Ingeus

[osdset]

Although, to establish the infrastructure for a "Ready To Go" business, you may need more than 8 weeks, depending on the business model that is appropriate for the business, you may need nothing other than a Web Hosting Page (which only takes an hour or so to set up) and aim for the first contract. The business may be officially registered at the time of the contract being signed, but need not be created in advance of any funds coming it.

 

Not every business requires you to be some idiot, such as Mr Alan Sugar, who wastes £Millions investing in a Product Line to develop a new public telephone box which supports email at 15p an email, to only find that the device bombs. Or, at the time, to suggest that Apple's iPod will bomb, thereby torpedoing your own credibility as in the case of Mr Alan Sugar.

 

Glad to see that your love affair with Sir Alan is still in bloom.

 

He speaks highly of you by the way.

 

Expect roses anytime soon.

[impecunious]

Who's side are you on?? I believe in positive thinking but if all I needed was a web hosting page and a contract, I would have been up and running 10 months ago when I became unemployed. Try telling that to the two and half million people currently without a job. Unemployment situation solved!

 

I expected more from CAG!

 

Imp

[antone]

Is there a full moon I wasn't aware of?

 

Ladies and Gents, civility, please!

[RebeccaPidgeon]

Glad to see that your love affair with Sir Alan is still in bloom.

 

He speaks highly of you by the way.

 

Expect roses anytime soon.

 

Let it not be said that being obsessed with such detail cannot be personally rewarding..... Sigmund Freud used the term "Anal Retentive" to describe individuals who suffer from such obsession.

 

Dont let it dominate your life....although you clearly have more intimate knowledge of Mr Alan Sugar than I do.

 

Checkmate

Edited August 30, 2013 by RebeccaPidgeon
Additional Information Submitted

[Paulo83]

I received a letter this morning from the DWP saying that a doubt has been raised because it appears I failed to undertake an activity Ingeus told me to do.

 

I keep all my letters from Ingeus, and on looking where I keep them all, I don't have a letter in regards to the activity. What I do have is a letter from the week later for a similar activity, and there is no mention of it being a mandatory appointment, and there is no list of possible sanctions on the letter.

 

On the doubt letter (or Good Reason Letter) it asks me why I failed to attend, if I contacted Ingeus (no I never), what they said if I did contact them (I never contacted them), and if I never contacted Ingeus, why not?

 

Of course my real reason for not attending is that I find these "awareness" workshops to be a complete of waste, but that's hardly going to stand up. But like I said earlier, I was booked onto the activity, but was never given a letter. The only letter I did get was printed on the same day (for a similar activity the week later), and it was not a mandatory appointment.

 

Can anybody give any advice on how I should fill in the "Good Reason" form please?

[kosebamse]

Paulo83,

 

Look up: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/work-programme-provider.shtml

 

Chapter 3a (specifically section 4.) talks about mandation. If the letter does not contain all the details of the section 4. then it is reasonable to assume it is not mandatory. After all, why in the first place a requirement of particular wording to mandate?

[JustInterested]

You should also ask the Jobcentre for a copy of the WP08 form that the provider sends to the Jobcentre with details about why they are raising the doubt against you. Nine times out of ten you'll find an easy reason within that to claim good cause (e.g. incorrect dates, totally false information etc.).

[Mr.P]

Three lines for a reconsideration and subsequent appeal.

 

1. The date of the FTA does not match up with the "activity" letter in your file.
   
2. The "activity" was not mandatory and the invitation to attend lacks the prescribed wording required by DWP provider guidance.
   
3. No letter had been issued for the alleged mandatory activity on the date specified.
   

"Good Reason" would simply be that you had not been notified of the correct date of the alleged mandatory activity.

[Dounyas]

Today I received a letter from DWP saying that I a doubt has been raised because it appears I failed to undertake an activity Ingeus told me to do. It says that on 19.08.2013 I was notified to attend/participate in an appointment on 20.08.13 but that I failed to do so.

