Information; we want Information!

I have another reverification case, and DWP’s handling of it reminds me to raise yet again a continuing problem with UC:

UC ‘writes’ to the claimant, stating a decision.

Few or no details are given on the notification, but of course you can ask for more information.

Good luck with that.  You ask. Nothing is forthcoming.

With the reverification problem, we have asked for copies of the decision to close the claim, the decision that an overpayment has arisen, a schedule of overpayment, the facts and law used.

Nothing.

It’s the same for every overpayment case. No details, just a brusque demand for money.

And for WCA decisions – they send swathes of generalised information about the WCA process, but when asked for the details pertaining to the actual claimant – nothing.

A colleague has just dealt with a sanction case where the ‘decision’ was given by phone, DWP have realised they have made a mistake but are insisting on going through the MR process – not a decision in sight. Claimant is still sanctioned though.

My concern is that intentionally or otherwise, UC is handing down decisions by diktat and discouraging challenges by not supplying proper information.

I’ll be talking to debt management about an overpayment case tomorrow morning. Notable lack of a decision. Just a stoppage and an amount quoted. Got more from the standard DM letter introducing themselves.

Have a somewheat similar problem with an appeal, albeit in reverse.

We’ve been told the decision was wrong and some payment has been made, but no identifiable decision has been given revising it. The amount paid isn’t right. The tribunal doesn’t think the appeal has ‘been’ lapsed as they put it, but it must have lapsed by operation of law. UC records have been altered retrospectively so there is no record of the decision ever being different.

I have an appeal which was adjourned. Judge wants information on how and why a decision has been made. Client was being knocked back for UC because of failed HRT. Suddenly, on 4th approach “claim approved”. No trace of a decision, no reasoning given to client.
Response from DWP: it was the pandemic, we was giving UC to all and sundry…

Second client: housing costs refused. The decision letter goes like that: in order to receive UC housing costs you must blah blah.

No idea which of the above criteria were not satisfied, what actually prevented client from being eligible and which part needs to be addressed.

I doubt this is a serious plot to make client and ours lives difficult. But someone made a decision not to employ enough staff or not to train them adequately. And that decision could only come from SoS.

Feel your collective pain!!!!!!!!!!!!!