Ingeus

[Bakatcha]

The Child Poverty Action Group have written to the DWP querying guidance given to JCP staff:

http://www.cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/CPAG-letter-Reilly-and-Wilson-Feb-13.pdf

The message is clear:

If you have been sanctioned whilst on one of these vile schemes (including the WP but not MWA) you need to put in an appeal ASAP. If you need help go see a legal aid solicitor. Don't delay as Legal Aid is soon to be stopped for such cases.

[Bakatcha]

See http://www.cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/CPAG-letter-Reilly-and-Wilson-Feb-13.pdf

wrong info being given to JCP staff.

Anyone sanctioned whilst on a Programme (or should that be progrom?) appeal now. Get legal aid before it disappears (soon).

[33crazydude]

No criteria under Regulations 19 (5)(7) satisfied[/i]

 

 

 

To silv.surfer,

 

 

I discovered your article regarding some letter which you received from the DWP and in this letter was a paragraph saying “No criteria under Regulations 19 (5)(7) satisfied”

 

I was curious if you attained a satisfactory result in the end?

 

My flat mate has been through a similar dilemma and received a letter which also states No criteria under Regulations 19 (5)(7) satisfied.

 

My flatmate was unjustly sanctioned by the job centre roughly 4 months ago and wouldn’t be entitle to claim job benefits for up to 6 months, but she did have the right to appeal.

 

When she appealed my flatmate was actually successful, but it took 4 months for the job centre to agree this.

 

My flatmate belives she shouldn’t have been sanctioned in the first place and the job centres judgment was unreasonable.

 

For four months my flatmate had no benefits to help support her and this placed a large financial burden upon her.

She’s tried to claim back money which she lost over a four month period, but the job centre will not pay.

 

It seems somewhat contradictory that the job centre agreed to her appeal, but won’t pay back the money she lost.

 

Is there any advice you might be able to give?

 

Yours Sincerely 33crazydude

 

 

P.S, Below is a link which shows the letter she received from the DWP.

 

http://postimage.org/image/8tzl7ra8l/

[Bakatcha]

@33crazydude

I suggest that your flatmate get all correspondence and make an appointment with a legal aid solicitor asap.

[33crazydude]

@33crazydude

I suggest that your flatmate get all correspondence and make an appointment with a legal aid solicitor asap.

 

 

Hi Bakatcha,

 

 

You’re totally correct, I keep telling my flatmate she needs to take the legal path, but for some reason she thinks its more prudent to wait for the job centre to contact her back and clarify what Regulations 19 (5)(7) means!

 

I have told my landlady she's wasting her time and needs to go down the legal rd because Time is of the essence!

 

Thanks for your advice Bakatcha and can you recommend any particular solicitors she should look for.

 

 

Yours Sincerely 33crazydude

[vv89]

Well, some of you might have seen my despairing post in the last page, about how much they waste our time? Yesterday just took the cake though. As I stated they wanted me to see an adviser in their building so they could discuss a potential contact center job. This building is a lot further away from my local ingeus building, so after spending the morning getting ready, hair done etc, bus travel for 40-45 minutes just to get there, only to be told to my face that because I've already worked in this particular place a couple of years ago, I can't apply again for 3 years since last working there. I waited half an hour to be seen to after the travelling just to be told this. I honestly felt like crying. I'm clearly doing my bit, but they're not even meeting me halfway. Not even a quarter of the way! They just don't give a damn! so that was that, another 40-45 minutes back down the road for nothing. I've had enough now. Can anyone confirm that removing data protection will make them leave you alone a bit more? I'm strongly considering it. Not just after yesterday's events but because of numerous reasons. one of them being I don't like being stalked after securing employment for 2 years. whether they help me land a job (unlikely) or not. Another reason being that this persistent time wasting of theirs is hindering my job search significantly. That was a good few hours yesterday down the drain when I could have been seeking employment!!! Once more, sorry for the rant, I know many of you are going through the same thing but no one really understands if they haven't been in that position before, you guys have. It's depressing

[33crazydude]

Hi vv89,

 

Are you wanting to cancel your waiver with INGEUS so they can't use your data with third parties anymore?

 

If so, I can help you my friend.

