Printable View
TPV has now instructed lawyers, not 1 but 2. Different ones to the CSP and PF.
It's time to press the flesh. Think 6 sessions!! Think of the tax deductions!! Think of our future.....
Are you out there and would you like to contribute? Join us and many, many others. email to [email protected] and we'll get right back to you.
Spread the Love
TPV
Nuffield Health and VERY strong as I commented on TPV comments box. It wouldn't surprise me if they have a LOT of city backing to get themselves positioned to tender for masses of NHS contract work. One look at their website is enough to show they are well set up to manage "choose and book" and also many local NHS services. Their goal is to have a clinic 20 minutes from everyone in the UK.
On a lateral thinking note
Has it occurred to anyone that perhaps a consideration is the lack of Physiotherapy only insurance avaiable?
After all we have Denplan, and Chiroplan, why no Physioplan?
If anyone knows anyone in the independent insurance development sector surely this is the way forward.
I did look into trying to get an underwriter to set up this very sort of insurance 2 or 3 years ago but couldn't contact the right folk.
If there was an alternative policy for people wanting to reclaim the costs of their Physiotherapy treatment and rehabilitation then perhaps it would be another route for us as professionals to promote such a policy to our patients.
I once again reiterate that all these changes have been happening gradually over the past few years, and I really do wonder just what the CSP has been doing with its head apparently stuck under ground unaware of this time bomb.
With regard Physiofirst, all I can say is if they are meant to represent 'private practitioners' and have known that this was coming I think they should all resign.
Radically, my deep down opinion is that this whole debacle requires all Physiotherapists who work OUTSIDE the NHS to reflect on what they get for their CSP and or PhysioFirst membership.
Isn't it time we looked hard at the CSP and asked why they haven't made us aware as a membership that all this is around with companies like Nuffield Health, BUPA, UnumProvident, and the rest ?
I feel let down by the CSP
I just phoned HSA and there didn't seem to be any change in their requirements just their normal HPC registration etc
Well done to all of you on your great discussion and comments which I am avidly following up in Scotland
I'd like to hear from any other scottish physios out there
Gone a bit quiet round here. Is evryone busy tendering?!
I see we have new Q&A's from BUPA via PF/CSP. As far as I can see, they are just that, i.e. not changes to the binding terms and conditions.
I have seen nothing yet that will persuade me to go ahead with the tender; interesting though, that Physiofirst are a little more clear about what they think of it all in their last message. The idea of a 'Physioplan' is interesting, but would need a lot of marketing.
Does anyone know if Bupa Wellness and Nuffield Health are connected in any way?
Glad you noticed that, JacobI, the fact that CSP/PF actually expressed their opinion about the tender. I do hope others didn't miss that. It isn't outright direction but surely we can take the hint.
Interesting also to note that, on the other blog - The Physios Voice - a contributor has confirmed that BUPA has informed them that they have only had 'a trickle' of tenders so far.
I telephoned CSP today about something else and then asked how the BUPA tender advice was going, and also if they had a copy of the BUPA contract they could email me as I seem to have mislaid mine. Not much in the way of answers from the receptionist, so I ended the call.
Interestingly I got a call back about an hour later from the CSP head of Policy! Asking what I wanted to know. Mentioned my concerns, as per this thread and stating that I felt I couldn't sign the contract as, apart from all the other concerns, I only treat children and there is nowhere in the contract that this can be clarified. I was informed of todays update from PF/CSP but during the call it was frequently stressed that if I did not tender it would be my decision and there was no guarentee there would be another opportunity later. This was said dispite my saying that I thought that PF & CSP had advised us not to tender yet. Basically I was advised to call BUPA to clarify my position... Still v. unlikely to tender unless the contract can be more specific to my speciality and everyones autonomy.
I think I should restate the premise of all our discussions.
- Bupa are a Private Medical Insurer
- Bupa has a contract to cover their customers.
- Physio's have a contract to provide a duty of care with their patients
- Some of those patients have contracts with BUPA to cover the costs associated with the delivery of that care. Others do not.
- By supporting patients with health care provision we enable companies like BUPA to exist and make money off the margins between cover they have to pay out on and revenues they generate from those customers annual fees.
Now we do not need to have a contract with the PMI, why would we? They make a business off our business, through extracting money out of their customers. We should not be looking to contract with any PMI on a fixed priced deal or in any deal that works for some of us but leaves many of our fellow physio's out in the cold.
