Yes, but when "summoned" by phone or by mandated letter only? Can someone please clarify the facts?

Thanks biggeorge, you've really helped put my mind at ease. I'll wait for the letter from Seetec and just keep my phone switched off then. Trouble is my new adviser really gunning for me now, after our slanging match on Friday, so she's looking for any excuse to sanction me (she almost said as much - wish I could've recorded it!) I hate feeling like this, scared of the phone ringing, always remembering what is coming up with a feeling of dread - all to get a few quid JSA. But if I get sanctioned just before Xmas... Honestly doesn't bear thinking about. Some people like my adviser must have no conscience, compassion or humanity.

Hi, I've just turned on my phone this morning and can see a voicemail message from a missed call number withheld (which often means it's from a switchboard), so I'm guessing it's probably Seetec. I actually don't have credit to check message as I only get free texts a month. Can I just double-check with anyone out there that not taking the call and waiting for the mandatory letter instead won't get me sanctioned? Thanks.

thanks but nope, it's gone. Apologies if I offended the powers that be, or said something against the party line? If site team could investigate please I'd appreciate. Really need some advice.

Hi, I posted a thread this afternoon about MWA. I got some good advice and asked a few more questions, now it's vanished. Am I looking in the wrong place? Thanks. Really need some advice before inevitable phone call from Seetec tomorrow morning...

Thanks for response Mr.P. Not assigned yet - adviser made a phone call as I was sitting there for my usual signing, then printed me off a letter which I had to sign to say I'd received saying that Seetec would contact me now I'd been mandated. (I read it carefully before signing, but nothing I could readily challenge in letter). I DID make a big fuss about being contacted by phone, saying I was aware that any mandated attendance must be sent via letter (as I read on this forum). My adviser then got really sh*tty and said (and I quote) "Oh, so you spend your time finding out what you can't do rather than looking for what you can, I'm only trying to help you with this MWA because you have gaps in your CV). Grrrrrr. The whole vibe of the conversation went downhill after that point. I made her write in the onscreen notes that I needed to receive instruction about my first appointment in writing, as I didn't always carry my phone with me, and didn't have credit to return missed calls). She added it under protest, but also wrote that she'd told me I MUST answer my phone, whether it's caller withheld or number unknown and to carry my phone with me at all times. I agreed she had said that. What should be my next move? Should I take the call when Seetec ring to arrange my appointment tomorrow? Should I ignore and wait for a letter? I am brutally skint at the moment, and can't risk a sanction this close to Christmas - I don't want to be the most legally correct yet sanctioned man come Xmas Day! But I will do anything to get out of this MWA bullcrap (having spent two years with Ingeus back in 2009-2011 which hand on my heart nearly finished me off)

Hello, I've found myself in a bit of a bind with my new adviser and was hoping for some advice please. Brief backstory: I transferred my claim from a different London borough a few months ago. Big mistake. My previous adviser was honorable and had integrity. She could see I was doing everything I could to get a job and as a result we had mutual respect. I met my new "Work Coach" on Friday and immediately we took a dislike to each other. She has put me on MWA starting Tuesday. I am angry for myself (of course) and also angry on behalf of my fellow man - WHY in the hell would any big business pay money for Xmas relief staff when they can get people like me to do it for free under threat of sanction? (But mainly I'm pee'd off for myself - over Xmas there is usually a 2 week break from signing, so 4 weeks where I would be left alone, and my JSA would go through automatically). Now I have to do 4 weeks of this MWA scrubbing graffiti off park toilets or some such other delight over Xmas period and will be sanctioned if I miss a day!) I'm not naturally a cynical person who looks to exploit the system, but I read a thread about JS28? Which allows you a period of 14 days illness. I've never missed a signing before so am free to use this. My question is I feel I might be ill for a couple of weeks on Tuesday If I use this form will it get me out legitimately from doing this Seetec Slavery until the New Year? Or will they sanction me? Despite what you all may think reading this, the JCP really has pushed me to the limit recently, so I'm looking for anything I can do legally to avoid a sanction, avoid MWA and still get my JSA over Xmas period. Thanks if you've read this far.

I've been signing on for over 4 years now and despite applying for every job I'm qualified for I've had no responses. It's really made me feel anxious and a bit depressed too. But I come from an an old school mindset where if I give in to my fears it's like weakness and admitting I've failed by going on the sick. But being unemployed for so long now and having to "grab my ankles" twice a week at the JCP and showing them what I've done to get a job is a bit humiliating and is really depressing me and making me feel anxious when I have to go. I'm thinking of going to my doctor and telling him I'm suffering from anxiety and depression because I've heard he'll write me a note I can show my adviser and then I can get this thing called ESA which is more money than JSA and also gets the JCP off my back. Sounds too good to be true. Any advice welcome. Thanks.

