Ingeus

[Bakatcha]

All you have to say is "my personal circumstances have changed such that I no longer wish to claim JSA/ESA" . No other information is required. They cannot threatren you with sanctions - you are signing off for Chrissakes! I will be signing off shortly (will actually be putting in a claim for pension Credit as I'm old!). I will not tell my provider (not Ingeus but A4greed). pimpo can then try to contact me (they don't have any phone numbers or e-mails so that just leaves post or a knock on the door). I will tell them nothing - but may hint at other employment so they go berserk trying to find out what it is. I have refused to sign data waiver (everyone should), so I guess that leaves them with the option of trying to find out where I'm working (JC+ won't know), trying to intimidate me into telling, bribing me with an offer of payment or making a fraudulent claim. I owe it to these bloodsuckers to f**k them up as much as possible.

[Bakatcha]

Bit late maybe!.

"Is there anything I can use to tell em to bog off and let me enjoy my new job in peace?" - You should not have sifned the data waiver form. Assuming you did withdraw permission without delay - specimen wording:

Re: Data waiver agreement under the Data Protection Act 1998

Dear Pimpo,

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the withdrawal of my consent with immediate effect and alter your records to show that my data sharing consent has been withdrawn.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 PIMPO 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 PIMPO

Name:

Job Description:

 

If you're confident enough you might also mention to your employer that he is not authorised to discuss your employment status with anyone (including pimpo).

[Bakatcha]

re your point 7 - withdraw your consent. sample wording:

Re: Data waiver agreement under the Data Protection Act 1998

Dear Pimpo,

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 PIMPO 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 PIMPO

Name:

Job Description:

[Bakatcha]

"If you refuse to participate with the providers they wil refer your case for a decision to consider the payability of future payments of JSA. These sanctions range from 2 weeks initially to the maximum of 26 weeks if a client refuses to engage with the provider so by refusing to sign any paperwork with the providers you are in effect refusing to engage with them."

Not quite true - you are able to refuse to sign the data waiver form without fear of sanction - indeed it should specifically say so - the wording should be:

Customer Name…………………………… (Please print name in full)

I give consent for (Provider), my future employer and DWP to share information as described in stages 1 to 3 above.

I confirm that:

I have read the information above and understand why this information sharing is needed and how this information will be used.

I understand that:

If I am in receipt of any benefits, my entitlement to these benefits will not depend on whether I choose to give consent or not.

My placement on any programme with (Provider) and any employment or future offer of employment will not depend on whether I choose to give consent or not.

I can withdraw my consent at any time in writing to (Provider).

Signature…… Date………

[Bakatcha]

I used to subvert this kind of thing all the time

 

Provider "can we have your contact details?"

 

Me " you can contact me at or write to my home address"

 

Provider "no, we must have a phone number"

 

Me "sorry, I do not posses a phone"

 

Provider "Oh come on everyone has at least a mobile phone"

 

Me "well I don't, I can't afford one on the pittance I get"

 

Provider "you must get a mobile phone It's imperative in this day and age"

 

Me "Ok, when are you going to pay for one"

 

Provider "we're not"

 

Me "conversation over then!"

I'm not with Ingeus (though I know them from FND) - I'm on the WP with A4greed. My approach has been to tell them that my preferred method of communication is by post - this (helpfully!) is one of the options set out in their sickeningly saccharine "Welcome Aboard!" booklet. So far I have refused to give them any phone numbers or e mail addresses. I have been asked why and I reply that I don't trust them with my data. So far this has worked.

[Bakatcha]

I come from a similar skill base to your husband and I was offered a part time job driving a delivery van for Iceland, I know that there is a demand for skilled craftsmen, so what's the problem?

Your husband is 51, I am 55, draw your own conclusions.

I think I see the problem. I am older than both of you (and, I dare say, better quailified) but I would love a part time job driving a van for Iceland (I have been registered on their website for some time now with no response). I would, however hate a target driven, results orientated, anti-social hours job which involved phoning people up under subterfuge to threaten them in order to try to get repayment of debt. There is absolutely no comparison between the two positions.

[Bakatcha]

Perhaps you should have made your case clearer at your first attempt?

I was not making a comparison between the two positions, both jobs are IMHO demeaning taken in context, I was drawing attention to the ages involved. Regardless of whatever skills or qualifications a claimant may have, if age comes into play the tendency seems to be to push for what I would term 'no brainer' positions.

 

As for the comment (and I dare say, better qualified) I find it offensive, on what do you base that assumption on exactly? I hold an advanced City & Guilds carpentry / joinery, a HND in Musical Instrument Technology, and a BSc (hons) in Musical Instrument Technology.

I think I am qualified enough in general terms thanks very much.