The voice from the CSP and Physio First, for the good of the profession, should be loud and strong that they recommend that physiotherapists do NOT participate in any contractual agreement with any PMI. It is simply not in our interests.
We are in the strong position as BUPA makes their money off our services. If we all we to say no to BUPA patients unless they present free of any restricted terms and conditions, then BUPA has no business. :mad:
Get it!
Payment for musculoskeletal treatment makes up more than half of a company such as BUPA's outgoings. This means that you need to make money elsewhere from the customers who are not accessing physio type treatment. If you had a physio only plan you'd be broke in the first 6 months. This is why it does not exist. We all know patients that feel if they fork out £1000 a year on cover then they are going to try and get £1000+ more back in value for treatment. And if those were just physio specific clients who just love to see their physio each week, where would PhysioPlan be? Not sure anyone would put money into backing that one :oQuote:
Originally Posted by Jill Wigmore-Welsh
Afternoon.
TPV has some very, very important news on www.thephysiosvoice.co.uk going live at 3pm.
Keep Spreading that Love
TPV
Thanks for the letter.we are getting there. I want to say that we need to have insight into the positions of our professional bodies, that they will be being advised as to what they can and cannot state to us without being subject to legal action, in addition to getting legal advice about the process on our behalf. they cannot state it more directly for those reasons BUT the last statement states their positions plainly; that "they fundamentally disagree with it". Thats business speak and actually is strong. hear it as that. They cant be seen to be telling people what to do. the statement is clearly "advised" but they express their position. We as members of the profession can however throw our weight behind our stance as individuals without risk of any breaking of the law and as we are doing so, the csp and physio first may well be saying privately come on, you can do it! It has to come from us. thats the point. I just want those that are so frustrated with them to not alieniate physios that are unsure but then think from the angry posts here that we are just those radical types. As much as the prof bodies represent us their "role" places them in a slightly different place to us. Thats the very nature of their position compared to ours. I hope that people can see the whole with all its parts. We can exercise our choice wisely then. We want time to consult, get advice and deliberate and we needn't be rushed, would you usually sign a contract that someone else had put all the terms to and you hadn't contributed? Do you want a contact at all? we are "independent" providers of valued and necessary skills.We've worked hard for that, keep it that way. Thanks for those working on it, A
:pI thoroughly agree with the above comment. Incidentally, I have not had an alert from this site for a while - surely the message from TPV should be spread as widely as possible on this penultimate day!
For those reading this, I am just an 'ordinary' physio, who has worked in the profession for over thirty years, in the NHS and then as a private practitioner. I have been involved in professional affairs within the CSP in a small way through clinical interest, so have perhaps a little more insight as to how things work there, and agree with andylouise comment regarding having to be careful what they say. But we as individuals can shout, and must shout together NO WAY BUPA!!
This is today's update from the collective work of many and the instruction of our independent legal team. Many thanks to Max et al. who have worked tirelessly on behalf of the rest of us.Quote:
The following represents a legal challenge that has been presented to BUPA. We wanted this to come from the CSP - they have been given so many opportunities to make a better job of representing you, their members best interests. They have singularly failed to do so. Competence comes in to the equation not just hard work.
This has been sent to BUPA this afternoon. Read and decide for yourself if, given the legality of the situation you still want to sign up to the tender. This has been drafted by the Head of Competition Practice at Nabarro LLP not a medical negligence lawyer instructed by the CSP…enough said.
Tender for physiotherapy services
We understand that BUPA has been in discussion with the Chartered Society for Physiotherapy (”CSP”) and Physio First and that through these discussions BUPA will be well aware of the considerable concerns which the industry has raised about BUPA’s proposals for a network and about the conduct of its tender process.We are writing in connection with BUPA’s tender for physiotherapy services.
We now seek urgent clarification of BUPA’s tender, and in view of the impending closing date for tender submissions (Friday, 24 April 2009) we request that you immediately suspend the tender process so that the concerns raised are properly aired and addressed.
The issues of concern are as follows:
1. We remain concerned that the tender process will have the effect of significantly reducing the number of providers which BUPA recognises and is willing to reimburse. BUPA’s Advisory Notes for the Tender state: “The number of providers selected for each region will depend on our volume requirement in that region … we will then appoint sufficient providers to ensure that there is appropriate local capacity to meet the requirements of our members.“
We understand that BUPA has been in discussion with CSP and Physio First and has indicated that it is prepared to remove any cap on the number of providers which will be admitted to the network.
