Ingeus

[Mr.P]

I am sorry that you have been misinformed....and that you are reporting the misinformation. It is sufficient that a candidate invokes their rights under the Data Protection Act to require any organisation to purge their systems of electronic and paper based systems, and if they fail to comply, for the Information Commissioner to address the issue.

 

Please see: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/work-programme-memo-029.pdf

Then have a look at: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/pg-chapter-11.pdf

 

Work Programme providers are the data processors whilst the DWP remains the data controller - What this means is the DWP takes on responsibility for data retention and it is their policies that apply. If you don't want the WP provider to know something, don't tell the DWP. Any consent revocation has to be addressed to the DWP, but you may well find statutory requirements override any opinions held about DPA requirements.

 

If you are unfortunate to be on an ESF funded programme, then some data has to be retained until at least Dec. 31st 2022.

[Mr.P]

UJM has only ever been accessible "online"... If the WP "adviser" meant to suggest that all job search activity had to be logged through UJM from next year, I'd say B*****s. IF job search activity has to be recorded via UJM, it is up to the DWP to make the announcement AND provide alternatives for those that do not have or can not use a computer/internet.

 

 

footnote: I had to fill out a benefit claim form recently. In the spaces requiring phone/email details, I entered "n/a" which was accepted without comment.

[Mr.P]

will they set him up a UJM account with that email address?

 

If they do without his knowledge or consent, they would be in serious trouble with, amongst others, the ICO and DWP.

 

I would be more than willing to come over and re-educate them on matters ranging from personal privacy through to first aid in the workplace.

[Mr.P]

It didn't contain the MAN language required to mandate me, so I swiftly phoned up and said I couldn't go. My reason was because I'm at a Prince's Trust appointment, which is true.

 

I used to do some (free) one day courses with the local university - A4e would schedule appointments that conflicted with these courses despite my telling them that I was unavailable. My response was "once again demonstrating gross corporate incompetence, you will reschedule for a more convenient time and date". Never, ever gave a reason - No point in letting Emma's little harpies claiming credit for the courses.

[Mr.P]

I just want them to **** off and leave me to work in peace but they won't leave me alone!!!!

 

Send them a cease and desist letter. Something along the lines of:

 

Your unwarranted and incessant attempts to contact me constitute harassment, and should you continue, it will be reported to the relevant authorities. For your information, I will report you for offences under the following:

 

• Telecommunications Act 1984
  
• Protection from Harassment Act 1997
  

As I am no longer claiming any qualifying benefits, I am under no obligation to engage in any way what so ever with yourselves.

 

What the hell, 26 calls in one day is excessive - I would report them to Ofcom and the ICO.

[Mr.P]

I'd send them a letter (not an email, text or phone call) stating that you are working and no longer claiming JSA, that no further appointments are required, and to please cease contact and delete your phone number from their records.

 

If that doesn't work, I imagine poster Mr. P would have some further thoughts

 

I wouldn't divulge the reason for ceasing a claim of JSA - Just write a short, blunt letter refusing permission to contact on the grounds that the JSA claim has ended along with any contractual or legal basis for engagement with the provider. Any courtesy visits would be subject to a fee payable on entry. Unscheduled or unauthorised visits by WP provider staff or agents will be dealt with by way of a wet kipper.

[Mr.P]

This one works best if initiated from day one of the work programme.

 

Sign up and register a free phone number offering call forwarding - Divert it to your normal phone.

The cost of call divert is embedded in the premium rate number you are allocated, so the caller ends up paying for the service. When you've had enough of their harassment, configure the call divert to their head office, DCA, or political party of your choice.

[Mr.P]

I want to take a Sign Language course in Glasgow but can't really afford it. Do you think Ingeus would help with the funds?

 

Do you have a confirmed offer of a job after completing this course ?

If the answer is no, then the prospects of getting funding is limited.

 

Is the course available at zero cost to Ingeus - i.e. are there grants available from other sources ?

If the answer is yes, then they may well stump up travel expenses and claim credit for organising and funding the course.

 

It doesn't hurt to ask - They may surprise all of us and say yes (but don't hold your breath).

[Mr.P]

is there anyway you can get your ingeus advisor to forget about you and not give you as many appointments?

 

By any legal and/or moral means, the answer I'm afraid is no.

You could try asking and state the frequency of appointments is inappropriate to your circumstances or needs. Don't expect a satisfactory response, and if by any chance you do get an agreement, it will most likely be ignored when a new "adviser" takes over.

[Mr.P]

are people who have withdrawn their consent considered zero profit people?