Edited September 23, 2022 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[Bakatcha]

Withdrawing consent tends to make you less attractive to them since they are unlikely to get any more money out of you. This in turn tends to make them less likely to harass you' It's easy to withdraw consent - just use the letter template provided by consent.me or something like this:

Re: Data waiver agreement under the Data Protection Act 1998

Dear Sir or Madam,

As you are aware I have signed the data waiver/consent form thus authorising PIMPO to share my data with other bodies including potential and actual employers. You should also be aware that I have the right to withdraw this consent at any time without giving reasons or explanations.

I understand that such withdrawal does not effect my placement on the Work Programme or any employment or offer of employment made.

Please take this letter as notification of the withdrawal of my consent with immediate effect and alter your records to show that my data sharing consent has been withdrawn. Please sign and date the copy of this letter to acknowledge that it has been received by YYYY Ltd. and my instructions will be acted upon.

Yours sincerely,

 

I acknowledge receipt of the withdrawal of consent and confirm that it will be acted upon without delay.

Signed :……………………………. on behalf of YYYY Ltd.

Name:

Job Description:

Don't worry if they refuse to sign to acknowledge it - it's still valid.

Keep a copy.

Edited September 23, 2022 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Aside from the fact that the plebs have wasted your time... I fail to see the logic of any employer barring an applicant from any Call Centre Vacancy, not on the basis of a criminal conviction of financial irregularity, but because they had worked within the Call Centre previously and are barred for 3 years.

Edited September 23, 2022 by dx100uk
unnecessary previous post quote removed

[vv89]

Yeah 33, that would be most helpful, I acknowledge that it doesn't make anyone immune from these people but if it can get them to back off a little bit and not waste my time anymore while I'm trying to seek employment, it would be awesome at this stage! Edit: Thanks to Bakatcha for the details as well, any more advice on the issue from 33 or anyone else would be most helpful. Thanks to everyone for the advice and encouragement, it's more than I get from Ingeus, which is the most shameful aspect of all this!

[Bakatcha]

Another journalist wants to hear from you

 

"Have you been on the Government’s Work Programme but found it didn’t help them get a job? Email [email protected]This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it "

 

Again from twitter so no more information twitter

 

The Child Poverty Action Group have produced a wording for everyone unlawfully sanctioned under the old (quashed) regs. Go to their site here

http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/sanction-busting-part-2 and follow the link in top right.

or go straight to the document here:

http://www.cpag.org.uk/sites/all/modules/contrib/pubdlcnt/pubdlcnt.php?file=/sites/default/files/NOTICE%20OF%20APPEAL-%20Reilly%20and%20Wilson%20LOOKALIKE_0.doc&nid=1336

[Guest]

it all sounds a complete hash...how long are people on the work programme before they are returned to the jc, for whatever happens next?

[Chester6]

The Child Poverty Action Group have written to the DWP querying guidance given to JCP staff:

http://www.cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/CPAG-letter-Reilly-and-Wilson-Feb-13.pdf

The message is clear:

If you have been sanctioned whilst on one of these vile schemes (including the WP but not MWA) you need to put in an appeal ASAP. If you need help go see a legal aid solicitor. Don't delay as Legal Aid is soon to be stopped for such cases.

 

Do you know why as legal aid would be best for people who are unemployed etc

[Chester6]

it all sounds a complete hash...how long are people on the work programme before they are returned to the jc, for whatever happens next?

 

WP is two years from the date you are sentenced to it

To call it a complete hash is a massive understatement unfortunately

With all of the **** they pull like focussing on the most likely and sanctions etc it's horrendous

Plus it's stupid that they get to be told about jobsearch as I can understand the jobcentre but why the pimps?

[Guest]

I dread If I get sent .....nearest one is really awkward to get to by public transport and the fairs are high, approx. £10 return, country busses etc....and I have no car. I went in there once with a family member for their first appt, what a depressing place, and a right bunch of numbskulls running it.....worrying to say the least.

[Guest]

*fares*

 

would send my bipolar into orbit seriously .....I was getting proper angsty just waiting for family member

[ismael urzaiz]

question..how can they be making money..costs of staff,premises,rates,electric and office equipment surely won't be matched by the few % of people they get job outcomes for.