We seek BUPA’s urgent written clarification that, notwithstanding the terms of the invitation to tender, there will be no limits on the number of providers selected within any region. Furthermore, if this is indeed the case, and all providers are potentially able to secure a place on the network, tenderers need to understand how BUPA will evaluate tenders and select providers. Will there, for example, be a “minimum” price or quality requirement, which a tenderer must meet in order to secure appointment to the network? If so, tenderers are entitled to understand what these minimum requirements are.
BUPA’s apparent indication that it will not have any limit based on volume requirements represents a fundamental change to its tender. In the interests of transparency and fairness, BUPA now need to explain to tenderers how the selection process will operate.
2. We are concerned that the requirements imposed upon physiotherapists under the new contract may constitute regulated activities under the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (”FSMA“). Since contravention of FSMA is a criminal offence, we propose to seek clarification from the FSA prior to recommending that physiotherapists enter into the new contract with BUPA. If the physiotherapists would be carrying out a regulated activity under the new contract, and the contract terms were not changed by you, each physiotherapist would need to become an appointed representative of BUPA prior to his entering into the new contract with you.
Under the Financial Services and Markets Act (Regulated Activities Order) 2001 (as amended) (”RAO“) physiotherapists may provide information about an insurance policy to BUPA members on an incidental basis. In addition, they may manage claims on behalf of BUPA. We propose to seek clarification as to whether clauses 3 and 4 of the new contract impose obligations on the physiotherapists which are beyond those which are permitted under the RAO and, more generally, confirmation as to whether a regulated activity would be carried out by the physiotherapists under the new contract. Our key concerns are twofold. Firstly, since physiotherapists act as agents of the member (who is their principal), they owe fiduciary duties to that member. This means that in entering into the new contract with BUPA, the physiotherapist is putting himself in a position of conflict. Further, the new contract requires the physiotherapist to advise on and explain certain terms of a member’s policy to them including level of coverage, exclusions etc. If such activities are regulated activities under FSMA then, by entering into the new contract with BUPA without first having become an authorised representative of it, the physiotherapists will be committing a criminal offence.
3. BUPA’s own primary care business – BUPA Wellness – is a significant provider of physiotherapy services. We call on BUPA to explain what safeguards it will put in place to ensure that the tender process is fair and non-discriminatory and that tenders from BUPA Wellness clinics are evaluated on an arm’s-length basis. BUPA is aware that both the OFT and the Competition Commission have previously raised concerns about the lack of “Chinese walls” between BUPA’s insurance and clinical services activities. Our understanding is that the BUPA Wellness business is closely integrated within BUPA’s insurance operations and therefore it is difficult to see what information barriers are in place to ensure that tenders are treated on a non-discriminatory basis and without preference to BUPA Wellness. We therefore call on BUPA to explain – in the interest of ensuring that tenderers have full confidence in the tender process – what measures it is taking to ensure even-handedness in relation to BUPA Wellness.
4. We also ask BUPA to clarify the extent to which providers in a network are entitled to charge additional fees above the BUPA reimbursement level – so-called “top-up fees” – to subscribers. Clause 4 of the standard terms and conditions appears to require that the provider may only submit invoices to BUPA and may not separately invoice patients in respect of any shortfalls. This is a fundamental departure from the normal practice between insurance companies and providers, where providers have been typically free to negotiate top-up fees with patients above the insurance company’s reimbursement level. We would view with considerable concern any attempt to restrict top-up fees, which appear to raise significant competition issues.
These concerns are shared by many other members of CSP and Physio First, as you will be aware from your discussions. It is impossible for BUPA to run a fair tender process, and to expect applicants to be in a position to bid, until these important issues of principle have been addressed. In the circumstances, we would ask you to suspend the tender process pending clarification and proper discussion to resolve the industry’s concerns.
In the event that BUPA proceeds, we are seeking legal advice as to the legal remedies which may be available, and we intend to bring these matters to the attention of the Office of Fair Trading by way of complaint.
Yours sincerely...
Now again from thephysiosvoice team..
