To think this isn't a reasonable suggestion from DWP

[Jenneypops]

Claiming universal credit as husbands hybrid role went fully office so he's looking for a new role and we qualify for support as low incomes.

We are in Staffordshire his office was in London. The staff member asked why he's given up his job instead of moving to London.

That is not a reasonable suggestion in my opinion, and it was delivered with a very snotty attitude. Why are some people on jobs to help people they clearly don't want to be or are useless at? No consideration for the fact we could never afford the rent there etc.

I feel much the same way.

My dad got into trouble because he refused to go for an interview with a company that was a 2.5 hour drive away. To go to the interview, he would have had to have stopped my mum from going to work that day (because they only had 1 car) and if he'd got the job, he would obviously have had to buy a car and spend 5 hours a day in it.

I've had my own very annoying experiences, like them wanting to see my bank statements but refusing to allow me to upload them. Not sure why they were unable to provide me a secure link because their head office can do it. I had to travel to them and because I have a fatiguing illness, I then had to spend the rest of the day in bed to recover. They did offer me a home visit but the next appointment was in 2 months time and tbey wouldn't pay me until tbey saw my bank statements. Personally so think they were breaking the law.

Not unreasonable to ask, they have to explore all avenues and check every box. Not really sure what you want here as you got 2 responses and then went on the attack. We’re all struggling and working harder than ever OP. It’s getting harder to find employment due to the NI & tax increases Labour have brought in, if you have a good job that treats you well I’d try to keep it.

@Jenneypops - I think what most people were saying that it might have been better for you and your family for him to do that until he found another job? Not that he should do it indefinitely? He was obviously doing it some of the time, so it was a reasonable question, given the fact that if someone leaves work voluntarily, depending on the reasons for doing so, UC may be paid at a lower rate for a shortish period, I believe, so they would need to know why as part of the claim assessment

But he has another job now, so that's brilliant news.

Op, mumsnet is batshit sometimes.

I'm with you, in the real world.

It's pretty normal to have to travel for a job.Not all of us can find appropriate work (ie that will support a family) where we live, and we have to move where the work is.

So YABU. It's a reasonable question for a civil servant to ask. You're asking for public money to support yourselves, instead of working any job or living from savings, and there should be due diligence about that.

Welcome to life as a benefit claimant OP. You should be aware that populist opinion is that money from the public purse should be guarded as if our lives depended on it and begrudgingly spent only on those that meet their idea of desperate and deserving. This means that DWP officers are expected to leave no question unasked and no suggestion unmade if there is the faintest possibility it could result in someone being refused benefit. This is why disabled people are asked if they can have a strip wash in place of help to bathe or can warm ready meals up in the microwave if they can't prepare a cooked meal.

Initially you said the staff member asked why he hadn’t relocated and now you’re saying she said he should have. Having worked in a job centre for almost a decade previously, I highly doubt she said that. She was just doing her job and asking related Qs. Staff aren’t meant to make assumptions and so she would be expected to do a bit of a deep dive into the circumstances around your husband giving up his job.

Also, cases randomly get picked up for spot checks for quality assurance purposes and so staff need to ensure they have the full details recorded against the consequent decisions they make.

This is why companies moving to full time office work is bad. You can have a company in London but recruit good people from anywhere. You demand full time office in London then you only get people who want to struggle to live in London. I find it quite sad that people think it’s reasonable that people pay out for travelodges in London to live in during the week away from their families, which inevitably then impacts on the parent that remains at home.

It's not unreasonable to ask. He has given up a job meaning you now need to claim benefits and she will need to establish whether he had a valid reason to do so otherwise he could be sanctioned surely?

Yanbu. However it would have been great if you could have moved to London and claimed loads for rent.

The DWP system isn't set up for staff to think about what they are saying. No one can sense check it.

This.

It doesn't mean he has to move to London. And presumably if he's qualified for one WFH job, he's qualified for others?

Maybe if he thinks he's going to be unemployed for a bit, and is in a minimum wage job, he could do some study to achieve better qualifications?

I don't really either, but you must know that everyone else who is unemployed is given similar expectations. For example, I was told I had to accept a job within a certain radius. Some of these jobs, when combined with travel costs, would have made it pointless to go to work, but that is obviously what the JSA advisor had to tell me.
In reality, he didn't go on the computer and force me to apply for jobs far away.

I suppose he should have told them he wouldn't go back to the office so they sacked him. Then he would be eligible for benefits, but would have problems explaining that for the next job...

But then are they getting London wages to live somewhere cheap and pricing out the locals?

"may be paid at a lower rate for a shortish period, I believe, so they would need to know why as part of the claim assessment"

I thought there was nothing for quite a while if you leave your job voluntarily.
Same for sacking actually so forget what I wrote above. You have to be 'made redundant'.

However it would have been great if you could have moved to London and claimed loads for rent.

Must admit I chuckled at this. They really should have hit the DWP back with a London rental bill 😂

Does London weighting always cover the extra cost, travelodges and meals out or increased house price etc?
I’ve always been public sector and the London weighting isn’t much at all.

Honestly, OP, don’t post on AIBU and expect reasonable answers.

Mumsnet 101.

You mean NI payers and tax payers not “the DWP”?

I didn't necessarily mean 'London weighting' given as an extra payment, but just the way wages are higher there because the average level is higher. If lots of people start buying and renting in cheaper areas it will really push prices up for local workers.

Trains are extremely expensive, staying in a travel lodge in london during the week is also extremely expensive. Someone on a low to average income cannot afford that. Some people are so out of touch with reality its absurd.

Of course they should be asking questions before giving out benefits. The entitlement 🙄
And stop drip feeding.

Ultimately yes but we're screwed anyway 😂

OP said the job was "barely minimum wage", it's unbelievably stupid to suggest staying in a Travelodge in London on low wage 🤦‍♀️

This 100%

They have to ask, as they have data bases that need that information, they don’t actually care why.