Are the DWP deliberately misleading claimants in order to put them off?

[stewey]

When I received my phone call telling me they'd be sending me the ESA50 form a few months ago now, as I stated in the thread at the time, the guy on the phone from DWP told me that "I wouldn't get put into the Support Group because only 3% of people are put in Support, and they are the terminally ill." That of course I found to be rubbish once I came on this great site.

 

He also told me that when the DLA is switched to PIP, there would remain 2 levels of mobility, but an increase to 12 levels of care, suggesting that if I were in the top level now, I may end up in about 7 or 8 once re-assessed. Yesterday I spoke to Welfare Rights who informed me that he was, once again talking complete ******** as there was actually a reduction from the 3 levels of DLA to only 2 for care with PIP.

 

I'm seriously wondering if the DWP are deliberately misinforming people before they even get to the Atos stage in order to frighten them off claiming? It was certainly that phone call which made me so depressed I was ready to give in...thankfully I came here and I'm now in the Support group without even having attended a medical.

[Nystagmite]

I've had similar - I was told I can't get DLA because I don't get the help. I was told by a retired welfare adviser, if that was the case, the only people who could get if they were living alone, would be those who had someone coming in to help them.

 

He might be right about a minority getting into the support group; but not all of us are terminally ill.

[BankFodder]

 

I'm seriously wondering if the DWP are deliberately misinforming people before they even get to the Atos stage in order to frighten them off claiming? It was certainly that phone call which made me so depressed I was ready to give in...thankfully I came here and I'm now in the Support group without even having attended a medical.

 

I'm sure that they wouldn't mislead you in this way ... would they ... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/22851346 ?

[antone]

DWP phone staff should not be making judgements about possible benefit entitlements unless they are the staff who make the decision and they have the full details of the claim in front of them.

[postggj]

I myself spent three months on JSA, when i should have been on ESA. I even received a sanction because i was unable to keep to this so called job seekers agreement. Not once did the job center staff suggest that i was on the wrong benefit entitlement, it was only through reading post on ESA on the forum that i became aware of it

 

Job center staff are not there to offer any sort of support in finding employment, there job is no doubt a directive to get as many people off the employment figures statistics that they can, by what ever means

[antone]

I myself spent three months on JSA, when i should have been on ESA. I even received a sanction because i was unable to keep to this so called job seekers agreement. Not once did the job center staff suggest that i was on the wrong benefit entitlement, it was only through reading post on ESA on the forum that i became aware of it

 

Job center staff are not there to offer any sort of support in finding employment, there job is no doubt a directive to get as many people off the employment figures statistics that they can, by what ever means

 

Bolding mine - no, this is not their job.

[postggj]

I am not saying all job center staff, so i will withdraw that comment

 

But it cannot be denied the amount of people receiving sanctions for trivial reasons due to the processes that are now in place. I was ill health retired from my employment and i was immediately treated as a work shy scrounger, even though i had never claimed any benefits before

 

What really annoyed me was that i am on crutches, anyone could see i was not capable of doing certain types of work as to the job seekers agreement, but i was offered no support, only you will do this or that or receive a sanction

 

That is from personal experience my comment, and by reading posts, the policy seems endemic now throughout the whole benefit system

 

Once again i apologize for labeling all benefit staff in the same category, flumps who is another poster i believe works for the DWP helped me out no end

Edited June 11, 2013 by squaddie

[Nystagmite]

Squaddie - I have completely different disabilities to you and found the same regarding the lack of support. When I did the work programme, the first thing my adviser said was "why aren't you on ESA?" There's no law stating that as someone with a disability, that I can't claim JSA. I just have to meet the criteria for it.

 

I was told recently by my "support worker" that I must find work. DWP / ATOS have stated otherwise. There's no support where I live either - just some weird obsession with getting people with Autism (not my only disability) back into work before sorting out the issues we have.

