Some of our least favourite people contributed to a book entitled Malingering and Illness Deception in 2003, that seems to provide much of the ammunition used by the current government to demonise claimants of disability and incapacity benefits.

One of the relevant chapters is ‘Malingering, insurance medicine and medicalization of fraud’ by John LoCascio of the criminal American insurance giant Unum, that has been heavily involved in British social security work since the 1990s.

The other is ‘Origins, practice and limitations of Disability Assessment Medicine’ by Mansel Aylward, the Unum puppet who was formerly chief medical officer at the Department for Work and Pensions.

Mike Sivier explains in detail here.

I find this quite worrying. It’s from last week, but it seems to have been missed. I thought it was something we should all be aware of.

Over the next few months, the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) will be working together to uncover benefit fraud and error across six social security benefits, including Housing Benefit.

The DWP will use ‘Real Time Information’ (RTI) from HMRC to identify cases where claimants have either failed to declare, or have under-declared, their income from earnings or from non-state pensions. RTI is a new system for collecting Pay As You Earn (PAYE) tax information from employers and pension providers, who are now required to provide HMRC with income details immediately after each payment they make.

This exercise is expected to run between September 2014 and April 2015. During this time, HMRC will pass on Real Time Information about earnings and pensions to the DWP and local authorities, so that they can match it with their benefit records.

The DWP estimates that they will identify 300,000 overpayments as a result of this initiative, of which more than 200,000 are expected to relate to Housing Benefit only cases.

If you’re found to have received a benefit overpayment because you haven’t provided your full income details to the DWP, or to the local authority in the case of Housing Benefit, the DWP or local authority will take action to recover the overpayment from you. They may also decide to start a criminal investigation for fraud.

With many thanks to the Welfare News Service.

Sick and disabled claimants are experiencing severe distress and some are even close to suicide due to botched disability benefit reform, an insider has revealed.

Personal Independence Payments (PIP) are replacing Disability Living Allowance (DLA) for Britain’s sick and disabled, but the assessment process which should take no longer than 26 weeks is sometimes taking twice as long.

The insider, or should we say whistleblower, is a call centre worker for the private contractor Capita, who together with the disgraced private healthcare firm Atos are responsible for assessing PIP claimants on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP).

The two companies are set to make £540 million from the new benefit in the next five years. Atos will receive the larger share of around £400 million, despite heavy criticism and a poor record in delivering ‘fit for work’ tests for Employment and Support Allowance (ESA), while Capita will make roughly £140 million.

PIP can be claimed by sick and disabled people regardless of their employment status.

Under the new disability benefit PIP, claimants are required to attend face-to-face assessments to determine their eligibility and the level of benefit they will receive. The whistleblower claims that mismanagement, IT problems and staff shortages are to blame for a backlog of 145,000 cases.

While waiting to be assessed for PIP, many sick and disabled people are often left penniless and unable to pay their rent, because their DLA has been stopped, the whistleblower said.

Speaking to the Daily Mirror, the whistleblower said:

“I’ve had people on the phone crying their eyes out and saying they are going to commit suicide.

“On one occasion I had to call an ambulance because they said they had stopped taking their medication. Some people have been going for months and months without money.”

“We’ve started getting calls from people saying their DLA will run out in a month’s time and they’ve not even got an appointment for an assessment.

“Others have been left with nothing because their DLA has been stopped. People have lost their home because they can’t pay their rent.”

She continued: “It’s a shambles. Day in, day out there are people ringing up to say, ‘Why is my appointment cancelled?’ I’ve seen appointments cancelled time and time again.”

According to the whistleblower, Capita call centre staff have been given instructions on what excuses to use when claimants ask why their PIP assessment has been delayed or cancelled. “I am having to lie on a daily basis about why things are taking so long”, she said.

Minister for Disable People Mark Harper told the Daily Mirror: “By the autumn, we anticipate that no one will be waiting for an assessment for longer than 26 weeks.”

Capita said they would be hiring more staff to help reduce the backlog.

If you have been affected by the issues raised in this news report please call the Samaritans on 08457 90 90 90 (UK only) or visit their website.

Spotted at Welfare News Service Facebook page. Published here with many thanks to editor Steven Preece.

Cross posted from here at the request of Sue Marsh.

“Figure 4.9 shows that households with disabled children lose out by more in cash terms than households with disabled adults, with households with disabled children and adults losing out by more than either group – around £1,500 per household per year on average.

 “Households with no disabled adults or disabled children in the 7th and 8th deciles [wealthier households] actually gain slightly from the reform package, whereas households with disabled adults or children (or both) lose out. At the bottom of the distribution, households with no disabled people, or with disabled adults, do not lose as much on average as households with disabled children, or both disabled adults and children. In percentage terms the distributional effects are fairly regressive across all four groups, with households with disabled adults and children doing worst of all up to the top decile.”

As one of the authors, Jonathan Portes says in an article for the Guardian today 

“Modelling the cumulative impact is feasible and practicable – at least by gender, age, disability and ethnicity. Our model isn’t perfect and could be improved, but it can be done…..Families that have a disabled adult or child lose perhaps five times as much proportionally as better-off able-bodied families.”

