Ingeus

[ims21]

Its a collective term. Its just an adjective. If you ban this word then why not ban every derogatory word on here.

I think the word desribes them well myself seeing as they send us off doing horrible things and they get money from it.

 

It has been decided that CAG is not prepared to carry this word in the context used on this thread.

[dyfed]

It has been decided that CAG is not prepared to carry this word in the context used on this thread.

 

Who decided and why? Is there a statement outlining the reasoning behind this or do we have to be censored?

[ims21]

Who decided and why? Is there a statement outlining the reasoning behind this or do we have to be censored?

 

Site Team and Admin have made the decision. As far as a statement is concerned please see my previous posts.

 

We request that further instances do not occur but if they do then they will be removed.

[dyfed]

Site Team and Admin have made the decision. As far as a statement is concerned please see my previous posts.

 

We request that further instances do not occur but if they do then they will be removed.

 

Ok thanks for the info.

 

But just to check is it ok to call them exploiters only if you look at the banned word in the dictionary it mentions exploitation and I feel that is what these people do.

[ims21]

Ok thanks for the info.

 

But just to check is it ok to call them exploiters only if you look at the banned word in the dictionary it mentions exploitation and I feel that is what these people do.

 

Personally I don't have an issue with that

[dyfed]

Great thanks.

[JustInterested]

Or are they just coming a quick one to secure outcome payments?

 

Have a look at this document: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-programme-faqs.pdf

 

Participant changes in circumstances during the Work

Programme

 

10.For example: a claimant joins the Work Programme as an ESA participant

in the Work-Related Activity Group (WRAG). You help them find a

suitable job that lasts for six months. They have to leave their job as their

family circumstances change and they become a full-time carer. You

support them in finding another job which fits their new caring

responsibilities and they stay in that job. This participant had joined the

Work Programme as an ESA WRAG participant and their participation was

mandatory. Once they became a full-time carer and returned to benefit their participation was no longer mandatory. All the outcomes you claim continue to be paid at the original claimant group rates.

 

Not exactly your situation but it might be helpful.

[signmaker]

Have a look at this document: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-programme-faqs.pdf

 

Participant changes in circumstances during the Work

Programme

 

10.For example: a claimant joins the Work Programme as an ESA participant

in the Work-Related Activity Group (WRAG). You help them find a

suitable job that lasts for six months. They have to leave their job as their

family circumstances change and they become a full-time carer. You

support them in finding another job which fits their new caring

responsibilities and they stay in that job. This participant had joined the

Work Programme as an ESA WRAG participant and their participation was

mandatory. Once they became a full-time carer and returned to benefit their participation was no longer mandatory. All the outcomes you claim continue to be paid at the original claimant group rates.

 

Not exactly your situation but it might be helpful.

 

Hi JustInterested,

thanks for this info, but I did find this quote myself, I have asked directly where the note was from (chapter and page no.) but I'm being given the runaround and she is evading the question, she even told me that it was in bright blue, (presumably because we are too thick to understand it in black), and to let her know if I didn't understand it:???:

So I re-sent her my e-mail and picked it out in red so that she would hopefully understand the question, a second time:???:, like the colour of lettering makes a difference.

It seems that this quote has been doctored to suit their own aims to me.

 

After further correspondance they say that my OH still has to speak to them when they call, and that she has not signed off, I am waiting to see how they can make her answer a phone call review when she is supposed to be a voluntary participant and they cannot mandate her to do anything now.

thanks again for your input.

[JustInterested]

signmaker, in this document: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/wp-pg-chapter-5.pdf it says: "12.You should bear in mind that a participant is with you throughout the 104 weeks duration of the Work Programme and you should endeavour to work with them no matter what their circumstances."

 

And that is true. If you are within 104 weeks of being referred to the provider then they have a contractual obligation to engage with you, no matter what your circumstances. But there is no doubt that the call will be a fishing expedition to assess whether your wife is, in reality, working so that they can claim an outcome payment.

 

However, just because they have a contractual obligation to engage with you does not necessarily imply that you have to engage with them as it will depend, as in your wife's case, on her particular circumstances. It seems to me that your wife's obligation, unlike the provider's, is voluntary.

 

By the way, I'm assuming your wife is claiming only carer's allowance. If she's also claiming a top up benefit that probably changes matters.

Edited August 11, 2013 by JustInterested

[signmaker]

 

And that is true. If you are within 104 weeks of being referred to the provider then they have a contractual obligation to engage with you, no matter what your circumstances. But there is no doubt that the call will be a fishing expedition to assess whether your wife is, in reality, working so that they can claim an outcome payment.

 

However, just because they have a contractual obligation to engage with you does not necessarily imply that you have to engage with them as it will depend, as in your wife's case, on her particular circumstances. It seems to me that your wife's obligation, unlike the provider's, is voluntary.