 

If a part time driving job is sufficient for your needs and if you can secure such a position then all well and good, however as you have aptly demonstrated, with your better qualifications, and advanced years no driving jobs were forthcoming, I rest my case.

[Bakatcha]

I recall a hidden camera documentary about one of these places. Seems awful. Did you outright refuse?

 

Hi nickk - not yet been placed in a position where I have to refuse. I know there are jobs out there like this (like you I have seen documentaries). I was just trying to point out the difference between being a van driver for Iceland (does no one any harm and a not unpleasant way to pass the day) and a telephone debt collector.

Happy Christmas!

[Bakatcha]

These people will stop at nothing to get their payments from the DWP. Just remember:

1. You don;t have to provide them with an e-mail address

2. You don't have to provide them with a phone or mobile number

It is true that you cannot prevent the DWP passing on this info - if they have it. Best to ask the Job Centre to delete these items from your data as soon as you know that you're being referred to a provider.

3. You don't have to give them a CV

Whatever you do make sure that you do not sign the data waiver form (this should prevent them spamming your details all over the place).

go to the consent dot me site for details (sorry this site is preventing me posting the link!)

[Bakatcha]

I bought one for around £14. Can't find the details now I'm afraid but have a look at some of these :http://www.pricerunner.co.uk/cl/11/MP3-Players?other_hits=462%3Amp3+players%7C108%3Amp3+players%7C353%3Amp3+players%7C687%3Amp3+players%7Cx%3B286%3B%3B&q=mp3+players&ref=redirect&search=mp3+players&sort=3

You want one with a voice recording facility.

As for charging for a CV = that is ridiculous (personally I would pay to keep these people away from my CV!). They are being paid by the DWP to provide tailored support to help people back to work (the attachment fee they receive is currently £400 for JSA and £600 for ESA claimants). In addition there are hefty follow on payments when people get and remain in work. If someone has suggested you pay them for CV help - get them to put this in writing (they won't!) or record it. Then complain to the DWP - the provider is in breach of their DWP contract by trying to charge you!

[Bakatcha]

Flumps1976 is basically correct but you are free to record either overtly (by telling them what you are doing) or covertly. If you inform them then they should (as Fumps says) go to a private room (thus avoiding the inadevertant recording of a third party). Either way the record should not be posted on the web (this is copyright law rather than anything else) but you are free to keep it and use a transcript as evidence should you ever have to do so.

[Bakatcha]

Hi davidsf2

They will be paid a £400 attachment fee by the DWP (this is £600 for ESA claimants). Attachment fees reduce to 75% of these figures for new "customers" from April and then again each year. The basis of the WP is that the payments should be result orientated so that the bulk of the payments relates to getting people into long term sustainable employment. I haven't checked the calculation but I understand that the total recieved (over a number of years) could be as high as £13000! Now there are also other revenue streams which are exploited by the providers - notably European Social Fund money (you will see the logos all over Ingeus's premises). This appears to work by getting people to go on courses (e.g. basic literacy and numeracy courses) with organisations like Learn Direct. The ESF pays for each attendee and there is a kickback arrangement whereby the provider gets some sort of introductory commission (around 1300 quid I think though I am open to correction). There are also "nice little earners" like A4greed's Debt/money advice service. Enemma Harrison (a4greed's founder and owner) was paid £300,000 to design a debt/money advice service then (surprise, surprise!) A4greed won the tender to provide the service! There is no doubt a substantial bounty paid by DWP for each individual receiving the service (though I doubt if Ingeus will push this as they are A4greed's competition).

Now - what can you do? Firstly do some research - start here: http://www.consent.me.uk/

Remember to claim your travel expenses every time you are required to attend at Ingeus AND (as you say you have caring responsibilities) you are entitled to reclaim any cost of care that is needed when you have to attend at Ingeus. They shouldn't argue about the latter but you may want to clear it with them first.

Good Luck.

[Bakatcha]

Correction! The figure from Learn Direct kickback is approx £1200. I got this figure from the Indus Delta site here http://indusdelta.co.uk/discussion/how_work_programme/7493

The exact quotation is:

"As you will probably know, approximately £1200 can be made from a client completing Numeracy & Literacy via Learndirect. I even had a spreadsheet which calculated how much the client had earned the organisation at each stage of the course. The organisation was even getting away with double funding, using the same client to claim on Learndirect and LSC funded projects (W/Links subcontract). If the client reached £1200 the organisation would sometimes pay for outside training such as CSCS cards, but only if they reached the £1200 target."

Edited January 11, 2012 by Bakatcha

[Bakatcha]

See if you can join the happy banned who have been banished from that site for telling the truth! I have been banished twice now! It appears to be run by apologists for the Work Programme the self styled centre for Economic and Social Inclusion (though perhaps in view of their prediliction for banning anyone that cares to disagree "exclusion" would be more accurate!