Britain has a new Minister of State for Disabled People – Mark Harper, MP for the Forest of Dean. As he gets to grips with his new brief – the fourth person to do so in this government – Kate Ansell outlines some of the responsibilities he has inherited.

The coalition is making substantial reductions to welfare spending, as well as making significant budget cuts elsewhere, as part of its reforms.

The new disability minister will be responsible for overseeing the wide-ranging changes to disability benefits, from the high living costs some disabled people have, to support for those who can’t work at all, or those who find themselves temporarily unemployed.

He’ll be taking on board recent rule changes to allowances which enable disabled people to work more effectively, and the narrowing of entitlements to funds which allow disabled students to access assistive technology and other services.

The government says they currently spend 50 billion pounds on disability benefits, and that Disability Living Allowance (DLA) claims alone have increased by 35% in the last decade. There may be some agreement that reform was needed, but campaign groups believe disabled people have been hit disproportionately by the changes.

Though often reported separately, it is possible that individuals are affected by more than one reform. For example, many of those who lose their entitlement to Employment Support Allowance (ESA) are likely to find themselves hit by cuts to DLA too.

Beyond benefits

The Independent Living Fund (ILF) – which gives financial support so that severely disabled people can live independently – is earmarked for closure next year. The government says that the money will be transferred to local authorities who will be solely responsible for care provision in the future, but the funds won’t be ring-fenced, meaning local authorities could use it for other services.

Sue Elsegood from Greenwich is 47 and has received ILF since the early 90s. She has a team of five paid personal assistants on rota and says she is “terrified” that her local authority will put her in residential care rather than pay for the level of support she currently receives with help from the ILF.

She has a room for her assistants at home and had to apply for a discretionary housing payment so she didn’t have to pay what critics have dubbed the “bedroom tax”. “It turned out fine, but it takes time and effort,” she says.

DLA has been given to disabled people since 1991 to pay for extra costs related to disabilities. Now changing to Personal Independence Payment (PIP) the government says they want to help those with the greatest need. As a result, some people will lose the benefit.

Lisa Egan, who runs the campaigning blog Where’s The Benefit? believes she meets the criteria for PIP, but is worried about being reassessed every few years – everyone will be, which is one of the major differences between DLA and PIP. She fears she will be turned down and have to appeal against the decision and is worried she won’t receive support in the interim.

Egan most fears the removal of Severe Disability Premium (SDP), a payment made to some disabled people on low incomes, which is being gradually cut as part of the changes to Universal Credit.

“My impairment causes overheating. I’m sitting here with three fans pointed at me. I forked out for a half-price air conditioner a couple of years ago.” She also bought a dishwasher because she lacks the energy to cook and wash up – extra costs she says she couldn’t have afforded without SDP, or DLA.

Access to Work

The government says the benefit changes are designed to help get disabled people into work and have also set up a programme to give employers confidence in employing disabled people, the other side of the employment problem – only 49% of disabled people have a job.

Those who can work but need support to do so can currently claim an Access to Work grant. Recently, however, criteria have been tightened and the system changed. The government says it has increased the funding available overall, but the changes have not been welcomed by everyone.

One of the groups hardest hit by these changes is deaf people. Charlie Swinbourne, editor of the Limping Chicken blog, says: “Our readers have told us that when they’re trying to get support from Access to Work, they are often told to phone which is crazy considering they are deaf.

“People are finding their jobs in jeopardy because they’ve had support taken away, or reduced, or because they’re waiting too long to know if they’ll get support.”

Last month, the government announced it was reviewing the changes, including the impact on deaf people, suspending some of the measures which affect deaf people in the meantime. Although this review has been welcomed, [Swinbourne says] uncertainty remains and adds to other work and welfare anxieties.

Local cuts

Outside the national benefits system, disabled people report that cuts to council and NHS budgets have had a huge impact on their lives. Jemma Brown has had direct experience of this. She is both blind and has mental health problems. She has been assessed and it has been agreed that she needs care but her local council will only pay a small proportion, indicating she will need to pay the rest. Brown says she can’t because they haven’t taken her debt into consideration. She says: “I was awarded seven pounds a week for care – putting me in a position where I can’t afford the basic care I need to live a normal life.”

Brown has also been waiting over a year for a major needs assessment from an occupational therapist, but says that, on an everyday basis, cuts to council services have created a string of difficulties. She regularly walks into trees with overhanging branches because she can’t see, she says this didn’t happen before the council changed the way it manages open spaces to save money.

On a national level, the DWP told the BBC they carry out thorough impact assessments on all their policies, as well as equality impact assessments on any policies that might have a disproportionate affect on disabled people.

There’s a general election next year, and the indications are that welfare reform will be a huge issue. Nick Clegg has withdrawn his support for the so called “bedroom tax” in its current form, stating he doesn’t believe disabled adults should have to pay. This is a significant change, considering that it was his own party that helped vote the reform through in the first place, and commentators have speculated this U-turn is to win back votes.

