But what is unreasonable is that she effectively made one honest mistake, but the amount of the ‘fine’ (I.e the accumulated penalty charges) is higher due to the length of time it took for the nhs to inform her of it, coupled with the number of prescriptions (the sicker you are, the bigger the fine).
Please look at my previous posts. The honesty of the mistake is irrelevant. Look closely at the dental penalty letter and it will clearly state that there did not need to be any fraudulent intent.
Genuine question. If she quits her job and is physically able to work, how long will she get those benefits for? Not that long I'd imagine and not worth making yourself unemployed for.
I gp private (because there were no NHS dentists in town when I moved her in 89, and I like the work my dentist does).
Where have you got those figures from? Based on the current bands you are telling us that you pay £80 for a Band 1 treatment?
I agree. All complex and nuanced.
Yes I understand that’s what it says. I am saying these charges are not reasonable for what is essentially a single mistake.
And now I remember why I much preferred chasing dodgy dentists as opposed to people giving me grief about the dental penalty charge!
That attitude is just one of the problems with "the official mind" nowadays. If a private company, eg. a parking company, were to charge a woman on benefits several hundred or thousand pounds because she hadn't read the small print on the sign, and saved the penalty up for a year so as to charge a bigger penalty, there would be outrage. But because it's petty government bureaucracy, the attitude of the officials is that it's her own fault, making a mistake is just as bad as fraud, so pay up even if it costs you your house and your job.
Indeed. Gone up a little from when the web site I looked at was last curated.
www.dentalhealth.org
Dear God please read my previous posts carefully. The ' penalty charge has not been " saved " up to make it bigger. And to trivialise it down to simply not reading the small print is ridiculous. People need to take some responsibility for their lives. And putting your signature on an official document without at least giving it a cursory glance is foolhardy. People's tendency to assume in their financial favour costs the NHS pot millions each year and we all suffer.
While I have sympathy for the frightened poor, living hand to mouth, and their scope for making mistakes, I get your point.
The major difference is that a parking company makes its 'rules' as obscure as possible, deliberately looking to line the pockets of its owners. That helps nobody but them.
Obviously if you are given a long list of conditions to read before you sign a document, the same document 52 times a year, you need to read it in detail every time. Not everyone knows that.
"Not everyone knows" you should read any official looking document that you've just put your signature on?
Who goes to the dentist 52 times a year?