 

By the way, I'm assuming your wife is claiming only carer's allowance. If she's also claiming a top up benefit that probably changes matters.

 

My thoughts exactly.

Not sure if it's classed as a top up benefit but she has claimed Income support for me, (we both do the caring but she is the CA claimant) meaning that I will have to have reviews every 6 months with the JC+, but Income Support is not on the DWP Provider Guidance Claimants group, so should not change anything,,, unless I have got it totally wrong.

 

It will be interesting to see how the next e-mail/letter is worded, because she will not be answering the phone to them, she'll be conveniently unavailable, let them do the running.

[jonruti]

I've been forgotton about...

 

Haven't been to Ingeus since March 2012! (I started September 2011), i stopped going because it wasn't doing me any good for my mental well being, i've had various letters and messages on my phone, but have ignored them, but the thing is i've still been signing on, did 12 weeks temporary work last October/December (Job Centre knew about this), yet i haven't been santioned, neither has the Job Centre asked about it.

 

Have i broken Ingeus?

 

By the way, i'm doing exactly the same thing i would've been doing at Ingeus (spending hours looking at the same jobs week in week out on the Job Pages on the Internet.)

 

I didn't want to do the pointless excercises and programs!

 

 

Congratulations on avoiding Ingeus. I have recently received a letter from the DWP informing me of a sanction imposed due to non attendance on a Customer Service Course in July 2012 (with a third party - despite my refusal to consent to share information). This was due to a near collapse and emergency appointment confirming that I have Type 2 Diabetes. This is thankfully under control now, but stress does not help matters at all. I have attended all previous courses and appointments on time and have attempted to cooperate fully despite the pointlessness of it all. I have learned the important lesson that the less you complain the more they walk all over you. I attended a course in Employment Skills that was brought to a premature end after two weeks when almost the entire class refused to cooperate with the tutor and spent the entire lesson criticising the WP Provider. I was sent back on this course six weeks later but no one else was. I know for a fact that three people were not sanctioned on this occasion, so what criteria are they using for the process? I sign tomorrow at my Jobcentre, but as to Jobsearch for the next two weeks, this will be extremely difficult due to present circumstances:wink:.

[Paulo83]

I've not been on here for a while, so Ill give an update. Usual rubbish.

 

I missed a pre-screen last week because I have no faith in their selection policy (remember the happy and cheery requirement I told you about). I missed an appointment on Monday because it was an hour session of "cold-calling" potential employers who I have already sent spec letters and a CV to. A total waste of time and as far as I'm aware, most employers dislike follow-up calls as it wastes their time. And I also hate taking cold-calls at home, so practising it would make me something of a hypocrite. My adviser left a message saying how concerned they were about my non-attendance, so the next day I made some BS excuse that I was ill. All is fine. I'm also expected to do a "CV walk" in the few weeks. I've already sent 70 out in the last 3 weeks. Starting to irritate me now. I have no absolutely no desire to step foot in another Ingeus office. The thing which annoys me most (and I've had this conversation) is that my adviser pretends there are loads of jobs out here.

 

Er, hello, unemployment only fell 4,000 in the last figures, and how many of those are "real" jobs, and not just people on zero-hour contracts or being placed on voluntary/exploitative schemes?!?

[Mr.P]

A total waste of time and as far as I'm aware, most employers dislike follow-up calls as it wastes their time. And I also hate taking cold-calls at home, so practising it would make me something of a hypocrite.

 

Cold calling could be interpreted as a possible breach of the Telecommunications (Data Protection and Privacy) Regulations 1999 as well as the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2004. Also, many potential employers will file prospective client applications in the recycle bin if they receive follow up calls.

 

A suggestion that your "adviser" reads up on the above mentioned regulations should give him/her something to think about for a few minutes (assuming they can comprehend legal documents).

 

 

 

Between you'n'me, those two laws apply to marketing and spam faxes/emails, but if they want to feed you BS, you've got something to slap them down with

[Paulo83]

Cold calling could be interpreted as a possible breach of the Telecommunications (Data Protection and Privacy) Regulations 1999 as well as the Privacy and Electronic Communications (EC Directive) (Amendment) Regulations 2004. Also, many potential employers will file prospective client applications in the recycle bin if they receive follow up calls.

 

A suggestion that your "adviser" reads up on the above mentioned regulations should give him/her something to think about for a few minutes (assuming they can comprehend legal documents).

 

 

 

Between you'n'me, those two laws apply to marketing and spam faxes/emails, but if they want to feed you BS, you've got something to slap them down with

 

As ever, great advice Mr.P. I have another 4 weeks of "cold-calling" sessions, but I will tomorrow be emailing a request to cancel all such sessions based on these guidelines. I will also highlight the fact that many employers will simply bin CVs following any follow up calls.