[john27]

Well, some of you might have seen my despairing post in the last page, about how much they waste our time? Yesterday just took the cake though. As I stated they wanted me to see an adviser in their building so they could discuss a potential contact center job. This building is a lot further away from my local ingeus building, so after spending the morning getting ready, hair done etc, bus travel for 40-45 minutes just to get there, only to be told to my face that because I've already worked in this particular place a couple of years ago, I can't apply again for 3 years since last working there. I waited half an hour to be seen to after the travelling just to be told this. I honestly felt like crying. I'm clearly doing my bit, but they're not even meeting me halfway. Not even a quarter of the way! They just don't give a damn! so that was that, another 40-45 minutes back down the road for nothing. I've had enough now. Can anyone confirm that removing data protection will make them leave you alone a bit more? I'm strongly considering it. Not just after yesterday's events but because of numerous reasons. one of them being I don't like being stalked after securing employment for 2 years. whether they help me land a job (unlikely) or not. Another reason being that this persistent time wasting of theirs is hindering my job search significantly. That was a good few hours yesterday down the drain when I could have been seeking employment!!! Once more, sorry for the rant, I know many of you are going through the same thing but no one really understands if they haven't been in that position before, you guys have. It's depressing

 

hi vv89 - you poor thing, i thought i had it bad at ingeus but in your case they are certainly going above and beyond to make themselves look incompetent - i've been considering withdrawing my consent too as it'll hopefully get them off my back - i bet my adviser will be giving me evils but i dont care - i certainly don't intend to do any more ingeus courses after this "skills for employment" thing as it's just pointless, pointless, pointless - does anyone know if withdrawing my consent means they can't sign me up for anymore courses? they'll just leave me alone to find a job?

[Bakatcha]

Do you know why as legal aid would be best for people who are unemployed etc

 

Legal aid is being stopped as government policy (for employment claims). Supposedly this is to save money but it deprives the most needy of legal advice and representation.

Tories! Don't you just love 'em?

[RebeccaPidgeon]

it all sounds a complete hash...how long are people on the work programme before they are returned to the jc, for whatever happens next?

Two years....however, as to what happens next, that has yet to be decided upon. Either JCP will mandate candidates back to the WP, or be assigned to MWA, or will be prompted to sign a "Universal Credit Commitment" within which a Job Seekers Direction could include Voluntary Work of x hours per week or MWA.

[Guest]

love to see the back of em

[estellyn]

Aside from the fact that the plebs have wasted your time... I fail to see the logic of any employer barring an applicant from any Call Centre Vacancy, not on the basis of a criminal conviction of financial irregularity, but because they had worked within the Call Centre previously and are barred for 3 years.

 

Or was the ingeus adviser telling him he couldn't apply because they don't get a job outcome payment if you've worker for the employer within the last so many years - if so this should be reported.

[Putneynic]

Aside from the fact that the plebs have wasted your time... I fail to see the logic of any employer barring an applicant from any Call Centre Vacancy, not on the basis of a criminal conviction of financial irregularity, but because they had worked within the Call Centre previously and are barred for 3 years.

 

A wild guess... anything to do with a redundancy payment and/or exit agreement from the previous period of employment? But even so... three years?

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Legal aid is being stopped as government policy (for employment claims). Supposedly this is to save money but it deprives the most needy of legal advice and representation.

Tories! Don't you just love 'em?

Under the last rabble, Charles Falconer introduced legislation which introduced "Community Legal Advice Centres" and, at a local level, the existing network of Citizens Advice Bureau and Legal Aid Centres (amongst others) were invited to bid for local authority funding. In the case of Hull, A4E won the contract, and the local Legal Aid Centre closed.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/poverty-pimps-march-on-a4e-close-local-law-centre/

 

Devising an Omnishambolic Portfolio of Policies isn't a Conservative Religion .

[estellyn]

Under the last rabble, Charles Falconer introduced legislation which introduced "Community Legal Advice Centres" and, at a local level, the existing network of Citizens Advice Bureau and Legal Aid Centres (amongst others) were invited to bid for local authority funding. In the case of Hull, A4E won the contract, and the local Legal Aid Centre closed.

http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2008/05/28/poverty-pimps-march-on-a4e-close-local-law-centre/

 

Devising an Omnishambolic Portfolio of Policies isn't a Conservative Religion .

 

Yes some awful places won the contracts, including firms of solicitors who would put the legal aid benefit work onto the trainees who did often appalling work - had to mop up a couple of cases from people who'd been with one of these firms then moved into our area - where luckily we kept our contract. Anyone on this forum could do a better job than workers at some of these crappy firms.