Let’s be clear. This may not be a silver bullet but it will make BUPA think hard about what they are doing. It will force them to clarify, in writing, their position on some key commercial issues not the inconsequential bits and bobs negotiated so far by the CSP on our behalf. This will take some time and will force them to take a less aggressive and overbearing approach to this process. Let’s just take the time to revisit some facts. Signing up to this now, in the current state would be extremely foolhardy. Signing up to any form of restrictive network and breaking your contract with the patient is not a smart move either. We all do have a choice and should not feel bullied in to something we don’t like and we know is bad for the profession. We really are at a cross roads. Which road do you want to go down? Sorry - the facts:
1. Start the erosion of the very clinical autonomy that allows us to deliver the best outcome for our patients.
2. Tendering will mean a loss of choice for patients and will effectively break our contract with them. Tendering will mean you have a legally binding contract with an Insurance company who will be able to dictate who you see and how you treat and the price you can charge for doing so.
3. Tendering is no guarantee of success - BUPA have made it explicitly clear that tendering at a level below the guide pricing is more likely to lead to success.
4. Tendering will mean agreeing to some very one sided terms and conditions and if you think for a moment that BUPA have the desire or resources to negotiate with us all separate terms and conditions then please think again.
5. The other insurers will follow if this tender process is successful - that’s almost guaranteed in my eyes.
6. I also think that what is on the table today and indeed not on the table today will change at some point and if you think your negotiating position is weak today then once you have a contract and a network is established it’ll actually be weaker.
Let us know what you think. Let others know…
I posted a naive comment about 7 days ago (seems like 7 years). I have just treated 16 patients really well and with great professionalism. They all left my clinic happy. GET STUFFED BUPA you need us more than we need you. I will not be tendering. Not now. Not ever in its present form.:)
Re. the recent legal challenge (TPV), Brilliant! Any way this can be forwarded to the email accounts used previously?
Hello Everyone,
I have been following developments from a distance and I admire and commend the tenacity and resolution of the members posting their comments.
However if I may I would like to play the devil's advocate on the whole process.
Is it possible that BUPA have factored in the physiotherapist's reaction to their tender process.
Now let's assume that every tender that is submitted before the deadline is accepted on the list of "approved providers"
So in effecct I may be a Patient of my chosen therapist
Then I suddenly have problem that I need help with.
I follow my normal "clinical care pathway" (They do not actually start with the therapist )
They phone BUPA and I give my preferred therapists name.
BUPA then tell the patient that their preferred therapist is not on the list of approved providers.
The patient asks why and BUPA says "We are unable to disclose that information. We suggest that you direct that question to your therapist"
Sorry but a bit long winded; here's the point.
Supposing that BUPA accept EVERY physio who has "tendered" (To me personally an erroneous word in this context) a contract to provide services for their patients.
In effect:
We have self policed our profession
Taken the onus off BUPA to legislate who is fit to effectively practice
And they can turn around and say "Every physiotherapist that tendered has been included on the list of BUPA recognised providers. Why your specific therapist did not tender is not within our control.We suggest that you ask them directly the reason for their decision not to tender"
Put our own regulatory bodies in a ( in my personal opinion) in a dim light somewhat.
Last Thought. If this did happen and BUPA accept every tender submitted then the therapists who did not tender have in effect done BUPA's job for them.
If hypothetically every physio tendered, then it would be up to BUPA to decide which therapists were not up"to the mark".
As I understand it they would then have to decide who they would or wouldn't accept as service providers.
Surely it would be easier for the CSP an PF to fight individual cases on this basis.
I welcome your input on this issue
Hi All,
Thanks for all the useful comments, views and opinions that have been posted on this and other sites in the last few weeks. It has been great getting to know that there is such strong support and standing for our profession.
I'm affraid i still have questions and i am still not convinced on the best thing to do for my profession and my patients. Hopefully i am not the only one with the headache i am about to pose.
Firstly the CSP and PF stand point.
I wish that they weren't, as is suggested, making us read between the lines and guess whether or not we should all tender. Why can't they just be straight?
Secondly, I have built up a good relationship between my clinic and BUPA patients.
I feel that if I dont tender and nothing comes to fruition through the legal onslaught then i will have let down my patients.
I do however know i could survive without BUPA input.
Thirdly, if Itender.
If i tender and opt for the 2 years - i have an out.
