UC sanctions should be temporarily lifted

[Needachangee]

NC as been discussing with a friend who uses MN

I am on UC currently but have been sanctioned for missing appointments as my mum was in hospital. I had a single piece of toast yesterday, I just started my period, it’s 30 degrees and I have 3 potatoes and half a tin of beans to last until Monday. That’s when I can apply for a hardship payment that I might not even receive and if I do it won’t come through till Tuesday.

AIBU to think sanctions should be lifted temporarily with the cost of living crisis. I understand that there has to be consequences and incentives to make people attend the job centre but the alternative is people like myself are close to starving. The only positive outlook I have is I’m starting work in September. Food banks are scarce as everyone is struggling to buy their own shops let alone donate.

The country is on its knees so I know there can’t be an increase in UC and as I say I will be earning myself soon enough but as I’ve been sanctioned the most I will get is £100 if I’m accepted for a hardship payment to see me through till payday in September. I think sanctions should be banned temporarily as a help to people like the increase during lockdown.

It is hard for you. For some reason, there are people who think you sit and rub your hands together and grin with laughter about the feckless unemployed... and that you all laugh about sanctions and people starving.

I know you don't. All I wish is that you could do more for the people who want to get back into work without the harsh commitments and sanctions. I know that is out of your hands.

Yabu no way do you get so little UC there's a standard set amount no one only gets £110 a month.

I’ll add a picture tomorrow of the letter my client received that tells him he should no longer send in a FIT note and stating that they are over ruling the doctor.

Copy below pasted into comment of ESA65B letter that the DWP send to GPs:

We no longer need Statements of Fitness for Work (known as fit notes) for
your patient as they are fit for work


Dear Doctor

Patient’s name:
Address:
Date of birth:

Following your patient’s Work Capability Assessment, we’ve decided they are fit to
do some types of work, but this might not be the same as they have done before.
This means you no longer need to provide fit notes for their Employment and
Support Allowance (ESA) claim.

Providing fit notes in the future for their ESA claim
Subject to your clinical discretion you may issue further fit notes in the future to your
patient if:
 their condition gets worse

 they develop a new disability or health condition

 they ask you for evidence for a reconsideration or appeal against our
decision.

And here, for good measure, is a link all about it.
www.disabilityrightsuk.org/news/2019/april/dwp-has-sent-150000-fit-work-letters-risk-patients-health

And a quote from that website.
"When someone is found’ fit for work’ following a work capability assessment, the DWP sends their GP a standard letter (ESA65B) informing them of the decision. The wording of this letter changed in August 2017 to say GPs "do not need to provide any more fit notes" to their patient"

There's a small box on the assessment questionnaire that read along the lines of,
Do you give DWP permission to contact your about the outcome.of your assessment. If you ticked it, you can rescind your permission at anytime as detailed:

mrfrankzola.wordpress.com/2020/08/10/protect-patient-doctor-relationship/

And an added.image as an option extra of a template of an ESA65B

this is down from CHDA and what we are instructed to do from the WCA outcome

Nope.
From chdauk.co.uk/your-assessment/assessment-process/after-your-assessment/

Quote:

"After your assessment our Healthcare Professional completes a report using criteria laid out by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). This is to provide the DWP Decision Maker with an impartial, justified medical opinion about how you are affected by your medical condition.

The Assessment Report will describe your medical conditions and the activities you undertake in a typical day. It will also have the Healthcare Professional’s observations, and the results of any physical examination undertaken.

The report is one piece of information DWP uses in deciding your entitlement. The Healthcare Professional who carries out your assessment does not make any decision about your allowance, benefit or credits. The Healthcare Professional will not know the outcome of your claim.

You may request a copy of the full report from DWP office handling your claim.

Decisions on claims
DWP will notify you of the outcome of your claim.

DWP makes decisions on claims. Direct any questions or concerns about the outcome of your claim to the DWP office handling your claim. They will know what information they have used to decide your entitlement. The Health Assessment Advisory Service will not be aware of this. We have no decision-making role."

@Preeeettyprettygood i understand your passion but you have to admit this is down to the individual there is no consistency. (as with many job roles) So a claimant has a good work coach and or a good case manager and a positive experience and this is how it should be. But you are being either naive or disingenuous if you believe that many of them care.

The DWP do tell the claimant that some nurse or OT with no experience of the claimants condition overrules a GP in deciding if he is fit for work based on a 30 minute telephone call, because the DM follow the HCP report.