See here: http://www.consent.me.uk/blog/

[Bakatcha]

Veeeerrry interesting - I guessed there would be a big money angle to drive this whole work programme mess and abuse - The question I would like to ask is does this apply to all Providers including Maximus, because I have only seen Maximus mentioned on here once and that was as an offshoot of one of them - is Ingeus an area thing ? and would all that information apply to them as well - or is there a variation of Government Contracts.

Oh yes vey BIG Money!!! It's amazing what an old chap with a clockwork PC, an internet connection and time on his hands can find out!

Firstly the country is split into areas (CPA or contract package areas). Then the whole thing was put out to tender on a CPA basis: details of tender here: http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/+/http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-prog-prospectus-v2.pdf). There are at least 2 Prime providers in each area (supposedly to give competition.)

Some details of successful bids here: http://www.mediafire.com/?pvt43ud5k940k feel free to have a nose around for your CPA and Maximus' bid.

In truth there is little variation in the Govt contracts for prime providers since this was largely dictated by the Govt in the terms of their original invitation to tender (ITT). So if Maximus are a Prime Provider expect their remuneration to follow that laid out by the DWP in their ITT. See section 3.03 of this document: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-prog-itt.pdf

There is HUGE amounts of money at stake here - I am in CPA02 (East midlands) and consigned to a Provider A4e - (they have a lot of contracts) but the value of just this one is put at over £100m over the 5 year period. The owner of A4e (Emma Harrison ) boasts of her £8m derbyshire mansion and her £40m personal fortune - who said there wasn't money in other people's misfortune?

Have a little investigation and come back here with your findings.

Cheers

[Bakatcha]

Provider Min serv standards (including Maximus) are here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/provider-minimum-service-delivery.pdf

As for training and qualifications - I don't know!

The specific payment details for each contract are not published as this is commercially sensitive info but you can bet it doesn't deviate from the pattern or amounts set out in the DWP's ITT.

You should have been informed about the complaints procedure. Believe me this will be long winded and involve going through many levels before you can get the Independent Complaints Examiner to take any notice.

I'm afraid that "advisors" have been given massive powers to affect people's lives and a license to berate, bully and cajole at will. As you have found this power can attract the wrong kind of person to the role and is exacerbated by the need for them to meet their targets.

[Bakatcha]

@nyfle - Prime providers get a per capita fee of £400 (JSA) or £600 (ESA) it's called an attachment fee and is payable at the outset. The amounts are set to reduce by 25% in April then again for each year thereafter until they disappear altogether after year 4.

I think the point is that the attachment fees are not enough to tide the pimps over till the main income stream kicks in (if it ever does!). This model means that an organisation wishing to bid for a prime contract (as opposed to being a sub contractor) had to have considerable working capital in order to bridge the gap in income. This in turn meant that charities were disadvantaged because, by and large, they didn't have sufficient working capital. Hence most (if not all) the successful bids for prime contracts were from private sector, non charitable, companies. A cynic might say that this was deliberate in order to freeze out the competition from charities!

The letter looks like it has been written by an employee of a charity so my guess is that it is not a prime provider but a sub contractor. As such the terms of its remunertion will be a matter between the prime and the sub. In this case (and probably many others) it looks like the prime has negotiated not to pay the sub anything up front and the sub has accepted this and entered into the contract. This is not actually the government's or the DWP's fault! When the charity decided it wanted to be involved with the WP it knew that it was entering into a very commercial world - and it still made the decision to do so. If they didn't like the commercial terms on offer then they should not have taken on the contract. A lot of charities decided not to become involved because they didn't like the commercial terms being offered by the primes, couldn't fund the cash flow required and/or were not empowered to take on such a contract by their articles (or whatever the charity equivalent of articles is). This charity entered into the contract with its eyes open and was hoping to make money out of it - I have no sympathy for the charity - just for those effected.

Edited January 14, 2012 by Bakatcha

[Bakatcha]

Hi silv.surfer

“so she sanctioned for 2 weeks” well she may have raised a sanction doubt which needs to be confirmed (or rubber stamped!) by the decision maker at the DWP. If so you should fight it by writing out your side of the story and giving it to the JC. You may also want to make a complaint at the same time – you can do this on the form at the back of the JC booklet called “our service standards”. I think all you need to say is that the advisor told him “the 'Job Interview was postponed so no need to go in” and then raised a sanction doubt for failing to attend. If the sanction has already been confirmed then you should appeal on the same grounds.

Now you may not be successful but it is worth doing anyway. The more we just accept injustice as the norm then the more these people will try to get away with.