I think i am also correct in saying if i want to terminate the contract then i still can but a time frame may be imposed.
If i tender and i am successful and the legal onslaught is also successful and BUPA are held to account on the points mentioned about the FSA etc. then surely that would nullify the tender as they have asked me to do something that is essentially ileagal ( as suggested).
I want to do whats best for physios and the profession, and therefore i am happy to follow the lead of my organisational body. So please, i ask, back yourself CSP and tell us the correct course of action in black and white.
So finally my position, as stands at the moment is -i am going to wait untill tomorrow to submit my tender in the hope that some clarity and a defiant position is upheld by the CSP and FP.( I think the odds are stacked against it though). If i have not heared i will, contradictory to most blogs on this site, reluctantly, post a tender, at my current prices. If i was asked to negotiate on these I would stand firm happily.
:(:mad:
Latest Updates:
Firstly if you are backing the letter that has been produced by our legal teams then please let Max and the team know you would like your name and practice also on the letter. That letter is a few posts above this one. Email him at [email protected]
Here's another update from thephysiosvoice.co.uk blog
Quote:
Hot off the press:
Well after much hard work from our CSP liaison (Claire Small from Pure Sports Medicine) she has managed to persuade CSP CEO Phil Gray to instruct his lawyers (Hempsons) to write to BUPA raising the issues we have been banging on about all week: namely, the conflict of interest angle (BUPA and BUPA wellness), the FSA angle and BUPA’s initial aim of significantly reducing the number of physios they register. We have seen site of the CSP’s letter and while it isn’t as beefy as we would like, it is certainly better than no letter at all. Please tell all your physio colleagues not to give up hope....even the CSP seem to be coming on side now.
However, please do not be lulled into a false sense of security at this stage. We will certainly not be taking our foot off the gas and we are under no illusion that the legal angles do not provide a silver bullet solution. We will keep battling for our twin aims of clinical independence and commercial autonomy. We will be sending a further letter on the FSA points tomorrow.
If you haven’t already done so, please don’t forget to write to BUPA yourself and make sure you send your letter to Jane Gallagher as well as BUPA’s physio tender email address. Our lawyers letter appears in full on the website if you want some pointers (www.thephysiosvoice.co.uk).
Best to all,
Max
Don't tender, you're letting the side down. So far almost no one is tendering so the situation with BUPA and their patients will remain ISQ. You don't have anything to fear unless you do tender which will affect everyone. Say No to the tender.
This is why no one should tender. Right now I no of almost no one in central London who is tendering, If BUPA want to rule out the main medical postcodes of the capital (which i had heard they were also going to do in the tender) then their patients will walk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Once Mighty
The inside word from within BUPA is that only a trickle of people have tendered. More than that BUPA have even been calling practised who havent yet submitted tenders asking them if they need help with their tender applications. Seems the NO vote is working in our favor as the number to provide a continuity of care for their customers is simple not enough. I also hear that physio's from the Nuffield group are not permitting that group to tender to BUPA on behalf of the group. I have read posts today saying that they have infact told Nuffiled that they are not endorsing that move, so this will further destroy BUPA's agenda.
We do need devil's advocates but it is clear weneed to stand together on this.
Patients want to see the people they want to see. If a PMI doesn't offer that then many will walk to competitors. We should be forcing that hand and let the PMI customer contract be the only point of negotiation.
BUPA are letting down their customers, not the physio's who are only offering to provide first rate care to an organisation (BUPA) that has already approved as appropriate to provide that care. Nothing else has changed.
Send the legal info link to the following (the more that do, the more attention it will get):-
[email protected]
[email protected]
where is the legal info link, could you post it please?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Manipulator
Additional Comment I forgot:
Please don't make it a London issue. We are all delighted with the volume of your voice, but don't risk alienating regional physios...Quote:
Originally Posted by physiobob
What if you know of other physios inyour area have already submitted a tender?:(
my sympathies are with you, we are in the same boat, but I hope that my resolve to protect the profession is stronger than those who have been cajoled into tendering. I guess we have to stand up and be counted!Quote:
Originally Posted by fizziophil
I know of two physios in my immediate area who have reluctantly tendered, before the legal challenge today. I just cannot follow them, my clinical autonomy and commercial independance is too precious to me. I have had a lot of support from my medical colleagues, which has been of great comfort. Those of you still wavering - please stand firm, our profession needs it.