If the DM adds their own points they frequently have to explain it to their manager. May not be you personally but it’s true.

Whose responsibility is it to send out a UC50, and yet they are not being issued meaning claimants are waiting far more than the stated 3 months for assessment?

In truth does a work coach or a case manager have time to do everything expected of them, given their workload? Would they be risking burn out if they tried?

Two examples, of many, are a work coach who was so concerned that she gave the claimant no work search and referred him to social services, well done that WC. She was then taken off the case and the claimant got another WC who immediately said he had to attend appointments and look for work. Why?

A claimant went abroad for a 2 week holiday, gave the dates to her WC, the case manager closed the claim and claimant was told to make a new claim and ask for backdate on return to the U.K. Again Why would someone do this?

As a rule work coaches don’t know the law, case managers don’t know the law and yet continue to make decisions that have a major impact on claimants lives. Yes a DM can change the decision but it takes too long and the impact can be devastating.

It is great to know there are some dedicated people like yourself but it’s really not consistent and it’s hard when your good work is overlooked, because there are some fantastic staff dealing with some really tricky claimants.

It's a ridiculous way of trying to get people off benefits take money that has been deemed the MINIMUM for you to live on and expect you to get a job how? How can you get a job your expected to travel too without money to travel money to eat money for broadband to apply for jobs (not all libraries are accessible without transport) thst aside people get sanctions for ridiculous things get a job 40 hours a week and they make you an appointment during that first week because you have had a change in circumstances so you need to take time off work to see the jobcentre and explain why your circumstances have changed its ridiculous because if you CANNOT get the time off work your sanctioned or they block your payment

Should someone be able to declare themselves unemployed, fill out a benefits form and then get benefits for rest of their lives without having to attend the jobcentre or do anything? No? Then there has to be sanctions.

The stupidest thing about the system as it stands is that sanctions putting claimants into dire straits like losing their homes etc leads to more expense to the system.

A family can’t pay their 800.00 pcm rent- - they are evicted. This costs in legal proceedings. The council has to put them in sub-standard accommodation which can cost thousands per month - paid by the council.

The effect on mental health puts people into the health system - this costs more money.

Children end up falling behind in school, family breakdown occurs etc etc….

If it’s just about money, it would be cheaper for the system to cover the 800.00 rent in the first place.

There is an industry that depends on poverty and so of course it will never be eradicated - this is the true scandal, not the poor sod on 70.00 a week who is getting punished at every turn for corporate greed and a failing capitalist model.

If the system just paid the rent, how many other people would find themselves "unable to pay their rent"?

(1) A sanction does not get you off benefits. You get reduced payments until you comply but you're still a claimant..
(2) If you report that you have started F/T work and your appointment is after this date your appointment will be cancelled. The Jobcentre WANTS you to be employed.
(3) If you need help with travelling costs to get to and from work for the period before you're paid wages the Jobcentre will help. More than an hour's notice would be needed though.
(4) The UC50 is issued by CHDA through the post once a referral has been made. Copies of this form are available on GOV.UK. If you have no access to a printer the Jobcentre will print off a copy for you should you need one.
(5) WFMA which comes from the Secretary of State means that all claimants in the Intensive regime without a fit note have to be seen weekly (If a new claim or a recent change to Intensive such as when a youngest child turns 3) for 13 weeks. The rest fortnightly.
(6) Only the standard allowance element is sanctioned. Money remains payable for rent, children etc. In fact there are a few people who prefer the sanction to coming into the Jobcentre as long as they get the other elements paid. They do not engage at all. There's probably a reason but Jobcentre staff are not social workers / counsellors or mental health experts and with 30 appointments to get through a day pretty burnt out themselves.

No reason not to publish all the good news stories on UC and other Tory Welfare reforms.

ukdaily.news/uk-minister-accused-of-trying-to-hide-reports-on-impact-of-tory-welfare-reforms-advantages-2-35464.html

Unless.....

They do not like light being she'd upon them or being seen to be in the wrong.
How Coffey ever won any votes at all is beyond me. She's abhorrent and I can only assume other anti gay people support her.

In other news..
On the phone for over 3 hours today assisting to arrange an assessment.

If you want them recording you have to notify them.. first the woman at CHDA said there was no recording equipment available..
then it was not enough notice..
Then, after quoting their letter back to them, magically.. the equipment appeared and it's plenty of notice for them.