It is another policy which has contributed to the much-reported general unrest in the disability community. “One of the biggest fears is uncertainty,” says Sue Elsegood. “Things are very stressful at the moment. I’m anxious at not knowing what will happen. There are so many bureaucratic barriers.”

More cuts are expected though charities and campaigners have already voiced concerns that disabled people have been too harshly affected by the austerity measures. It remains to be seen how Mark Harper will take on the challenge.

Kate Ansell is a disabled journalist specialising in social affairs. She has directed two Panorama films about the way welfare reform is affecting disabled people.

With many thanks to Kate Belgave.

Yesterday, I went to the home of a Kilburn man who is 51, has mild learning difficulties and currently signs on. He has worked all his life in hotels and in kitchenwork, but found it harder to get and keep work during the recession. He’s been out of work for four years now and is depressed about it. He doesn’t read or write very well and thinks that is the reason he’s finding it difficult to get another job. More on that soon.

For now, he wanted to show me his flat. It’s the tiny, single room in Kilburn you see here – so small that it was difficult for the four of us who were there to fit into all at once. His rent is paid in housing benefit – which means that his landlord gets housing benefit for renting this tiny little room out as a flat.

There was a bed, a broken fridge, another fridge in the middle of the room that this man had bought to keep his diabetes medication in, because it must be kept cool, and a broken oven. He’d got a second smaller oven with two hotplates to sit on top of the broken oven so that he’d at least have hotplates that worked. You can see that in the video. This man has complained to his landlord about the mice and cockroaches that live under the broken oven, but nothing has been done.

There are no windows in this “flat” – just a door that leads to a shared path down the side of the house. In the heat, the room has been nearly uninhabitable. To cap things off, he says he has to do a jobsearch of about seven to ten jobs a week and has been threatened with sanctions if he doesn’t. He has been sent on the work programme. He wants another job. I’ll add to this story and have a lot more video to post, but – have this to think on for now. Here we are in 2014. Austerity’s over, you know. For some.

With many thanks to the Welfare Neews Service and Mr John Lockett.

I became aware of your website last year and have been a weekly visitor ever since. I myself have been experiencing the joy of Atos – and now the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) – for over a year now.

Leaving aside that I was wrongly assigned to the ‘Work-Related’ Activity Group (WRAG) and had my case illegally sent for Mandatory Reconsideration by the DWP, those may be stories for another time.

My immediate concern is the fact that DWP allowed Atos to blatantly discriminate against disabled people and yet refused to acknowledge this, let alone actually do anything about it! It is now clear why – they are indulging in this themselves.

When I was first contacted by Atos, I made clear that, due to fatigue caused by my disabilities, that I must sleep in the afternoon. Atos continually sent me afternoon appointments and despite DWP being copied to any correspondence, I never heard from them on the matter.

Eventually, after two formal complaints, Atos finally sent me a morning appointment which was cancelled shortly thereafter and the process promptly began again! Again, deafening silence from the DWP.

When I pointed out to Atos that they were calling people for assessments they knew to be disabled and yet provided no disable parking, they responded by stating that disabled parking was available in the street immediately outside the centre.

When I again challenged this and provided photographic evidence that it was a lie, they lied again and essentially re-stated the original lie. Again, deafening silence from the DWP.

As stated above, DWP have been copied into all correspondence between myself and Atos yet, when I received the appointment letter for Jobcentre Plus this was not only for four days hence (two of which were a weekend) at a time of year when many people are away on holiday, but yet another afternoon appointment.

I immediately telephoned and explained (again) why a morning appointment was necessary and they sent me yet another afternoon appointment. It took a formal and quite strong letter before I received a suitable appointment.

I have not been in a Jobcentre since 1995 when DWP or whatever it was called at the time, gave me a little green card and classified me as disabled.

My local Jobcentre has, I believe moved twice since then. I had to attend my first WRAG (Work Related Activity Group) interview this morning and, despite having written three times to ‘Marion’ at the Burnley Jobcentre, they have provided no details as to the location (other than the postal address) and no details on parking availability at all, let alone parking for disabled drivers.

That aside, the visit was actually a pleasant surprise as ‘Marion’ patiently explained to me that I was now in the Support Group and that it would be unnecessary for me to visit again for three years! In that hour, I received more information that was actually relevant to my case and more sensibly explained than any other thus far. I do however, as I explained to her, intend to pursue the discrimination issue.

To minimise the chance of error and lateness, I located the Jobcentre on a map and went out early yesterday (Sunday) morning to locate and scout the location and found that:

• The entrance to the Jobcentre is not on the street stated in the postal address, but another street, which provides no on-street parking whatsoever, let alone for disabled people.
• The street stated in the postal address is, at its closest more than thirty metres from the entrance to the building and, while there is parking available on this street, it is usually all taken unless one is very early or lucky.
• The building itself has a car park which has two disabled spaces, but this is controlled by a keypad and barrier and appears to be for staff only. The car park to the east of the building is contract parking only on weekdays.

How simple would it have been for them to have answered my queries on this or to have taken Atos to task for their failure? Yet in their arrogance, incompetence or both, the DWP appear to believe that the Equalities Act and Disability Discrimination Act do not apply to them.