Boo-hoo! Sorry SabreSheep I don't really get your point. Of course it's an unfair system! Life is an unfair system too! But to get my JSA pittance each week I'm willing to do what the system asks of me. Not TOO arduous really? I've been signing on far too long now to start pretending I'm outraged by benefits like some cheap Channel 5 doc. But I mean, really, we must at least try to help ourselves. I've had advisers trying to sanction me for unbelievable stuff, so just ticking a box of letting them see what I do on UJM doesn't seem to me to be the biggest thing worth dying for.

I apply for every job that comes up when I do a UJM search (however far away or not matching my skills, just to keep them happy) safe in the knowledge most of the jobs on there are fake, or there will be a thousand Eastern Europeans younger and more willing to work for illegal wages because they are 20 and living 8 to a room (and good luck to them for doing that, I'd do the same thing if I was 20 and Poland had a strong economy). I don't get why it's an issue for a lot of people on here to play the game whilst they apply for real jobs they want? Hell, we may as well all just stick two fingers up to the system and cry A&D and cop out of the whole system for a while

Please can someone explain to me why it's such a big deal to allow DWP access to what we write on a DWP website? I honestly don't get it. What am I missing here? Gawd knows we all have to jump through so many (increasingly) ridiculous hoops to get our paltry JSA crusts each week - why make it even more difficult in the long run? We need to stand up to our rights being eroded and being made to feel like **** for claiming what we paid tax for now we're out of work. But honestly - whether DWP have access to the evidence I'm mandated to show them online or via a screen print that costs me £0.10p to print out, screams to me of being petty and bloody-minded, almost being more "jobsworth" than the advisers we face. Reading some of the posts on here about genuine maladministration, I don't understand why this recurring issue of allowing access to UJM is such a problem. Personally speaking, I feel like such a small man having to sign on each week, it embarrasses me and crushes what little self respect I have left. So I guess if not allowing DWP to view what I write on their site is some sort of impotent protest, then fair enough. Can anyone explain please?

I had the same issue with the Workbook, it's not mandatory but advisers don't seem to realize this and threaten all sorts. Personally I don't have a problem allowing DWP access to UJM - I've got nothing to hide, they have my personal information anyway, and it takes me less than two minutes each day to log on and write some placatory crap in the "Activity Box". While technically it is not mandatory to allow your adviser access, why would you want to deliberately cheese them off, win the petty battle, then label yourself as a "problem" for which he/she will make it their vindictive mission to make trouble for you within their rules? Bigger wars to fight IMO

I agree with this too. An even better solution, since the woman with this panic room is not disabled, would be to charge the cost of the adaptions to the violent tw*t who created the need for it in the first place. An attachment of his earnings or (more likely, benefits), kind of an "idiot tax"!!

Somewhat harsh and judgmental, dear Chester! Clearly I've hit a nerve and you are one of these leftist types who takes any differing view as a personal attack and responds ad hominem to shut down debate.

I agree with Coniff, in theory (as none of us I'm assuming actually know this woman?) it sounds like an expensive Hollywood solution. Surely if she is in that much physical danger the perp should be arrested or relocated to another part of the country? If she is forced to move out then the chances of someone else needing a "panic room" is pretty small, so what a waste of tax-payers money when people are forced to use food banks, etc. I think there is definitely a political leftfootforward agenda here, funding especially "hard" cases to challenge the spare room subsidy that doesn't exist for housing benefit in the private sector.

Hello Audrey. Yes, budgeting loans certainly do exist - I got one last month. They can be used for things like washer/dryers. I was awarded £340 (although I applied for £1k) There are different limits depending on circumstances, children, etc. My JCP adviser gave me the form, yes it is quite long to fill in. She said the only criteria for acceptance is that you don't already have one, or have had one in the last couple of years, and it is to be used for one of the approved measures on form. My adviser told me to apply for the maximum allowed as they'll always third what you ask for!! Be advised though that it can take up to a month to come through (mine took just over three weeks from posting form to money in my account). I'm currently paying it back at about a fiver a week through my JSA. Good luck

