Too much info with ESA50?

A friend has received his esa50 and for each question he has put 'please see attached'. The attached, is his typed response to all that the esa50 requests information about and is all beautifully typed and paragraphed and spell-checked by his wife. Much of it is from his recent DLA appeal.
The problem is - as I see it, is that his response is some 30+ A4 pages long and about 17,000 words. I found there was some repetition and places where it could be less wordy, but the upshot is that it is factual and not 'woffle', and refers and deals with the illnesses from which he now suffers and the effects these have on him. If someone butchers it down to the bare basics, it could be reduced (I'd estimate) to maybe 20 pages although I'd say at this point information relevant to his case could be lost. It would also start reading like a telegram.
Would submitting such a long document help him or irritate the recipients?

Thanks

I just sent in my esa50 and it ended up being 100 pages of answering the questions and 75 pages of medical evidence. As far as I am concerned I have complex medical conditions and it is not straight forward to do short answers as all my conditions have an effect on each other. I feel that if you do not put the information down they are not going to know or understand the problems you have so put all information in otherwise they may make wrong assumptions. Also if they are making you fill the form in I fell they are being paid to do the job of reading it regardless of how long or short it is.

As someone who was 'conned' into believing I did not need to include lengthy explanations of my disabling conditions, having been told in the preliminary phone call that my GP would be contacted, and I would be called for a medical examination, I would suggest your friend is doing the right thing. It could prevent the Unnecessary, lengthy, stressful process of having to appeal a wrong decision. I certainly regret not providing full descriptive details in my ESA 50.

However, this is just my humble opinion, and perhaps moderators have better advice than I can give.

Best of luck to your friend. I hope he gets the result he is looking for.

PC

Hi DK,

Whilst agreeing with Gordon in the main, in that one should try and keep the ESA50 and any extra evidence as concise and to the point as possible, as he says do not leave any relevant evidence out.

Providing historical reports, X-rays, MRI's, test results can only help to substantiate that your medical condition may be long standing, chronic and/or progressive, and that you are therefore more likely to suffer the resulting limitations that may help you qualify through the descriptors.

Of course, if one obtained one's G.P, records, you would not have to include spurious consultations and illnesses such as coughs and colds.

I would provide an index, and cross reference any important evidence to how and why you feel that you may qualify under any particular descriptor.

I would put the most upto date evidence at the front, and draw attention to it.

In my opinion, a lot of these ESA50's are not read "initially" by the ATOS HCP, however it is still important to send as much relevant evidence as possible, as it will then be available in the case of a reconsideration/appeal.

The ones that I have had input with. where more or less in the form of an "Evidence Bundle" in that they could have been used in an appeal without much being added.

In fact, in the case that I mentioned earlier on today, where the relative was originally placed into The WRAG, they were placed into The SG within 2 working days, without providing any further evidence, once the reviewing DM read the ESA50 and extra pages at reconsideration.

The DM commented, that the format of the ESA50 content, and the extra pages had made it easy for him to ammend the WRAG award to SG, which says a lot really with respect to the ATOS HCP's , original recommendation in the paper assessment.

That is the main issue, make it as clear and as easy as possible for the ATOS HCP and The DM to give you the correct award.

This of course in my own opinion, and the advice given by Gordon is perfectly relevant also.

Finally, make sure you use B&W's excellent ESA Claims Guides.

bro58