You might ask: Why hasn’t he contacted his MP? I have, and not only has he proven to be of less practical use than a unicycle, he does not even bother to respond, but then he is a Lib-Dem and part of the odious coalition who compounded this Labour-initiated mess.

You might also ask: Why hasn’t he contacted the Equalities Office? I have, three times. The last time I directed the complaint to the principal Minister (now ex-Minister) Sajid Javid, castigating him for his Ministry’s failure to respond. Not even an acknowledgement was received at any time.

Regards,

Mr John Lockett

From the ToUChstone blog:

The proposal to increase the waiting time for financial support when people lose their jobs, as part of the Universal Credit scheme, does nothing to help claimants find work. Combined with the delays in processing claims it is likely to be 5-6 weeks before many claimants receive any Universal Credit. At the National Deaf Children’s Society we are particularly concerned about the likely impact on families with deaf children.

The financial costs of having a deaf child may not be as obvious as for other disabilities, but they are very real. For example, children may have to attend frequent appointments with audiologists and a young child may need new hearing aid moulds several times a year. Attending these appointments is not only likely to involve travel costs, but may also require parents to take time off work, in some cases without pay. Deaf children often fall behind with their education, and many parents of deaf children use their disability living allowance to pay for extra tuition in core subjects. Suitable childcare and out of school activities are often hard to find and may involve extra expense on travelling or paying for an extra child to attend to help with communication.

If the parent of a deaf child becomes unemployed and has to claim Universal Credit, a wait of 5-6 weeks before receiving benefit is likely to place them in the position of having to choose whether to use their DLA to meet the child’s needs or whether to use it to keep the household running while they wait for benefit. Parents may be unable to afford to take their child to audiology appointments, or may have to cancel extra tuition or after-school activities. Many deaf children already fall behind their hearing counterparts in education, and delays in getting the aids they need, or the extra tuition that helps to redress the balance, will have long-term effects compounding this.

The situation could be even worse for families with older children due to the lengthy delays being experienced by claimants for the Personal Independence Payment that has replaced DLA for over-16s. Families in this position may have nothing to fall back on while they wait for one of these two new benefits to finally be processed and put into payment.

The National Deaf Children’s Society Stolen Futures campaign highlights the many services for deaf children and young people that have already been reduced or withdrawn as a result of spending cuts. This increased delay before benefit is paid only makes a bad situation worse. We urge the Government not to implement the longer waiting period and to ensure that all benefits are processed efficiently and paid on time.

Saving Our Safety Net is a new campaign from the TUC that aims to defend a decent welfare system that provides help to those who need it, when they need it. You can find out more at the www.savingoursafetynet.org

The brilliant Mike Sivier informs us today that Ed Miliband would like to see a Public Prime Minister’s Questions.

Mike asks his readers what we would ask David Cameron at such an event.

My top three questions would be:

1. Why are you, the father of a disabled child, betraying disabled people and carers by hitting us hardest with your welfare reform policies?

2. Why are you, once a parent carer, not doing anything to raise Carers’ Allowance? You say your party is for Hard Working People yet you don’t pay the hardest working people in the world the National Minimum Wage.

3. Why do you think there is a ‘bias’ towards the inclusion of disabled children in mainstream schools? My parents, or the parents of any one of my friends, can and will happily tell you that the exact opposite is true. Your claims hurt us because they suggest you are trying to reverse all our hard work for inclusion. We struggled, our parents battled, we left each other and moved schools. We didn’t do all this so that anyone could come and reverse it all.

I would tell him that many disabled people voted for him because we thought he understood, since his own son was one of us. I would tell him that many of our parents voted for him because they thought that having a son like us made him one of them. They, too, thought he understood.

I would tell him that now we feel he has betrayed his son’s community, and his own community. I would tell him how very strong and special that community is. I would tell him how very, very much it hurts us that we have been betrayed by one of our own- one of our own who had the power to do the very opposite of everything he has used that power to do to us.

Many thanks to Benefits And Work.

A report of research carried out by Social Policy Research Unit, University of York on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions has been released.

The small-scale study comprised 36 qualitative interviews with claimants and those who support them, and 12 group discussions with Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) staff who are responsible for administering PIP’s processes.

The aim was to provide a snapshot of the early implementation of the new benefit and identify potential areas for improving delivery.

At the same time as this research was conducted, DWP was closely monitoring the implementation of PIP and taking actions to address any issues during the settling in period.

The report recognised that the findings are not necessarily representative of PIP processes in general as they are based on a small number of claimants from a particular moment in its implementation during September – October 2013, and DWP has already taken action to improve the implementation.

Summary of findings:

Some of the claimants interviewed were well informed about PIP before they claimed but others appeared to know very little. Most claimants experienced the initial telephone call of the claiming process as unproblematic, although DWP call centre staff reported that many claimants did not have the requisite information available.

The form How your disability affects you (known as PIP2) worked well for most people. Claimants for whom the PIP2 worked less well included those who felt they were not able to get across adequately how their condition affected them and those who found particular questions stressful, intrusive or embarrassing to answer. Having access to help from professionals and third party organisations was much valued by those able to do so.