[postggj]

Just before i claimed ESA, they wanted to put me on Mandatory work activity renovating a listed building, They were expecting me to do roofing work experience and i have half a knee, I am 49 years of age, not 19, unbelievable

 

Remember, i had been in full time employment since i was 16, yet within 3 months of claiming JSA, they were saying i did not have up to date work experience

Edited June 11, 2013 by squaddie

[osdset]

I would not be surprised, both the DWP and JCP are very good at leaving out information that could be beneficial to a claimant. It seems to be 'if they don't ask don't tell'.

[postggj]

It just seems that the benefit advisers are lacking in a duty of care.

 

Most of the time i am on crutches, i have to consider that the DWP have targets set to get people off benefits. I was told that people placed on this mandatory work activity are taken off the unemployment figures. I do not know if that is true, but it explains things.

 

I was just expected to turn up at this renovation, no prior health and safety screening or measures. I tried to explain that there was no way i could climb scaffolding. The response was that if i failed to attend then a sanction doubt will be raised.This is no more than the attitude of a bully.

 

You only have to look at an individual on crutches to realise that person should be noware near a building site, it is not rocket science.

 

I have no doubt the majority of job center advisers have to comply against there better nature through performance management techniques, but people are going to get hurt if it continues. That is claimants forced onto the mandatory work activity when it is not suitable

 

HOW DID WE EVER GET TO A STAGE OF NOT CARING FOR PEOPLE LESS FORTUNATE

Edited June 11, 2013 by squaddie

[Guest]

I think there is a lot of attempting to put people off, put claimants off. I don't ask the dwp anything now, just fill in the forms, seek info and advice here if necessary and get on with it. I have no option but claim, and or appeal if i get turned down, and that's just the case for me, as with many others.

[flumps1976]

It isn't a case of withholding information, it is a case of not being fully trained and in all fairness it is impossible to expect somebody to know every aspect and regulation of every benefit which is why a few years ago the JCP removed the customer service aspect at the same time that processing was centralised within benefit centres.

I am what you would call "old school" when It was expected that you would have a knowledge of the majority of benefits and would be able to signpost people in the correct direction.

Benefits are extremely complicated and it was decided that it would be easier to remove the requirement to give information or advice in case it was incorrect.

I used to process IS and JSA many moons ago and am lucky that I retained a fair amount of knowledge and will research what I don't know (in my own time mostly as I am run off my feet at work) the one area I know very little about and will happily admit to is ESA

The changes for PIP and Universal Credit that are currently happening are available to read on the intranet service at work but if it is a choice between making sure a claimant receives their payment or reading a legislation/procedural update then payment will override so my learning has to take a back seat.

Hoping that makes sense as it is late and I'm finally feeling tired!

[estellyn]

Yes, I'm with flumps on this, in that it is just under trained staff attempting to over reach beyond their abilities and training, giving advice and proclamations on entitlement based on on a paper thin knowledge base.

Edited June 12, 2013 by estellyn

[jasta11]

I would not be surprised, both the DWP and JCP are very good at leaving out information that could be beneficial to a claimant. It seems to be 'if they don't ask don't tell'.

 

Totally agree. That's why when they make you register with UJ they conveniently 'forget' to also tell you that you don't have to tick the 'Allow DWP access' box.

 

In my view the problem with the DWP is 50% 'not knowing the rules' and 50% 'knowing them but not telling'. Though actually I'm now starting to think that the majority of JC staff really don't know the rules they're supposed to be working by.

 

Would be far more of a mess without informative sites like this.

[Nystagmite]

Flumps does have a point. With changes happening all the time, it's difficult to keep up.

[osdset]

Flumps does have a point. With changes happening all the time, it's difficult to keep up.

It won't be difficult to keep up when they roll out UC, it will be impossible.

[postggj]

And i was under the impression this super UC was up and running and a resounding success

 

Seems irritable bowell syndrome has been keeping very quiet on this

[stewey]

Flumps, it is really good to know that there are people working in DWP who do care about the claimants...I've had so many experiences with those who treat the claimant with utter contempt.

