doctors, and started a case with the Ombudsman to get my medical records altered (they were all based on the 'emotional' stuff) and to prove my case regarding the missed diagnosis. During all this time I am still required to work. I did contact benefits and they said I needed a GP to say I had been ill during the time my diagnosis had been missed. Unfortunately my current GP was going on all the 'emotional' stuff in my records. I have now had my case upheld to prove that I was indeed ill at least during the year I did not get treatment due to the missed deficient blood test result. What do I do now? Who do I contact? I'd like, at least to be able to claim any benefits I was entitled to during that year. It's taken nearly another year (and I still haven't got it in writing) to prove I was ill and my GP should have given me treatment. Basically my life has been trashed just because a procession of doctors failed to read my blood test results.

Yes, there were a lot of suggestions. No action though. Best idea would have been to read through my blood test results...like I did. That's how 'we' discovered what was wrong with me! Crikey, even I can hear the cynic in me...

Well, I never actually got one (didn't get the chest x-ray either) but it's good to know what it is at least. My GP seemed to be excellent at suggesting all this stuff but never actually actioned any of it!

The 24hr tape thing is sorted! Apparently it means 24hr ECG or Ambulatory ECG. Thanks for the pointers Nolegion.

Ah ha! There, you see, my paranoia has suddenly subsided. Many thanks for your prompt and informative response!

I was actually thinking more of what '24hr tape' refers to. Is it medical terminology linking to the chest x-ray somehow?

I'm new to this forum so apologies if I'm preaching to the converted, but have you tried AVMA for advice? I too am suspicious of all these 'advisory' bodies and my first thoughts are where the funding comes from for such large organisations, but I think AVMA are independant. A quick google will pull up their website.