 

Now they need a good reason letter from me sent to the address on the letter before 06.09.13 to explain why I didn't undertake this activity.

 

----------------------------------

 

on 19.08.2013, whilst I was with my adviser, he said that he didn't have a digital copy of my CV on file , he said that if I didn't send it over to him I will get sanctioned from the jobcentre. I didn't want him to have a digital copy of my CV so I tried to give him my printed CV on paper but he refused. He insisted on a digital one. He then issued me with a mandatory work notification which normally has an appointment on it on the first page 20.08.2013 (which is automatically generated). This details of this letter mentions that the activity to be done at the appointment is that a CV will need to be emailed to him by 5pm on 19.08.2013 as a mandatory activity on the work programme. Failure to receive this cv and cover letter will mean that the job centre will be informed.

 

Although I wasn't interested in sending it to him by email, I have changed it to PDF (no changes can be done to it) with a copyright included then sent it to him. and he received it after checking with him over the phone and that was all completed before 5pm.

 

 

Now how can he expect me to attend the appointment on 20.08.2013 if the activity to be completed is on 19.08.2013.

 

I am sure this advisor is using this tactic to get me off the work programme. He is deliberately misleading me. I need to lodge a complaint against him.

 

What are the best points to raise in this letter to win this case?

Edited September 4, 2013 by Dounyas

[Mr.P]

You've posted the same question http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?402025-Work-Programme-Good-Reason-Letter - To keep advice all in one place, I'll post the response on that thread.

[Paulo83]

Thanks for the advice. I'm using non-mandatory activity, a lack of a letter, a lack of explanation of sanctions for failing to attend in the letter I got for the different activity (issued at the same appointment) and non-relevance of the activities in regard to the work I am actually looking for.

 

I will have to get it in filled in and sent off pretty soon because the time allotted is a joke. I can imagine for most people it being a stressful ordeal. There's no guidance or help offered within the letter, and if they haven't heard from me after the 11th of this month, then they assume I am making no defence. It's obvious they just want to sanction as many people as possible.

[jasta11]

Hope you get a good result, Paulo. If no letter was handed/posted to you for that particular appointment then that alone should be enough to stop the DWP sanctioning you; the WP broke the rules by not issuing a letter for the appointment, as they must. Of course, you can be sure the WP didn't mention this to the DWP when they reported you - the DWP will assume everything was done by the book and you just failed to attend.

[Paulo83]

Hope you get a good result, Paulo. If no letter was handed/posted to you for that particular appointment then that alone should be enough to stop the DWP sanctioning you; the WP broke the rules by not issuing a letter for the appointment, as they must. Of course, you can be sure the WP didn't mention this to the DWP when they reported you - the DWP will assume everything was done by the book and you just failed to attend.

 

Thank you. I filled in the back of the (rather crappy) "Good Reason" letter with all the relevant information and explained that Ingeus had failed to mandate the activity, failed to issue a letter and failed to give details of any sanctions which may arise for non-attendance. They all breach the DWPs own guidelines, so I'm confident of a positive result. For evidence, I also enclosed a copy of the letter they did issue that day, but for a different activity.

 

I mentioned this earlier, but one thing I did notice is that the "Good Reason" letter offers no advice and no guidance whatsoever. It's pretty plain they don't want people to offer any defence so they can sanction as many people as possible.

[jasta11]

Agreed totally. It's the things they don't tell us that cause a lot of the problems - such as 'forgetting' to tell new claimants that they don't have to tick the box on their UJ account to give the DWP access, or that we're quite entitled to show our jobsearch on paper if we so wish, etc.

 

In their literature the JC supposedly presents a 'friendly and welcoming' face to it's clients, but it still relies on the old principle of the unemployed being frightened by 'the dole' and what it can do to them if they don't keep in line. Fortunately, we're better educated now as to our rights thanks to sites like these and there's far more we can report them for.