Some Physios have said that BUPA has phoned their practice several times this week, and this comment appears to reinforce a belief that therefore BUPA are 'worried' that Physios wont tender. Reiterating comments made earlier, could it be that BUPA could have anticipated a negative response from Physios ? Isn't it possible that non tendering practices are being contacted just so that when the tender deadline of 12pm tomorrow evening passes...well its passed.
A tender dealine is just that, and I am unconvinced that droves of Physio practices wont tender.
I spoke to BUPA today with regard to an issue raised over taking on a contract then wanting to get out for varied reasons, and found the dialogue to be as reasonable as any conversation I have had with a corporate.
While I recognise that there are many negatives to this whole process. Our profession has left chinks, and let us be mindful that this issue is less to do with the tender than our whole professionalism as Physiotherapists.
Perhaps we need to project ourselves further to the future and rather than directing anger at BUPA, who seem really just to be acting as a business. Maybe we could be reflective over where our seeming trust in the CSP to manage the direction of Physios in indepnedent practice came from.
With regard the derisive comment from Physiobob with regard my suggestion of a Physioplan concept. The actuality is the same in Dentistry and Chiropractic professions yet Dentists and Chiropractors have great insurance policies for their professions
I would like to share the opinion of the Federation of Small Businesses legal advice team, who, when appraised of the situation, suggested that we would be better off tendering. Not by accepting all the various clauses, but by filling it out as we see fit. However, they did advise us to ensure we included our strong opposition to the nature of the tender, and state the reasons why we oppose, on an idividual clinic basis. I was advised that this would allow us to shift our position at a later stage, if a legal challenge were successful (which will take months, if not years).
Jill is absolutely spot on. BUPA are apparently acting to boost their profits and further secure their empire. They are a business, not an empathetic, conscientious, professional Chartered Physiotherapist. We cannot blame them for trying, but we should be far stronger in our response to them. Physios have proved what a divided bunch we are, and really invited this action upon ourselves. The shame is that there are certainly those that have already, and will still tender, regardless of their moral compass, because of the fear engendered by a large company laying down terms and conditions, and as suggested in previous posts "putting a gun to our heads".
Fingers crossed for tomorrow. Call your local MP's, any legal representative you know, and bombard the media. Protect the profession.
It disappoints me to read the few posts above this one about people considering tendering for a contract based on what seems like short term interests. I understand people financial consideration given their current reliance on BUPA however if that is not your situation then I can see no hesitancy in NOT tendering. This is not a regional issue (as I have said many times), this is an issue for the entire profession, students, new graduates, NHS physio's and private practitioners. To be honest it is enough to make me consider hanging up the clinical hat. The majority of people are not tendering, not to mention the 30,000+ physio's who would not have receive one anyway. BUPA does have over 12,000 physio's on their books and they haven't let anyone else on them for years (newer grads that is). If a small number of practices in the UK tender and 99% do not the BUPA does not have any opportunity to change the current relationships. Nor will they be in a position to step into the NHS as the preferred provider. I will be standing firm. This is a long-term position for the stability of my business. If some of you wish to go the way of the TESCO farmer then so be it. Perhaps those that so should read the book Tescopoly!
please everyone do not submit a tender. I know a number of practices have done so in my region and are doing so at their normal rates. Surely they will just get rejected......? And then what? You have accepted their terms and if you re negotiate it will purely be based on price
If we are just negotiating our services on price, at what point does our long established profession turn into the oldest profession
I tried sending an email to Jane Gallagher last night requesting further clarification. I have received what appears to be an automated response.
Please be advised that the deadline for submitting your online tender is midnight on Friday 24th April 2009.
Due to the volume of emails we have received and this fast approaching closing date, we are unlikely to be able to respond to your email prior to the tender closing date. We therefore suggest that you phone our Physiotherapy Tender helpline with your query; 0845 600 4078, open Monday - Friday, 9 am - 5 pm.
Once you have completed your online tender, please use the PRINT icon at the top of section 10 to print out two copies (we recommend that you also print out an additional copy for your records). Check that this has successfully printed, and then use the SUBMIT icon to despatch your tender to Bupa. Once you have submitted your tender you will be unable to print any additional copies.
Please sign two copies of the printed contract and return them in the postage paid envelope included with your invitation to tender letter.