[signmaker]

Just an update of the problem we were having with A4E and DNCC regarding carers allowance, after more research we have found out that unless the main carer does less than 35 hours caring this benefit and my IS cannot be stopped by anyone, and the threats that "benefit will be at risk" (WILL BE!!!! not may be), is just that a threatener, grasping at straws, for an outcome payment.

They also threatened her with "you did sign the consent form" which was used against her, MY advise WITHDRAW YOUR CONSENT as soon as possible.

We are being told this on here all the time, do it now don't give them any more ammunition than they already have.

 

Yes my oh does have to continue with her sentence with A4E/DNCC as a volunteer!! but as stated it is these companies that still have the legal contractual obligation to TRY to keep in touch with her but she doesn't have to speak to them, and cannot be mandated.

I did ask a very nice lady to intervene from ICE and although we did get one more nasty insulting e-mail from DNCC, contact has ceased (for now) needless to say DNCC did get a nasty reply back to their e-mail.

I hope this may help anyone else in the same situation.

[kosebamse]

Does the Work Programme provider know its clients' social security number or it has to be provided with SSN by the Job Centre beforehand?

[Charlotte_Henderson]

My adviser left a message saying how concerned they were about my non-attendance, so the next day I made some BS excuse that I was ill. All is fine. I have no absolutely no desire to step foot in another Ingeus

 

Firstly never believe a word your advisor at ingeus tells you, when they say its fine you missed an appointment. what they really mean is they have reported you to job centre for non attendance.

 

Secondly unless your no longer with Ingeus you will be visiting another ingeus office soon.

[Charlotte_Henderson]

Does the Work Programme provider know its clients' social security number or it has to be provided with SSN by the Job Centre beforehand?

 

Yes it does know it

[Charlotte_Henderson]

I've just received letter with my next appointment but it seems to be lacking the term 'This is a mandotary appointment' and also missing the sanctions bit.

 

Am I right in thinknig that this isn't an appointment I must attend?

 

Its still an appointment you must attend, i got one the same afew months ago. i went to the appointment and took letter to show advisor he said even if it doesnt say mandotary etc, you still must attend!

[kosebamse]

Charlotte, how come the Work Programme provider knows about its clients' SSN before they get acess to the information which is stored by JCP? In respect to your answer to MR Happy77, can you give us a directive which claims that it is mandatory, even if the letter does not contain the wording making the letter a mandatory one?

 

For this seems to be not the case:

 

whatdotheyknow.com/request/152662/response/376951/attach/5/WP%20JR%20Assurance%20letter%20v%20final%203.pdf

 

Mr Happy77, have a look at Annex A - Mandation activity notification wording.

[LongHairedLily]

I may sound a little bit dumb here....I finished with Ingeus second week of July and start a new job a weeks time. Ingeus can't make a claim can they, am sure I read they a can claim up to two years after the end of your term with them??

[RebeccaPidgeon]

I may sound a little bit dumb here....I finished with Ingeus second week of July and start a new job a weeks time. Ingeus can't make a claim can they, am sure I read they a can claim up to two years after the end of your term with them??

Good luck in starting the new job.... if, at the time of exiting the Work Programme, you had not attended any job interview as a consequence of any effort on the part of Ingeus, it would be difficult to claim any outcome payment. To do so for a job starting in August/September may be a case of fraud.

[LongHairedLily]

Hi Rebecca, interview was late July so no overlap. I want to claim the in work credit or called something like that. £40 per week for the first 12 months, so was in a quandary as to whether write down details of new employer in order to claim..

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Hi Rebecca, interview was late July so no overlap. I want to claim the in work credit or called something like that. £40 per week for the first 12 months, so was in a quandary as to whether write down details of new employer in order to claim..

If, in order to apply for the In Work Credit, you have to apply via Job Centre Plus, I would have assumed that JCP would have details of the employer - and that any Work Programme Provider need not be kept in the loop.

[Charlotte_Henderson]

Charlotte, how come the Work Programme provider knows about its clients' SSN before they get acess to the information which is stored by JCP? In respect to your answer to MR Happy77, can you give us a directive which claims that it is mandatory, even if the letter does not contain the wording making the letter a mandatory one?

 

For this seems to be not the case:

 

whatdotheyknow.com/request/152662/response/376951/attach/5/WP%20JR%20Assurance%20letter%20v%20final%203.pdf

 

Mr Happy77, have a look at Annex A - Mandation activity notification wording.

 

I agree with you, but try not turning up for an appointment and see where it leads you Mandatory or not

 

I am only going on what my advisor said.