[Paulo83]

Agreed totally. It's the things they don't tell us that cause a lot of the problems - such as 'forgetting' to tell new claimants that they don't have to tick the box on their UJ account to give the DWP access, or that we're quite entitled to show our jobsearch on paper if we so wish, etc.

 

In their literature the JC supposedly presents a 'friendly and welcoming' face to it's clients, but it still relies on the old principle of the unemployed being frightened by 'the dole' and what it can do to them if they don't keep in line. Fortunately, we're better educated now as to our rights thanks to sites like these and there's far more we can report them for.

 

Yeah, certainly. Purposely withholding information to get claimants to sign up to things they needn't do so is a sly trick. I don't know if it's a national thing, or just a local thing, but my job centre makes you print out copies of your job search if you haven't signed up to UJ.

 

I've never had a problem with my local job centre. They all seem reasonably in-tune with what's happening with regards to high unemployment etc. The problem is with those at the top; people like Iain Duncan Smith spinning the old "scrounger" myth week-in, week-out.

 

I've found this site to be a great help with regards to Ingeus. It was good to do some homework before I started there. I was willing to give them a try and at first they were pretty helpful in enhancing my CV and covering letters. But recently, as I am viewed as one of my advisor's "top" clients, I'm being pushed and pressured into being subbed for jobs I don't want. I am resisting though and just saying I am not interested. So then I got the talk I need to broaden my horizons and look at various job roles in different areas, but I was just lacking confidence and needed a push. A load of crap. I know what type of work I am looking for and I won't be bullied or pressured into looking at things I'm not interested in.

 

At the end of the day, they don't care about you. Their goal at Ingeus is to force the better clients into work as quickly as possible so they can claim a "success" and get their taxpayer-funded reward from the government. I do genuinely feel sorry for the people who get "parked" on the WP. The ones who need the most support are the ones they neglect the most, because it's harder for them to find a job in comparison to a "good" client.

Edited September 12, 2013 by honeybee13

[ismael urzaiz]

talking to my mate last night,he got a job wouldn't tell ingeus where, they've bribed him with 50 quid into his bank account and promised more financial help until he gets his first pay.

[jasta11]

Well worth them paying him £50 as they'll make hundreds more from him getting a job (they get an Job Outcome payment) and for him keeping it (they then get Sustainment payments every so often while he's in work).

 

He could report them for bribery - but as he's already accepted the money then good luck to him..hope he gets a few bob more out of them

 

Paulo - if you mean the JC is making people print out copies of their jobsearch on UJ, then they can't do this. Extract from FOI response dated 22nd July from DWP Central Office says they can't;

 

'In response to the question you have raised about requiring jobsearch evidence from Universal

Jobmatch. Advisers cannot mandate claimants to give them access to their Universal

Jobmatch account, nor can they force a claimant to print out screen prints of their UJ account.'

 

I've never heard any advisors at my JC telling clients they have to provide prints from UJ, but if I ever do I'll be in quick and show them this.

[Paulo83]

Paulo - if you mean the JC is making people print out copies of their jobsearch on UJ, then they can't do this. Extract from FOI response dated 22nd July from DWP Central Office says they can't;

 

'In response to the question you have raised about requiring jobsearch evidence from Universal

Jobmatch. Advisers cannot mandate claimants to give them access to their Universal

Jobmatch account, nor can they force a claimant to print out screen prints of their UJ account.'

 

I've never heard any advisors at my JC telling clients they have to provide prints from UJ, but if I ever do I'll be in quick and show them this.

 

No, it's only if you haven't signed up to UJ. They can only access your UJ with your permission.

 

Strangely, I had a letter through this morning from the DWP saying there is no longer a doubt against my claim. Dunno what's happened there???

[Mr.P]

Strangely, I had a letter through this morning from the DWP saying there is no longer a doubt against my claim. Dunno what's happened there???

 

Common sense prevailed and they realised that you couldn't be sanctioned for an activity that hadn't taken place or that you had not been notified of ?

[Paulo83]

Common sense prevailed and they realised that you couldn't be sanctioned for an activity that hadn't taken place or that you had not been notified of ?