For most claimants the assessment by a health professional was largely straightforward. Those who found engaging with the process difficult included people with mental health problems which may have led to them not explaining fully how their condition affected them.

DWP case managers, relying on reports from health assessors to make decisions, found that the quality of reports varied. Having to ask for clarification or correction led to delays in processing claims.

Decision letters were generally well received by claimants. Disallowed claimants appreciated receiving a follow-up call to explain the decision. This helped some to understand better how to ask for a mandatory reconsideration.

Ideas for improving the PIP claiming process were made by claimants and by DWP staff. These included suggestions for improving: the way claimants were informed about the benefit; the effectiveness and efficiency of the claims process; the claimant experience; and internal processes.

The full report can be found here

A further consultation on the PIP assessment process – running until 5^th September 2014 – is currently being carried out by the DWP and claimants or advice workers can give their views here

Our thanks to Jim Allison for spotting this for us

But will they, readers?

With many thanks to Benefits And Work.

The flaws in the Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) system are so grave that simply “rebranding” the assessment used to determine eligibility for ESA (the Work Capability Assessment (WCA)) by appointing a new contractor will not solve the problems, says the Work and Pensions Committee in a report published today.

The Committee calls on the Government to undertake a fundamental redesign of the ESA end-to-end process to ensure that the main purpose of the benefit – helping claimants with health conditions and disabilities to move into employment where this is possible for them – is achieved. This will take some time, but the redesign should be completed before the new multi-provider contract is tendered, which is expected to be in 2018.

In the meantime, the Committee recommends that DWP implements a number of other changes in the shorter-term to ensure better outcomes and an improved service for claimants. These include:

• DWP taking overall responsibility for the end-to-end ESA claims process, including taking decisions on whether claimants need a face-to-face assessment, rather than this decision being made by the assessment provider.
• DWP proactively seeking “supporting evidence” on the impact of a claimant’s condition or disability on their functional capacity, rather than leaving this primarily to claimants, who often have to pay for it. DWP should seek this evidence from the most appropriate health and other professionals, including social workers and occupational therapists, rather than relying so heavily on GPs.
• The “descriptors” used to assess functional capability in the WCA being applied more sensitively.
• Placing claimants with a prognosis of being unlikely to experience a change in their functional abilities in the longer-term, particularly those with progressive conditions, in the Support Group and not the WRAG.

Dame Anne Begg MP, Committee Chair, said

“Many people going through the ESA claims process are unhappy with the way they are treated and the decisions which are made about their fitness for work. The current provider of the WCA, Atos, has become a lightning rod for all the negativity around the ESA process and DWP and Atos have recently agreed to terminate the contract early.

“But it is DWP that makes the decision about a claimant’s eligibility for ESA – the face-to-face assessment is only one part of the process. Just putting a new private provider in place will not address the problems with ESA and the WCA on its own.

“We are therefore calling for a number of changes which can be made to improve ESA in the short-term, while also recommending a longer-term, fundamental redesign of the whole process.

“We hope that the new Minister for Disabled People, who was appointed last week, will respond positively to our constructive recommendations for improving the ESA process.”

One of the key issues which the Report identifies is that ESA is not achieving its purpose of helping people who could work in the short to medium term to move back into employment.

Read the full report on the Parliament website here

Is this how we treat our former soldiers?

“Lessons must be learned” from the death of a Stevenage diabetic who could not afford electricity to keep his insulin cool after his benefits were stopped.

One year ago on Sunday (July 20), former soldier David Clapson died aged 59 at his home in Hillside from fatal diabetic keto-acidosis, which the NHS calls “a dangerous complication of diabetes caused by a lack of insulin.”

His jobseeker’s allowance of approximately £70 a week – on which his family says he was reliant – had been suspended three weeks before on June 28, for missing meetings.

According to his family, Mr Clapson was found “alone, penniless and starving” a short distance from a pile of printed CVs, with nothing to his name but £3.44, six tea bags, a tin of soup and an out-of-date tin of sardines.

The coroner found that David – a former BT engineer of 16 years, who had served two years in Northern Ireland with the Royal Corps of Signals during The Troubles – had nothing in his stomach when he died.

Now his sister, Gill Thompson, says “lessons must be learned” by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) before vulnerable benefit claimants are sanctioned in future.

She said: “I rang him regularly to check on him and so did friends, but because he was such a quiet and private person neither family nor friends knew just how bad it was.

“Apparently the DWP rely on information from the claimant, support workers or medical professionals to understand the level of vulnerability.

“Should his severe condition not been taken into consideration when issuing this sanctions? Should someone have checked his file?”

In a letter sent by the DWP regarding the case, head of benefit centres – Claire McGuckin – said “I am confident that the correct procedures were followed for the administration of benefit.”

Gill said: “I am disgusted with the DWP response and now feel I should make this more public.

“David should have been helped by health professionals not persecuted by the authorities. He was not a scrounger but wouldn’t seek help. He needed true professional and clinical support which never came.

“The authorities should have been more willing to understand and help a vulnerable adult before they die.