[stewey]

It won't be difficult to keep up when they roll out UC, it will be impossible.

 

I think the UC will be a complete disaster...many people in the two towns I live a few miles from are drug addicts, alcoholics, with loads of unloved kids who dare I say it were brought into the world for benefits.

Now these people can barely cope with their money on a daily basis, nevermind a monthly one...so what will happen..? They'll blow the lot in a few days, and Social Services will be writing out endless shopping vouchers to take to Tesco's. Any savings made by switching to monthly payments will be swallowed up by a massive increase in Social Services spending. Just my theory, but I think it will prove to be correct.

[postggj]

I think the UC will be a complete disaster...many people in the two towns I live a few miles from are drug addicts, alcoholics, with loads of unloved kids who dare I say it were brought into the world for benefits.

Now these people can barely cope with their money on a daily basis, nevermind a monthly one...so what will happen..? They'll blow the lot in a few days, and Social Services will be writing out endless shopping vouchers to take to Tesco's. Any savings made by switching to monthly payments will be swallowed up by a massive increase in Social Services spending. Just my theory, but I think it will prove to be correct.

 

 

Quite a few subjective comments made with no objectivity

 

Though i agree that any claimant who has a dependency such as a alcohol or drugs habit needs provisions made to allocate funds as they are being paid now. but the job centre needs to be informed that they are registered substance abusers

 

I do take objection though to the phrase kids brought into this world for benefits and unloved with no justifiable supporting facts, that is no more than stereo typing the claimant again, "work shy scrounger"

[stewey]

I'm sorry you take objection Squaddie, but if you look around the areas I'm referring to, which I'm not going to mention by name, you'll see endless numbers of unloved kids, and I think anyone who denies that there are thousands of kids being brought into this world for no other reason than the benefits system, are completely deluding themselves. So many aren't even cared for properly, clothed properly, and many as teachers will tell you aren't fed properly.

 

I loath IDS, but there are certain areas of his reforms in which he has a point, one of those is a life on benefits being a choice. That is wrong in any society.

 

I have a nearby neighbour who recently had 2 more children, just as she was about to lose the CB for the elder ones who had reached 'adulthood'. Am I being cynical in my thinking? Given that the police and social services are never away from her house, I think not!

 

I should add that none of the kids have the same fathers, and none of the fathers have ever been on the scene.

[postggj]

You are just basing your conclusions on a single mother rhetoric getting pregnant just to get a council house, in reality that never happens

 

Even if the kids have different fathers, that is irrelevant to the situation of a person claiming benefit

 

Some people may abuse the system, that is human nature, but do not tarnish everyone with the same brush

 

Being on benefit is not a life style choice, NO FIGURES OR STATISTICS HAVE EVER BEEN PRODUCED TO BACK UP THAT CLAIM

[stewey]

That's nonsense, figures or not. I personally know of dozens of teenaged girls who already have it in mind to get pregnant so they can get their own flat, and then the inevitable life on benefits will follow. That makes it a lifestyle choice!

 

And these are people who are at school with my own children, some have already gone on to achieve this goal and are pushing buggies around at 15 and 16.

 

I am not "tarnishing everyone" but there is no denying that for many, not all, and probably by no means a majority, but for many it is a lifestyle choice.

 

Quote - "You are just basing your conclusions on a single mother rhetoric getting pregnant just to get a council house, in reality that never happens" - Really? Once more I could give you countless examples, and any local authority housing officer will tell you the same!

[Nystagmite]

As ever, it's the minority spoiling it for the majority. I have friends (male and females) who are single parents. They work and try to do their best for their children.

 

Funny how we bash single parents; but never the absent parent? Many single parents (including at least 2 I know - I don't know anything the third one, nor is it any of my business) were married when they had their children. Not all single mothers sleep around and have children by multiple fathers.