 

No, because the DWP remain the data controller, and will share information with the provider with or without your consent. There is a live memo published by the DWP that outlines the legal position (or rather, their opinion).

[Mr.P]

what would happen if everyone on the WP with every provider all withdrew their consent?

 

Absolutely nothing. It would be business as normal for providers. For further details, I refer you to the following two live memos issued by the DWP:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/wp134-provider-memo-claimant-consent

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/wp139-provider-memo-claimant-consent-before-contacting-an-employer

 

Should sufficient numbers of the exempted claimant groups withdraw consent, the DWP will seek an updated Designation Order that allows providers to use/abuse all data.

 

The simple answer is: If you do not want a WP provider to have access to certain pieces of personal information, do not give it to the JCP/DWP.

[Mr.P]

I'm under incredible strain from Ingeus pushing me into self employment when I have yet to test the waters with selling comics as a business (surely a trial basis is allowed?) and I worry going into self employment at the chance of it not making money I won't be able to provide for my daughter/wife's needs, I'm not bothered about mine.

 

The desire to push you into self employment is understandable when you examine their funding model - They only get paid once you have signed off, so even unsustainable s/e gets them a payout. Their experience of setting yp and running a small business will be extremely limited and I have grave concerns that they could differentiate between a viable idea and a crackpot one doomed to failure - No business venture will return a good profit margin from day one, so you are right in wanting to test the waters first.

 

Perhaps your first question on Thursday should be "what experience do you have in starting up a profitable small business ?"

Pick out the B.S. and take it from there. As for the "group sessions", ask them to explain how they are appropriate to your circumstances and needs. Chances are, it will be "supervised" job searches or more inane CV writing sessions.

[Mr.P]

Thank you for that, my dad said he'll come for support as I feel incredibly nervous and stressed out and I will see them tomorrow.

 

I'd also suggest asking for (insisting ?) on a private room and record the conversation. you don't have to tell them that you are recording..

 

Don't forget to get travel expenses refunded in full. If you use a private car, the DWP guidelines state 25p per mile (presumably each way).

[Mr.P]

Adviser: Do you think any girl would be interested in you right now?

You: That's not something I think about much at the moment - I have other concerns.

 

Me: Are you trying to hit on me ???

[Mr.P]

Larbour Party announces plans to replace back to work scheme

 

Don't forget who was responsible for handing out contracts to these big companies in the first place. It was Labour that gave us the New Deal programme and the Flexible New Deal - The only real difference between the old versions and the new is the payment model. The content has remained the same, as has the scope for fraud.

 

If Labour do scrap the current scheme and leave it to councils to provide local programmes, who do you think will staff them ?

If the current providers don't subcontract to the councils, in all probability, the same people will be employed all be it with a different paymaster.

[Mr.P]

Now I'm no super model, I have some junk in my trunk (so to speak ) and so can't really go to the advised Primark for a suit.

 

The following suggestion may not (excuse the pun) suit everyone, but.... Have a rummage around in your local charity shops - I found a half decent suit a couple of years back for a fiver with a bonus of some loose change in one of the pockets. If you're lucky, you may even find some designer labels that would have cost a fortune when new.

[Mr.P]

I have noticed that increasingly these shops are being run on a professional basis (notwithstanding the use of voluntary, or involuntary, labour). Unfortunately this means that the prices they want to charge are becoming well outside of the traditional charity shop range.

 

Indeed. I buy CDs from time to time, whilst most charity shops are in the 50p to £1 range, Oxfam regularly charge £3 or more. Another has a regular turnover of white goods such as washing machines and fridges - These are refurbished units and at least come with a three month guarantee, so perhaps the £50-80 tags are not too bad.

[Mr.P]

He's saying that this is what he's been advised by the mental health team as a way of me moving forward but they have not even seen me (the mental health team at Ingeus) to make any sort of assessment.

 

Hang on a moment.... What the H*** is Ingeus doing having a "mental health team" ????

Work Programme providers can not make a claimant seek or undertake medical treatment - This includes talking to an in-house "team".

 

PandaPawPaw - Before you discuss anything with this "MH team", ask what qualifications they have and which body they are registered with. If they ask you about things that you do not want to talk about, remind them that there is no legal, moral, or contractual obligation to talk to them... Indeed, if the staff are unqualified/unregistered, they could be breaking the law themselves.