“The signs were there and lessons must be learned to ensure cases like this are truly eliminated from a fair society.”

A spokesman for the DWP said: “Our sympathy is with Mr Clapson’s family.

“Our advisers work closely with claimants to support them into work, and if someone is in a vulnerable situation we take that into account if they tell us.

“Sanctions are only used as a last resort when claimants fail to do everything they can in return for benefits, however hardship payments are available so they can continue to meet their basic needs.”

Citizens Advice has called for further improvements to the sanctions system, as today the Independent review of the operation of Jobseeker’s Allowance JSA sanctions validated by the Jobseekers Act 2013 is published. The review found that the DWP and Jobcentre Plus need to improve communication with claimants who have been sanctioned, particularly those who are vulnerable.

Citizens Advice Chief Executive Gillian Guy said:

The JSA sanctions regime can create more barriers for people already struggling to find work. Communications failures mean sanctioned claimants often don’t know they’ve been sanctioned, why, and what next steps are available to them.  We see huge numbers of people whose ability to make ends meet has been shattered when they’ve been sanctioned, in some cases forcing them into debt or to a foodbank.  

There’s been a 60 per cent increase in people with JSA sanction problems coming to Citizens Advice Bureaux since the extension of the minimum sanction period from one week to four in October 2012. One of the knock-on effects often experienced by clients is that the sanction led to their housing benefit being stopped, when the rules say it shouldn’t be.

Jobcentre Plus and DWP have a lot of work to do to make sure people know where they stand and where to turn for help. The effectiveness and proportionality of the JSA sanctions regime needs to be addressed, including a reduction in the current minimum four week sanction period. People who can work should be able to and receive the support they need to gain employment.  That’s why we need a system that sets people up to succeed, and doesn’t put them in an impossible position where dealing with a sanction means it’s harder for them to look for a job.

Citizens Advice has found that many JSA claimants are already struggling to make ends meet. From October to December last year:

• 1 in 4 Citizens Advice clients with a JSA sanction problem had dependent children
• 1 in 4 identified as being disabled of suffering from a long term health condition
• 1 in 6 also had a debt problem
• 1 in 10 had issues with rent arrears or threat or reality of homelessness

Readers, would we celebrate this? There’s a poll here too.

Iain Duncan Smith is reportedly being urged by senior Tories to shut down all Jobcentres and let private companies and charities to step in to help Britain’s unemployed back to work.

The proposal, backed by allies of chancellor George Osborne, is being considered for potential inclusion in the party’s election manifesto for 2015, in what would be a radical step for Britain’s system to help people into work.

One senior Tory figure told The Sun: “Introducing competition into the job search market is a natural Conservative thing to do. Tailoring help from experts for what people really need will work far better than the clumsy one-size-fits-all state solution.”

However, Duncan Smith is believed to be sceptical about the idea, with a source describing the proposal as “expensive and complicated”.

This comes as a report by David Cameron’s favourite think-tank Policy Exchange called for Jobcentres to be split up and forced to compete with charities and the private sector to help people into work.

Just over a third (36%) of Jobcentre users find sustained work because deep-rooted problems fail to be addressed, the report said, adding that they could be replaced with “Citizen Support” centres to better help jobseekers.

“The way public services are currently structured means that often a jobseeker ends up being passed from pillar to post,” said Guy Miscampbell, an economics and social policy research fellow at Policy Exchange.

“This is confusing for the individual, creates barriers to help them into work and is expensive.

“Services have improved enormously, but there is still a lot more to do. What is needed is a radical overhaul of the system which puts the needs of the jobseeker first.”

In response the Policy Exchange report, a spokesperson for the Department for Work and Pensions said: “Every day up and down the country our Jobcentre advisers are working closely with local authorities and other organisations to help people off benefits and into work. We now have an employment rate which has never been higher and record numbers of people in work.

“The Work Programme – which is run by private providers who are paid by results – is helping more people than any previous employment programme and has already helped 300,000 into lasting work, and through Universal Credit we are redefining the contract between benefit claimants and the welfare state and helping to make work pay.”

Parents have voiced their anger that just 11 politicians turned up to a parliamentary debate on provision of education for children with autism yesterday (July 17).

The debate was opened by the Liberal Democrat MP for Burnley, Gordon Birtwistle, who said he was ‘pleased’ with the turn out:

“I am pleased that there are a number of Members in the Chamber today who wish to debate this important subject,” he said.

However, footage of the debate received a rather different response from parents and autism awareness campaigners on Twitter.

Anna Kennedy, who set up a school for children with autism and was awarded an OBE for her campaigning work for autistic children, tweeted: 

https://twitter.com/AnnaKennedy1/status/489789911793688577/photo/1

“Parents pin their hopes on events like this,” Anna told Parentdish.

“You’ve got to give credit to the MPs that were there to speak up for families, but such low attendance is disheartening and seems to suggest that most MPs don’t care. That’s the feedback I’m getting from families with autism.”

During the debate Gordon Birtwistle raised the issue of the difficulties faced by parents when trying to get a diagnosis for their child, and the problems this can cause for that child’s education.

