New checks to crack down on free prescription fraud

[Northerner]

Patients claiming free prescriptions face checks before medicine is issued in an effort to stamp out fraud.

Prescription fraud currently costs the NHS an estimated £256m a year in England.

A new digitised system to be piloted next year will mean pharmacies can instantly verify who is entitled to free medication.

But pharmacists have opposed similar plans in the past, saying they harm patient trust.

Currently, patients either present an exemption certificate or sign the back of their prescription stating they do not have to pay the £8.80 charge.

The NHS Business Authority runs random checks, but only after the medication has been dispensed.

In 2016-17, the number of £100 fines it issued for false claims doubled to more than 900,000.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-45850140

Make sure you have an exemption certificate if you need one! 😱 A lot of people got caught out when they last had a 'crackdown', often unfairly as they didn't realise they needed one - many people on insulin for a couple of decades, for example, didn't have one because they assumed they were exempt and and been diagnosed before the scheme was introduced. Diabetes UK got many of those fines overturned.

It's a pointless and unfair system - prescriptions are only charged for in England

 

[mikeyB]

Aye, it doesn’t cost the NHS £256m, because they haven’t costed in how much it costs to run the system. Scotland worked it out using the global cost, and found that it was cheaper to give everyone free prescriptions. Saves time and money.

 

[trophywench]

I never understood that 'people not knowing because it hadn't been introduced all that long'. It was certainly the case in 1972 and the crackdown that caused the furore was comparatively recently. However, whereas we always had to register for it ourselves, I was told by the GP I moved to here when I moved house to a different area and county that they would do my change of address, not me. They must have done since I got a new card which they re- issued from the date I registered with the surgery. They also renewed it without any input from me.

 

[trophywench]

Thinking about it though, it's probably 'those on certain benefits' because you just tick something on the back and sign it, you don't have to prove to anyone that you ARE in receipt of the benefit, just a tick and squiggle. Dental treatment's the same. They have to find you to take action against you and you'd be wise to that if you're a fraudster presumably.

Glasses, you have to actually apply for a voucher to present to the optician, which is much more sensible but there again isn't as urgent as drugs are when you need them so a short delay really doesn't matter.

 

[Northerner]

I never understood that 'people not knowing because it hadn't been introduced all that long'. It was certainly the case in 1972 and the crackdown that caused the furore was comparatively recently. However, whereas we always had to register for it ourselves, I was told by the GP I moved to here when I moved house to a different area and county that they would do my change of address, not me. They must have done since I got a new card which they re- issued from the date I registered with the surgery. They also renewed it without any input from me.

My certificate had expired for two years when the news broke about the crackdown. I never got a reminder letter, and I'd only been diagnosed for 7 years at that time, but I'd totally forgotten about it since I'd never been asked - I can certainly understand that people who had never been challenged in 20/30/40 years might not even be aware of their existence, particularly if diagnosed as a minor I'm 60 very soon, so it's not a consideration for me now. As @mikeyB says it's pretty pointless anyway, since as well as the numerous exemptions there are also the discount schemes which means that it can't possibly cover the cost of 'policing' it, or even managing the bureaucracy 🙄

https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about_us/news/-victory-in-campaign-to-cancel-diabetes-fines-

 

[Hepato-pancreato]

Dentists want proof of benefit. Well in mine they do. Seen a young woman chastised for not having proof of exemption last time I was there. Was embarrassed for her, Receptionist wouldn’t have spoken to me like that.
Can’t see what they moan at £8.80 charge. If they got a regular prescription you would buy the yearly ppc £104 .
My bet it is for antibiotics for yearly chest infection from the 20 a day habit. So a one off. Or a packet of fags.

 

[grovesy]

Dentists want proof of benefit. Well in mine they do. Seen a young woman chastised for not having proof of exemption last time I was there. Was embarrassed for her, Receptionist wouldn’t have spoken to me like that.
Can’t see what they moan at £8.80 charge. If they got a regular prescription you would buy the yearly ppc £104 .
My bet it is for antibiotics for yearly chest infection from the 20 a day habit. So a one off. Or a packet of fags.

o

Dentists want proof of benefit. Well in mine they do. Seen a young woman chastised for not having proof of exemption last time I was there. Was embarrassed for her, Receptionist wouldn’t have spoken to me like that.
Can’t see what they moan at £8.80 charge. If they got a regular prescription you would buy the yearly ppc £104 .
My bet it is for antibiotics for yearly chest infection from the 20 a day habit. So a one off. Or a packet of fags.

Not everybody knows about prepayment for prescriptions and not all pharmacies inform people of them.