Then a guy at the DWP didn't know anything about the assessors contacting GPS after, didn't know that they did that... So I mentioned that they used to use the letter I've mentioned above and that jogged his memory enough..

I think some people from these organisations hope that the callers don't know anything and will just accept what they say and put the phone down etc.

It's a ridiculous way of trying to get people off benefits take money that has been deemed the MINIMUM for you to live on and expect you to get a job how? How can you get a job your expected to travel too without money to travel money to eat money for broadband to apply for jobs (not all libraries are accessible without transport) thst aside people get sanctions for ridiculous things get a job 40 hours a week and they make you an appointment during that first week because you have had a change in circumstances so you need to take time off work to see the jobcentre and explain why your circumstances have changed its ridiculous because if you CANNOT get the time off work your sanctioned or they block your payment

Now that sanction would be silly. But people cannot expect money for nothing in return. There are 3 appointments to not attend before Sanctioning, that's plenty. If people want money, then make attending the appointments a priority.

But do you not understand that these people who might be missing these appointments may well be in full time employment and not given sufficient notice to be able to book time off to attend these appointments ? This actually happened to a friend of mine she needed a password to be able to logon to their system in order to claim her childcare she only had a week to get the receipt onto the system otherwise she lost that weeks money which was in excess of £300. They claimed they were sending this password to her phone which was clearly bollocks because everybody else was able to text her but Theres wouldn’t come through. So she was given a 12 hour window of opportunity to get herself to the nearest job centre to pick up this password and then get online and then submit the receipts.
she was really fortunate that her employer understood and just let her go but I do think that was more to do with the fact that she was in a professional role I can’t imagine if she worked in Tescos they would’ve been the understanding and still paid her for the time.

The flaw here is the assumption the majority are happy to live on benefits long term. Out of work benefits for those capable of work in the U.K. are low compared to other major European economies and the majority do not want to be on them long term.

Benefit sanctions have been found to be disastrous for mental health, put people into debt and there is little evidence that they work. For all these reasons for the few who do choose to live a meagre lifestyle on benefits many more are harmed by them.

But there has to be sanctions otherwise people could claim once and receive benefits for the rest of their lives. Which would be insane.

I do not think the requirements for claiming benefits are unreasonable. Look for work and attend the jobcentre every 2 weeks for a brief interview.

With the amount of time and effort some unemployed people spend in playing the system and getting everything they can in benefits, it'd be easier just to get a job.

Not sure where you are but to tackle period poverty my council has various locations where you can pick up free period products. Public loos etc. It’s definitely a thing across Scotland, might be worth a Google where you are.

Morrisons also does it. I think you're supposed to go to a register and say "I have a package from Sandy"

Interesting to read the comments about 3 missed appointments for a sanction.
I have just found this when looking at sanctions I have someone today who had an appointment with JC+ this week. On Thursday evening he received a text to say it had been moved forward to Saturday, that evening he wrote in his journal why he couldn’t attend and on Friday rang to rearrange. He was told ok and they would get back to him.

Yesterday they sanctioned him, it was his first missed appointment and he has learning disability. Harsh.

With the amount of time and effort some unemployed people spend in playing the system and getting everything they can in benefits, it'd be easier just to get a job
But it’s almost impossible to do and this is promulgating the myth that we are all benefit scrounges. We’re not.

I saw this tweet today showing sanctions have risen and are higher now than pre pandemic.

But there has to be sanctions otherwise people could claim once and receive benefits for the rest of their lives. Which would be insane.

You obviously didn’t understand my point. Benefits are set low, the vast majority of people would not aim to live on such little money for the rest of their lives. There will always be a small minority that do but not enough to set up systems that disadvantage so many. Sanctions are also not about reviewing a claimant’s situation every few months which is reasonable for those not ill but actively rushing to penalise claimants for sometimes small reasons.

Absolutely disagree. I can’t just not turn up to work and expect to get paid; attending occasional appointments is the requirement to receive benefits. I hope your mum improves soon.

Some of the sanctions should be lifted, permanently. I am sure given the length of time the sanctions regime has been in place anyone with sense could come up with valid reasons such as hospital appointments of close relatives, train strikes and a few others.

I don't know how the author of most of the current welfare regime, Iain Duncan Smith, can square some of these with his religious beliefs.