“Children with statements of special educational needs are eight times more likely to be excluded than their peers, and children with no statement are 11 times more likely to be excluded,” he said.

However, Anna didn’t feel the debate covered any new ground.

“They were just talking about things parents already know: that getting early diagnosis is a postcode lottery, as is what services are available to a family.

“The fact so few MPs show up to these debates means that every time they just go over the same ground and that doesn’t led to anything changing.

“My sons, Patrick and Angelo were diagnosed in 1994 and 1997 and I’m not hearing anything different in 2014. It’s quite sad. Awareness is improving but it needs to be more than that.”

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education Edward Timpson pointed out that this was the third debate on the autism and education in the last 18 months, which he said “is a rather better return than we had over the previous 10 years.”

But Anna didn’t feel that this was cause for congratulation:

“I think there were about three people at the last debate and two of them looked like they were asleep!” she said.

“If I could have a meeting with the new Education Minister, Nicky Morgan, I’d tell her that she really needs to listen at a grass roots level to people with autism and their families, to hear what they’re going through.

“At the moment it feels like families are not being listened to, and they’re being penalised because their child has a disability.”

Yesterday, someone asked me if there is a list of companies which participate in workfare. I responded that I don’t have a full list.

However I’ve just seen this Tweet which tells me that if anyone does have, or want to have, a list, they can add Tesco to it.

And they don’t seem afraid to admit it, either.

From the always brilliant Benefits And Work.

As we reported at the beginning of July, sanctions against ESA claimants have increased fourfold in the course of a year up to December 2013.  Members can download a detailed guide on how to prevent and overturn ESA sanctions from the ESA section of the members area, but we also though it would be useful to read some actual examples of how people get hit by ESA sanctions.  We’ve collected these from a range of online sources.

Please feel free to tell us your sanctions story using the comments feature.

This claimant received a letter to say they had missed an appointment with Seetec . They were advised they did not need to attend due to a clash with an appointment with Mind. Even after explaining this, they are still receiving only £50 a fortnight.

This claimant is on ESA because of mental health issues and was told to attend a work-related activity. They were sanctioned even though their Doctor kept on issuing sick notes to say they were not well enough to attend.

This person called the DWP and was informed that their ESA had been sanctioned because they had declared they had been self-employed for over a year. In fact the discussion was about making jewellery as a hobby.

A 37 year old agoraphobic, unable to get very far from home and some days unable to go out at all was transferred to ESA and placed in the Work-related activity group. The claimant missed a third interview after the second one had not gone so well. That interview was rescheduled but they missed the new one too; due to being unable to attend. They had to explain in advance. Their benefit had been reduced to £47 pounds a fortnight and they did not receive any notification.

A selection of examples of people on ESA being sanctioned can also be found inthis report by the Scottish Citizens Advice Bureaux called “Sanctioned: what benefit?” which was published this month, including:

An East of Scotland CAB reports of a client and partner who came in to enquire about their joint ESA. The client has been placed in the Work Related Activity Group and missed an appointment at Jobcentre Plus (JCP). The client says that she was not notified and normally receives a letter, due to her memory problems. When the client spoke to her JCP adviser, she was told that they didn’t write to her, but they told her about her appointment at her last one; therefore, they would be sanctioning her. The client suffers from a number of mental and physical conditions, some of which are the side effect of cancer treatment in the past.

A West of Scotland CAB reports of a client who has been awarded the work-related activity component of ESA. He has ME, for which he has a letter from his doctor, saying he is unable to hold down a job. He was unwell last week and could not attend a meeting with the Work Programme provider, and informed them of this. Today he was at the Work Programme provider but was again feeling unwell. He spoke to them and explained, and they said if he went home the Jobcentre would sanction him. He called the CAB, who explained to him that as part of being in the Work-Related Activity Group he had to attend these meetings. The client did not know this and thought they were voluntary. The CAB explained that if he was sanctioned he would have to request a mandatory reconsideration and that he would get no money in this period.

An East of Scotland CAB reports of a client who was in receipt of ESA (work group) but had not attended an interview at a Work Programme provider, resulting in sanctions, with his benefit reduced to around £11 per week. This was despite producing a doctor’s certificate saying he was not fit to travel as he had been diagnosed with terminal cancer of the liver and investigations were being currently undertaken on a prognosis as to whether he had 6 to 24 months to live. The client had been confined to bed for the past three days and requested use of a CAB phone to contact ESA to determine his award. The client completed the phone call but received no help from the DWP, merely being given the standard story that he had missed his interview and had been sanctioned. No account was taken of the medical certificate. The impression was given that the DWP adviser was “reading from a script” from which he could not deviate nor offer alternative advice. A food parcel was arranged.

A West of Scotland CAB reports of a client who had his ESA sanctioned as he failed to attend a meeting with the Work Programme provider. He is a former member of the armed services and has recently had his medication changed so he can begin to work with his Community Psychiatric Nurse and Combat Stress [a charity], as the client suffers from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and is extremely forgetful. On the morning he was due to attend the Work Programme he forgot he had an appointment with his Support Worker to see how he was coping with the changes in his medication. He phoned Working Links and explained the situation which was accepted and a new appointment provided. Despite this the client has been sanctioned. The bureau has assisted him in requesting a mandatory reconsideration and were advised that this could take up to two weeks. However, we are now ten weeks down the line and no decision has been made.