[Mr.P]

My response: Work Programme Provider Guidance, Chapter 3a:

20. When deciding whether activity is reasonable in a participant’s circumstances you need to consider:

The participant’s claimant group and how this affects the nature of their participation. For example, although mandatory ESA participants can be supported towards employment they cannot be mandated to:

 

• apply for jobs
  
• undertake medical treatment
  
• take up work
  

This pilot project referred to above, sounds like it is outside the Work Programme. IF this thing is being run alongside the WP, then I would most definitely be asking for proof of qualifications & registration before anything else.

 

.... I recall posting a vacancy advertised by Ingeus a few months ago. They were seeking newly qualified MH staff - Perhaps this pilot project was the reason behind it. So.... We have inexperienced staff with little practical knowledge of dealing with mental health issues handing out treatment to a randomly selected subject. Is anyone else alarmed by this ?

[Mr.P]

If he has submitted the forms and the JCP has authorised the holiday, it is a case of "arse and elbow". Had he informed the "adviser" that he was going on holiday before the appointment ?

 

Did your friend keep copies of any/all forms handed in (preferably signed/stamped by the JCP) ?

[Mr.P]

Still haven't answered the question: Had the (Ingeus) adviser been informed of the holiday ?

 

If "yes" and the JCP had also been informed of (and approved) the holiday, then appointment should never had been made. The resulting benefit doubt would then be vexatious at best and should be rejected as soon as the "good reason" letter is returned.

[Mr.P]

wouldn't my friend get sanctioned simply because he didn't inform ingeus of his plans even though he informed the jobcentre and filled out the correct paperwork?

No, he shouldn't be, although it is always best to inform the WP provider of such things.

 

From the DWP Generic Guidance which applies to all DWP contracts/provisions, Chapter 2:

 

Holidays

53. Job Seekers Allowance (JSA) regulations allow claimants to be treated as actively seeking employment when away from home on holiday (within GB), but they must be willing and available to return immediately to take up employment. This does not apply to claimants on Mandatory Work Activity, as the placement is only for four weeks holiday periods are not permitted. For longer mandatory placements, if the claimant notified the provider in advance that they would be absent on holiday, this will be acceptable as long as JCP accept they are Available/ASE, and a DMA referral would not be required. It is proposed that a cumulative period of 2 weeks holiday during a 26 week placement is reasonable, but anything over that would need to be referred to DMA for a decision. Provider and adviser guidance will be amended to cover this. However if the provider has any doubt in any individual circumstance then a DMA referral should be made for the DM to make a decision.

 

Technically, the claimant should have informed the WP provider before going on holiday... But as they are only the "data processors", I would have thought it acceptable to inform the JCP (which was done) - If there was a lawful requirement to notify the WP provider, the FLA at the JCP should have informed the claimant.

 

joeski: I'd suggest that your friend adds a short note to his "good reason" letter saying something along the lines:

"If there was a requirement to notify Ingeus of my holiday, the JCP adviser should have pointed this out when I handed in the relevant form"

[Mr.P]

how come ingeus never telephone people to ask when a suitable time for an appointment would be?

 

It is the same for all agencies, the DWP included - You are unemployed, therefore you have nothing better to do than do what you're told as and when we tell you to.

 

In reality, some have care commitments, others are engaged in voluntary work or short courses - Now, if they would care to ask, much of the hostilities would disappear.

[Mr.P]

the WP want screen shots and print outs although the JC just want a written record,[...] if a written record is good enough for JC then it should be good enough for them?

 

One would have thought what is good enough for the JCP would be good enough for any WP provider. However, the latter is prone to making up rules as they go along to hide the fact that they don't have the tools, resources, or knowledge to actually help anyone back in to work.

 

That said, a JCP adviser can ask for supporting evidence such as screen shots, printouts of emails, and letters in response to job applications - This shouldn't be done as a matter of routine, only in cases where there is a suspicion that the written record is "inaccurate" before referring it to a DM.

 

If a WP programme "adviser" kept demanding screenshots or printouts, I'd be challenging the legal basis for the demands and point out that their task is to help a claimant back in to work, not to perform tasks that the JCP should be doing - Caution is advised if you wish to go down this route as you could be branded a trouble maker and become a target for sanctions.

[Mr.P]

UI also think it is very unfair how you go back on the WP after finishing work, i had a 3 month contract for a job lasted a bit longer, signed back on didn't go through as a rapid re claim so surely should be classed as a new claim

 

Claiming JSA after working three months does indeed count as a new claim. Unfortunately, your WP sentence is for 104 weeks regardless of any breaks in your claim. On the bright side, time spent in employment counts as part of the 104 weeks and whilst working, you are under no obligation to engage with the provider.