With kind regards
Physiotherapy Tender Team
Bupa, Thames Side House, Staines, Middlesex TW18 4TL
T: 0845-600-4078; [email protected]
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
I then followed the advise above but all the advisors were busy so I left contact details and emailed the physiotender address. Response
Please be advised that the deadline for submitting your online tender is midnight on Friday 24th April 2009.
Due to the volume of emails we have received and this fast approaching closing date, we are unlikely to be able to respond to your email prior to the tender closing date. We therefore suggest that you phone our Physiotherapy Tender helpline with your query; 0845 600 4078, open Monday - Friday, 9 am - 5 pm.
Once you have completed your online tender, please use the PRINT icon at the top of section 10 to print out two copies (we recommend that you also print out an additional copy for your records). Check that this has successfully printed, and then use the SUBMIT icon to despatch your tender to Bupa. Once you have submitted your tender you will be unable to print any additional copies.
Please sign two copies of the printed contract and return them in the postage paid envelope included with your invitation to tender letter.
With kind regards
Physiotherapy Tender Team
Bupa, Thames Side House, Staines, Middlesex TW18 4TL
T: 0845-600-4078; [email protected]
Please consider the environment before printing this email.
So its the 24th do we tender do we leave it
should we accept the £30.00 personally i suggest that all of us outside london should if submitting then submit a significantly higher fee why should bupa force private practicioners to fix prices for 4YEARS with a 75 p increase when their own hospitals charge significantly more
if we go in then go in at higher rate say at least £35.00 or higher or shall we all stay resolute and not tender its a bit of poker texas hold em is in not
personally i would like to tell Bupa to ******* why should they tell us what to charge or what to treat we all have clinical expenses that differ and different skills why should London have a higher rate ...has anyone seen the cost of premises up here esp in glasgow edinburgh are we second class citizens in Scotland is it discrimination? we could play the race card!!!! just venting what we are all thinking on this last day ..the choice is yours
your thoughts please
My thoughts are quite clear. Why have we not seen a response from either BUPA, CSP or PF to the lawyer's letter sent last evening?
See: thephysiosvoice.co.uk
Because the lawyers, finally via the CSP, only sent it yesterday afternoon. Don't expect any reply until next week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Manipulator
This is the current auto email response from Jane Gallagher's email at BUPA if you do email her to make an enquiry. I suggest everyone NOT tendering sends her an email outlining that fact.
Seems she is not directly answering any questions before the deadline!
[email protected]
Interestingly, I sent her an email this morning and DID NOT get an automated reply. Perhaps she is pasting replies to those she see's fit to send an moderated auto-rely to?
Quote:
If your query is about the physio tender please be advised that the deadline for submitting your online tender is midnight on Friday 24th April 2009.
Due to the volume of emails we have received and this fast approaching closing date, we are unlikely to be able to respond to your email prior to the tender closing date. We therefore suggest that you phone our Physiotherapy Tender helpline with your query; 0845 600 4078, open Monday - Friday, 9 am - 5 pm.
Once you have completed your online tender, please use the PRINT icon at the top of section 10 to print out two copies (we recommend that you also print out an additional copy for your records). Check that this has successfully printed, and then use the SUBMIT icon to despatch your tender to Bupa. Once you have submitted your tender you will be unable to print any additional copies.
Please sign two copies of the printed contract and return them in the postage paid envelope included with your invitation to tender letter.
With kind regards
Physiotherapy Tender Team
Bupa, Thames Side House, Staines, Middlesex TW18 4TL
T: 0845-600-4078; [email protected]
Also here is a useful posting from thephysiosvoice for a short simple email to Jane Gallagher at BUPA - [email protected] This is almost exactly what I sent her this morning..
Quote:
We do think NOW is the perfect time to email Jane Gallagher saying ” I have received preliminary advice indicating there are a number of problems with the contractual terms proposed by BUPA. In particular the requirements in relation to the management and processing of insurance claims on behalf of BUPA in addition to being exceptionally onerous may be illegal. I am always willing to negotiate the terms for the provision of your services with your purchasers. I am currently unable to provide a response to the tender offer until I have received detailed clarification of the advice. I will be in touch again once I have received satisfactory clarification. Meanwhile I will continue to provide physiotherapy to BUPA’s members on the basis of the current terms of business…..” or something!!