You may also use the provider’s own internal complaints procedure though this is likely to be extremely long winded and ultimately ineffectual.

Good luck!

[Bakatcha]

you say "my Friend also had HB and CT removed". I don't think this is correct - being sanctioned should not mean the loss of Council Tax Benefit (and I think I'm right in saying that Housing Benefit should also continue). In these circumstances write to the council saying that you have "nil income" - use exactly those words.

[Bakatcha]

The excellent consent.me site now gives access to evrything you could want to know about providers and their contracts:

http://www.consent.me.uk/blog/

[Bakatcha]

Hi HELLY13

Jihn says "Good luck with your next meeting and tell them to pay for childcare"

That is not a bad idea as some providers have undertaken to do exactly that when bidding for the WP contracts. For instance Maximus (another poverty pimp) promise Access to funds for travel, childcare, equipment and clothing if included in Action Plan

I have taken this from their minimum service standards which can be found here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/provider-minimum-service-delivery.pdf

Ignorasus' service standards are also on the same document though no specific mention of childcare. Definitely worth having the discussion though and pointing out what other providers (e.g. Maximus) do. At the very least it may cause them to cut down on the hours in your sentence.

[Bakatcha]

Hi John - when I was on FND with Ignorus they tried to get me to apply for a job with them as a kind of liaison with the Job Centre. I politely declined. I was also told that I should have applied for a job as a trainer with them - again I declined.

Details of the payment schedule can be found in part 3 of this document http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-prog-itt.pdf

Basically 3 payments one an attachment fee, one an outcome payment and one a sustained outcome payment - the schedule for payment is as per the document. It is widely thought that providers discounted the 2 outcome payments when bidding for contracts by around 5%. I haven't worked it out but I think the maximum they can get is around £13000! Even at 10grand per full outcome this is a considerable amount of public money being passed over to private hands. I guess it's perfectly possible for a pimp to get more money over the payment period than the individual person gets paid! Remember as well that in many cases all benefit will not cease just because a low paid job has started so in addition to the pimps' payments there will still be a cost in benefits. Makes you wonder where the sense is really!

[Bakatcha]

This from the excellent Ipswich Unemplyed Action site http://intensiveactivity.wordpress.com/

An ex Ingeus advisor gives the inside perspective:

"ConDemOut Says:

February 9, 2012 at 10:15 am

I worked as a Personal Adviser for a company called Ingeus on the Work Programme when it first started but had to leave it was so corrupt. Our job was impossible. How do we get 3 million people into 500, 000 jobs. The simple maths doe’s not add up.

The jobseekers who are made to go on the work programme are, in the main, some of the most unemployable people in society. How was I meant to turn around a whole life of unemployment and the lack of employability skills in 6 weeks?

We baby sat them. We were/are there to make sure they ARE applying for jobs and to punish them when they don’t. We were/are there to kick people off their benefits more than to find them a job. In another company I used to work for, A4E, (during New Labour’s New Deal which was almost as bad but at least that was just about hiding figures – not providing free labour to rich multi-national corporations) we were positively encouraged to assess a clients employability prospects and if they were very low, we were told to find a way of booting them off their benefits as this was also considered a ‘win’, just like getting them into work.

These companies with Work Programme contracts only makes money if they get people into jobs so the staff are bullied by management to get people into jobs that they aren’t suitable for, that goe’s against their career plan, that they aren’t qualified for and in the worst scenario that they are endangering themselves and others by doing as they are not capable of doing the job safely etc.

The billions that is being WASTED on this programme could of been used to offer employers tax breaks or other financial incentives for taking long-term unemployed people on or even better giving our NEET young people Apprenticeships (this is what all companies and employers say if anyone bothers to ask them) but NO. It is spent proping up rich and powerful corporations like Asda, Tesco and Poundland by supplying them with serfs, free labour to do their bidding. These big coporations are sacking people so as to replace them with free labour from the Work Programme! It’s criminal."

[Bakatcha]

Hi YorkyLad,

I had similar experience when I rang up and changed an appointment (a whole week in advance) - I put it back one hour and was told that it was rescheduled successfully. On my arrival I was taken aback to be berated by a young harridan for being half an hour late (I was half an hour early!). Got home to find threatening message on answering machine re sanction doubts etc. etc. I was furious but never got an apology.

Also on another occassion I turned up, signed in and waited half an hour then queried why I wasn't being seen. I was then told that my advisor was ill and not in that day and I could go. I'd probably be still sitting there waiting if I hadn't asked!

Put it down to incompetence on their part.

I like the "Analingus"!

[Bakatcha]

Well to be honest - I'm not sure! If you can come up with a way to get £75 out of them and not give them any useful info for them to get paid well all I can say is "hat's off to you!". Give it a try.