 

Well, I'd been notified verbally and that's it. Doesn't meet any of the DWP guidelines.

 

I got a four-page letter telling me that the doubt no longer applies. It's like it was a sanction letter, but with no sanctions in it! It also states that I can appeal and they've even disclosed the "disagreeing with a decision" booklet. How bizarre!

[osdset]

Well, I'd been notified verbally and that's it. Doesn't meet any of the DWP guidelines.

 

I got a four-page letter telling me that the doubt no longer applies. It's like it was a sanction letter, but with no sanctions in it! It also states that I can appeal and they've even disclosed the "disagreeing with a decision" booklet. How bizarre!

 

The DWP love to waste paper, whole forests have disappeared to satisfy their insatiable need.

[Eowyn01]

Hi,

 

I am on the Work Programme with ingeus, and coming to the final hurdle.

 

During the last meeting, I was instructed through the MAN to Register with 10 Agencies.

 

Your activities for the next appointment are:

Client is required to bring evidence of applying for a minimum of 10 live vacancies per week including evidence of organisation names and contact details for this appointment. Client will register with 10 agencies.

 

Can a single MAN encapsulate many activities. And will a Sanction Doubt arise if I do not.

 

In terms of agency registration, I already apply for vacancies which are advertised by agencies, and the job application will cover agency registration.

 

I have also learned that other candidates have been instructed to approach employers for feedback on their job applications, an issue which also applied to Job Centre Plus through the Job Seekers Agreement and Claimant Commitment.

 

Has anyone faced these requirements before?

Edited September 8, 2013 by Eowyn01
Modification

[JustInterested]

Eowyn have a look at the provider guidelines here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/provider-guidance/work-programme-provider.shtml

 

especially the mandation section as that will tell you all you need to know. In general though a mandation has to be a clear single task, and yours clearly isn't. As far as feedback goes I set up a separate email account and apply for feedback on that. That helps because you don't have the hassle of talking to the employer who, in my experience, doesn't want to be contacted, but it also lets you show that you have done as you've been asked without having to show them your main email account. And I use the same argument you use for agency registration, although whether they will accept that depends on how good you are as a negotiator and how much of a swine your adviser is.

[Mr.P]

In general though a mandation has to be a clear single task, and yours clearly isn't.

 

From DWP WP Provider Guidance, Chapter 3a:

31. It is recommended that only one activity to be achieved per MAN.

32. For example; a participant is mandated to attend a specific appointment. The attendance at the appointment is the requirement, although you may include steps you expect them to achieve such as:

 

To find details of 5 jobs which would be applied for during the session

Update their cover letter/curriculum vitae (CV) ready to be sent with the applications in time for the specific appointment.

The appointment letter requiring ten job applications and registration with ten agencies, whilst excessive (in my opinion), is valid. Failure to complete without good reason could lead to a sanction. Finding ten live vacancies should be easy enough, finding ten genuine jobs that you have a chance of getting is another thing entirely.

 

Most agencies require a visit in person to their office to fill out paperwork and sign forms - I don't suppose the "adviser" has made any allowances for travel expenses.... (no, didn't think so)... In which case, I'd suggest sending emails to ten agencies enquiring about registering - You may well have to go outside your area if you've already registered with most of the local outfits.

 

If some of the live vacancies are agency "jobs", you'd still want to send a separate email to "register" - This way, you comply with the mandation.

[Eowyn01]

@JustInterested :

 

Thank you for the considered view, and the reference to the Provider Guidance.

 

Quite a few employers do invite candidates to assume automatic failure from the outset, unless notified to the contrary. Other employers also state that "We do recognise the time and effort it takes to apply so we will contact you to let you know the status of your application. As an employer of choice we receive a high number of applications so we are unable to offer feedback if you are not shortlisted.".

 

@MrP:

 

Thank you for offering a balanced view.

Edited September 8, 2013 by Eowyn01
Additional Information Submitted