You might also be concerned with the clear conflict of interest arising from BUPA’s ownership of BUPA Wellness and it’s provision of physiotherapy services. You might want to ask for written confirmation of how BUPA propose to ensure that there is a level playing field. You might also want to touch on the concerns about clinical governance the proposed pathways - just read many of the posts on this site
Just In! The Latest eMail Alert from Physio FirstQuote:
Bupa Tender
Do remember that if you decide that this process is suitable for your practice then today is the last day that you can submit your tender. Bupa will close the tender process at midnight tonight, 24th April 2009.
Physio First has a message for its members from the CSP’s Chief Executive.
Bupa Tender: Further Update from the CSP
CSP and Physio First, the Society’s recognised occupational group for private practitioners, working together, are continuing to seek additional changes and clarifications to the BUPA tender process. This is to add to the significant number of alterations which were achieved in a recent meeting with BUPA and which are already on the CSP website and which have gone out via Physio First’s email alerts. These matters reflect a number of major concerns which have been expressed by Physio First and CSP members.
One of the most significant changes from our meeting with BUPA was that they backed away from their previously stated position of seeking to cut radically the number of private practitioners treating BUPA patients. They have accepted the arguments we made for the need for patient choice and local access. They have stated that they expect that a similar number to the current 6,500 practitioners to be included (subject to their tender process).
Yesterday, lawyers on behalf of CSP and Physio First sent a further letter to BUPA seeking further clarifications on three issues of the tendering process, questions about the Financial Services Act and the role of the BUPA Wellness company as a potential bidder in the tender. These are further issues raised by members.
We are aware that BUPA have responded quickly, denying there are any problems with the issues we have raised, including a denial of any competitive advantage of BUPA Wellness. Further discussions will take place between legal representatives on this.
Conclusion
The CSP and Physio First have been very active and working in close partnership to seek changes to the BUPA tender process since they announced it in late March 2009. The closing date for tenders remains midnight today – Friday 24th April.
Physio First and CSP do not like or approve of the tender process. It is clearly BUPA’s intention to seek to reduce their total costs by this tender. They claim that physiotherapy is one of their largest costs. We have instructed our lawyers to submit a formal complaint to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) that BUPA may be potentially abusing its dominant market position in health insurance by its approach on this tender.
However, as explained elsewhere on these web pages, a public tender with independent contractors is covered by the 1998 Competition Act. That Act means that there are legal limits to what can be done. Any attempt by organisations to recommend reasonable fixed prices to practitioners or any effort to encourage a boycott of the tender process, would mean that the CSP / Physio First was breaking the law. We are not going to do that. The decision on whether or not to participate in the tender is for each practitioner to decide.
Instead, Physio First and CSP have been seeking positive clarifications and changes made to the tender process which reflect many of the concerns which practitioners have raised. A number of those changes have been achieved. We will continue to seek further improvements where possible, which keep members of both organisations, informed of significant developments.
Phil Gray
Chief Executive
CSP
24th April 2009
Extracts from Phil Gray’s (CSP CEO) statement 24.4.09:-
“if you decide that this process is suitable for your practice”
“Physio First and CSP do not like or approve of the tender process. It is clearly BUPA’s intention to seek to reduce their total costs by this tender.”
“The decision on whether or not to participate in the tender is for each practitioner to decide.”
What do these add up to?..............DO NOT TENDER!
Wait and see what happens when the dust settles and BUPA are left with an inadequate network for their Members.
Well done to everyone on this site. I will not be tendering. If Bupa do change the goalposts and redo the whole thing then they will need to listen to us first.
:D
I would like to respond to Alasdairjon #108 - you can't tender without signing the Terms and Conditions, so even if you leave some bits blank on the tender document, you have still agreed to the T&C, so what's the point?
I also sent an email to Jane Gallagher, with a copy to the Tender team, and got the same automated message.
Please - don't waver, don't sign your profession away!!
I have finally reached my decision and sent an email to Jane Gallagher stating the following:
On careful consideration, I find myself unable to agree to all the proposed terms and conditions of your tender.
I would, however, be more than happy to continue treating your clients under the terms and conditions of my existing agreement with yourselves.
As such I would like to submit my existing agreement with BUPA in lieu of my online tender
Thanks to all concerned for the fantastic job you have done, the great website and most of all the forum.
Well done and fingers crossed !