An East of Scotland CAB reports of a client who has had his ESA sanctioned. He attended his appointment but was left sitting which caused him a lot of pain. When this became too much for him he went to the reception desk and explained what was wrong and that he couldn’t wait. As he had already signed in he says the girl said she would let the person he was seeing know. He then requested another appointment and received a letter with this information. The client attended this appointment and then a few days later his benefit was sanctioned.

Here at Benefits and Work we asked you, in November 2013 what your sanction experiences are and some of you responded:

An ESA claimant in the work-related activity group who suffers from agoraphobia and depression was harassed every two days to attend an interview even though her husband had explained she was too ill to leave the house. The threat to cut her benefit meant that she took an overdose and was hospitalised.

A similar story was told here.

This story relates to someone has been sanctioned even though his illness stops him from being available in the mornings (severe bowel problems and incontinence which are known about). His attendance is insisted upon at these times although he is unable to do so and also has uncontrolled epilepsy.

We have also been told; “I had to leave my abusive job due to my mental health issues and I’ve been sanctioned 4 weeks! Since this I haven’t been able to eat and my anxiety is at an all time high and I have no where to turn! This is wrong!”

In today’s Guardian.

A press release from the TUC:

Most people who lose their jobs will soon have to wait five weeks before they get any cash help, according to small print in the Universal Credit rules uncovered by the TUC as it launches a new campaign today (Wednesday), Saving Our Safety Net. A YouGov poll reports opposition of almost four to one to the five-week wait.

Currently most newly unemployed people have to wait two weeks they get their first benefit payment. But under new Universal Credit rules people will not be eligible for any help for a week and must then wait a further month for their benefits to be paid in arrears. This means that, other than the few who receive emergency help, any new claimants will have to wait at least five weeks for any cash.

In a new report Universal Credit: the problem of delay in benefit payments published today (Wednesday), the TUC says that this new and deliberate delay to payments means that worries about money are likely to distract new claimants from looking for work, drive them into the hands of payday loan lenders and increase demand on food banks.

The new five-week wait will apply to anyone making a fresh claim for social security benefits, regardless of how long they have held their job or how much they have paid in National Insurance contributions.

Saving Our Safety Net launches today with a petition against the five-week wait. The campaign will highlight how government welfare reforms are undermining safety net protection for working people, which the TUC says is as much part of our welfare state as the NHS.

A TUC commissioned YouGov poll finds that the five-week wait is opposed by almost four to one (70 per cent to 18 per cent). Fewer than one in seven people (13 per cent) say they have heard of the proposal and more than half (52 per cent) say it makes them think less favourably of the government’s welfare reforms.

Seven out of ten people (70 per cent) say that they would be worried when asked to imagine losing their job and not being entitled to receive any JSA for five weeks. Of those who said they would be worried, the top concerns were meeting rent or mortgage payments (69 per cent), buying food (52 per cent), and paying energy bills (23 per cent).

The poll also finds that opposition to the five week wait extends across the political spectrum. Potential Conservative voters oppose the policy by 55 per cent to 37 per cent, and potential UKIP voters were significantly more critical, opposing the policy by 71 per cent to 21 per cent.

TUC General Secretary Frances O’Grady said: “While it is right to deal with people who abuse the system, the government is now undermining the welfare safety net that any of us might need. Making people who have contributed all their lives – but who are simply unlucky enough to lose their jobs – wait five weeks before receiving any help is both cruel and vindictive. Just as with the bedroom tax, it shows that ministers are desperately out of touch with the lives of ordinary people, many of whom do not have any savings to fall back on.

“People who lose their jobs need to be concentrating on looking for a new one, not worrying about whether they have enough money to pay the mortgage, keep up with their rent or feed their children.

“We already know that Universal Credit is way over budget and in the intensive care ward. The five-week wait is yet another ill-thought out idea and should be enough to send the whole policy back to the drawing board. It’s a policy designed to benefit Wonga, not the British people.

“It’s not surprising so few people know about the five week wait when the government has kept it under wraps. We are launching the Saving Our Safety Net campaign to expose government welfare plans for what they are – undermining the National Insurance safety net to which nearly everyone at work contributes.”

NOTES TO EDITORS:

– The TUC report Universal Credit: the problem of delay in benefit payments can be found at https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/BenefitsDelayed2014.pdf

– Full details of the polling commissioned by the TUC can be found at https://www.tuc.org.uk/sites/default/files/FiveWeekWaitPoll2014.pdf

– Information on the timetable for the national rollout of Universal Credit can be found at http://www.turn2us.org.uk/information__resources/benefits/universal_credit/universal_credit_timetable.aspx

– The Saving Our Safety Net campaign website and five-week wait petition has been launched today (Wednesday) at www.savingoursafetynet.org

Esther McVey seems to have got Us Lot back.