This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

GPs pursue legal challenge to lift ban on charging own patients for extra services

Exclusive A group of GPs are in talks with lawyers over plans to legally challenge the ban on GPs charging their own patients for non-NHS services.

The GPs, from New Forest Central Medical Group in Hampshire, are in early discussions with lawyers regarding a legal case which would challenge the part of the GMS contract that stops practices from charging their own patients for extra services, such as chicken pox vaccinations.

To help fund the legal fees, the group launched a crowdfunding page last Sunday which has already reached over half of its funding target.

The BMA's GP Committee expressed its support for overturning the ban, and said that while it had sought this change previously, NHS England had 'chosen to not pursue' it.

Currently GPs can provide private services but not to patients who are on their registered practice list. This means that they are forced to send their own patients requesting certain services to other providers, despite them being medically advisable.

A key example of this is with gay men, who are at a higher risk of HPV, but cannot get the HPV vaccine on the NHS.

With the aim of changing this, GPs at the annual LMCs Conference in Edinburgh last year passed a motion calling for the Government to allow practices to charge their own patients for non-NHS treatments.

But the GPC was unable to push through the stance in 2018/19 contract negotiations, with a presentation given earlier this year showing that NHS England opposed the changes.

The New Forest Central Medical Group are hoping that a legal challenge on the ban will be more effective.

GP partner Dr Matthew Davies - who is also a qualified lawyer - is leading the challenge.

He said: ‘From the practice's point of view this would hopefully increase funding, giving us greater freedom to employ more clinicians and cross-subsidise the funding of NHS work.’

Dr Davies explained that not only would this increase patient choice by allowing practices to 'offer cosmetic skin lesion removal, non-NHS vaccinations such as chickenpox, or even 30-minute, out-of-core-hour appointments'.

It would also help practices attract junior doctors, as they could compete with specialities that allow doctors to provide private services, he said.

The medical group spoke to LMCs around the country prior to launching the crowdfunding page last weekend, and reported a ‘significant degree of support’.

So far £3,130 has been donated - over half of the £5,000 target - in less than two days.

GPC chair Dr Richard Vautrey said: 'The BMA has, for some time, sought a change in the GMS contract to allow practices to provide services that are not otherwise commissioned by the NHS to their patients. NHS England has so far chosen to not pursue this with us.'

He said that the BMA believes that GP should be able to 'provide minor treatments and procedures that are not available through the NHS' as this would reduce the 'need for patients to seek expensive private hospital procedures'.

Dr Vautrey added that 'any change must not compromise the care available to all patients, free at the point of delivery within the NHS contract'.

A recent Pulse survey revealed that eight in 10 GPs would welcome charging their own patients for non-NHS services, such as longer consultations and certain vaccinations.

However some GPs expressed concern that this would 'normalise fee paying' in general practice.

Tower Hamlets GP and LMC chair Dr Jackie Applebee said: 'Allowing practices to charge their own patients for services not available on the NHS is the thin end of the wedge, and will help to normalise fee paying in a previously fee free domain.'

She added: 'Charging may well bring in more money for practices but it will also usher in a two-tier service, in which the affluent have better access.'

Readers' comments (13)

  • Good luck and good hunting,this is a battle for the future of practice between those who wish to deliver a reasonable service for a reasonable fee,and those who slavishly, mindlessly, adhere to a political doctrine, no matter the outcome.

    This will put practice on a level footing with hospital practice,address the recruitment crisis,improve standards and give patients access to a reasonable service,predictably Tower Hamlets oppose.

    The good book tells us "the labourer is worthy of his hire"presumably Tower Hamlets would take issue here also.

    Oppose this and you leave practice with nowhere to go but the privatisation of Babylon and the Hurley group,with armies of salaried doctors

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I don't understand all these arguements about a two-tear service. Some parts of the UK are now at risk of a no-tear service if we don't come up with something that makes primary care sustainable. The rest of the world copes with this and England has always favoured a free market. So long as basic care is sustained, what's not to like?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Thank you for this Dr Davies, have donated. Loved your comment on the crowdfunding page:

    “This is hopefully more useful and more practical than going on a resilience course”

    More than the college or bma have done for us.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    My opinion of charging a fee for weekend GP appointments resonate later with this . Only common sense should prevail , if services are not funded by NHS/government, we should be able to charge a fee , full stop.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Well done indeed these doctors. This could be the saving of General Practice.

    The BMA should be offering more than lip service support and "NHS England has so far chosen to not pursue this with us.' is just typically hopeless.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Vinci Ho

    Another angle of argument is under current system , many patients paid to see a consultant in a private consultation, these patients, so often, end up seeing the same consultant in a NHS hospital for following up the same problem . Accordingly , this kind of practice should be banned as well??

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I agree wholeheartedly with being able to charge pt's -both for core and noncore services!!!!as for 2-tier system- the last 4 episodes of ill health in my family have had to be private because timely NHS care is simply not available any longer-so i'm busy propping up a system that i cant get what i need out of.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Very well done to these doctors. Why does BMA not fund this? Great to see positive action. Ideally this would not be needed I agree but conditions are not ideal. DDA please do the same and allow GPs to dispense to all. Why does a conservative government oppose this? One suspects that they secretly agree but want to be seen to oppose it.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • All Poltical Parties see this as a non-vote winner. There in lies the problem.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Why isn’t the BMA pursuing this on behalf of its members??

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page

Have your say