Forewarned is forearmed and all that Jasta, I totally agree with you. I think DWP have this perverted instinct that everyone is swinging the lead and it's "guilty until proven innocent" - probably because of the national mood which seems to increasingly reflect the Daily Mail. I've always been grateful for the pittance they give me and have always jumped through their increasingly absurd hoops like a good little doggy to get my belly tickled with £68pw, (despite having paid tens of thousands in tax over the years previous). What really irritates me is that in my situation I'm brutally skint - if they sanction me again I've absolutely got nothing, and nowhere to borrow, so I must be careful with how much I "enforce my rights" - as said previously, we can win the battle but lose the war. I swear to God though, if I ever win the lottery I'll immediately give ££££££££ to set up a fund to help people get by whilst they were sanctioned for standing up for their rights. I don't blame the JCP staff, (they are probably living in fear of being the other side of the desk too), but I blame the system that tars everyone as a ****** trying to play the system, when in reality it is probably one person in every ten thousand, etc. Still, I'm grateful for the kind adviser today - so much so I actually shook her hand at the end and said thank you for being human. It's an increasingly rare thing these days.

Thanks for the heads-up Essexmat. I've had my fair share of spectacular a-holes at JCP over the past few years I've had to sign. But I take as I find, and this lady seemed genuine and nice. Trouble is, she pointed down the line to a woman at another desk and said I'd be seeing them for my next signing, so not sure if she's to be my regular adviser. I'm happy to share anything about me with them that's already in the public domain, but this Work Plan booklet would have pushed me over the edge!!! I finished primary school and got a gold star for colouring in way back in the 70's and don't wish to repeat the experience! ha!

Update: Went to sign on in new JCP, have to say the new adviser was lovely. I was rendered speechless with shock! I showed her my UJM entries and screenscrape of Job applications, she simply presented me with the slip to sign to authorize payment and we were done. "Any question? See you in fortnight". No mention of the "My First Work Book" or crayons to colour it in. In and out in under five mins! Thank God!

I'll play it by ear and see how she reacts tomorrow when I show her the DWP handbook saying 'not mandatory'. I've not met this new adviser yet. Maybe she'll be a reasonable, professional human being with compassion and common sense... Maybe!!!! (No, fat chance, I agree Thanks for advice LW. I'll let you know how I get on.

No, you are quite right. I've just double-checked and sure enough tis there. What is confusing me though is that in the DWP staff handbook it clearly states that use of the Work Book is NOT mandatory, (so long as claimant shows sound evidence on UJM or other mutually acceptable format), but refusal to sign the CC will close my claim/cause sanction. And explicit in the CC are the above two paragraphs saying I will use the Work Book. I'm confused!

Thanks for the advice LW. I read through the CC carefully before signing it and couldn't see any explicit reference to the Work Booklet so I thought it safe to sign. I don't have a problem agreeing to reasonable requests in return for receiving JSA, and to be honest I don't have a problem allowing DWP access to my UJM (it's their little toy, I just use it). But I really take exception to this blasted Work Plan Booklet - it achieves nothing far as I can see, just wastes the time that I could be using for genuine jobsearch. I'll have a read of your CC thread. Cheers.

Hello, I'm after some advice please. I've recently moved London Boroughs and duly told JCP. I've done the live transfer claim and had to sign the new "Claimant Commitment". All fine. The lady at the interview booked me in for my regular signing day (tomorrow) and gave me this booklet called "My Work Plan". I've read around this forum and understand it's not mandatory. (I downloaded the excellent FOI requests linked on another thread and have printed it off ready to show them tomorrow if they get shirty). But I have two questions please. 1. Although completion of the My Work Plan is technically not mandatory, do I have to sign the front page that looks like an extension of the CC and also has other important statements I must agree to (including info on my next signing date, etc). But if I do sign it, aren't I also accepting to use the My Work Plan booklet implicitly? 2. If I kick up a polite stink and stand my ground, then I might win this battle, but isn't there a danger my card will be marked with my new adviser as a trouble-maker and she will then seek to stick me on daily signing, some community work bulls**t, or whatever is the worst within her power to otherwise stitch me up to the letter of the law? Am I therefore just better off giving in and completing this damn waste of time, infantilizing and pointless booklet? I currently use UJM "Activity History" box daily to record all my searches, and always print off a Hotmail screenshot of all the jobs I've applied for (at least 10), so I honestly feel I do enough to jump through their hoops to get my pittance. This Work Plan book is just a step too far. Thanks for reading this far, and any specific legislation or FOI facts you could point me to would be really appreciated. I'm grateful too if you can only offer opinion, but the fear of being sanctioned and left with no option but to steal, get criminal record, ruin my life, die, etc, means that opinions are of no use. I need cold hard facts to battle these vindictive, power-crazed secretaries at JCP!!