Challenging bureaucracy and upholding my right to protect my information.

Conor_3

There's really no point continuing trying to converse with such a stupid !!!!!! who continues to argue in the face of overwhelming factual proof.

You and the OP are both wrong and you've been given the legislation that proves they have the powers and why they ask it.

If you choose to be so belligerent with authorities when they request information they have the legal right and requirement to have, you're going to have a very miserable life consistently shooting yourself in the foot.

One of my relatives is like you. He refuses to be told, even in the face of overwhelming proof. He's consistently being made to look a fool. I suspect that happens to you a lot but you're so full of your own importance that you don't even see it.

ben500

Conor wrote: »

There's really no point continuing trying to converse with such a stupid !!!!!! who continues to argue in the face of overwhelming factual proof.

You and the OP are both wrong and you've been given the legislation that proves they have the powers and why they ask it.

If you choose to be so belligerent with authorities when they request information they have the legal right and requirement to have, you're going to have a very miserable life consistently shooting yourself in the foot.

One of my relatives is like you. He refuses to be told, even in the face of overwhelming proof. He's consistently being made to look a fool. I suspect that happens to you a lot but you're so full of your own importance that you don't even see it.

Of course we are both wrong, and the advisor as you would have us believe has the authority to dismiss the wishes of the secretary of state and waiver the requirement for photocopying of documents hence the reversal of the decision, I should have realised this all along.

If you have nothing better to do than to throw abuse I suggest you run along and continue to whinge about your ni contributions.

An unenforceable demand was made and retracted upon challenge, that is what has happened nothing more apart from some jobsworth making threats to the op to withdraw or deny benefit if not satisfied.

zootet

Conor wrote: »

No you didn't. They are allowed to record and store the information and you refused to let them do that. You only allowed them to acknowledge that what you said was correct.

I asked them to write it down on their file, otherwise known as "recording the information".
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/record
Look at definition #1
1. to set down in writing or the like, as for the purpose of preserving evidence.

It is a legal requirement under the Social Security Act that they have a record of the information and without this, your claim cannot be processed. You can appeal it and you'll be told that the case doesn't comply with the law and cannot proceed until copies of the provided evidence are taken. By all means exercise your choice not to let them photocopy it but they will continue to refuse to pay you because of your failure to comply with a request made for information that's required to be recorded as required by Social Security Act.

Seems you missed the part where I said the claim has now been processed without the need for photocopying. And as promised, the money is now in my bank account.

deary65

I agree with much that has been said in relation to staff working in the benefit offices, they do a sterling job under difficult circumstances. However, I must agree with the OP, that a line must be drawn between information required to establish a claim and information used for snooping purposes.


We do not, as yet, live in a dictatorship where bureaucrats are in uniform and we salute them( whilst they scan the bar codes stamped on are arms) when asking for another bowl of soup, which we have payed for through our contributions to the welfare fund.


The future is even more frighting that Orwell predicted!

zootet

And my truly last post to this thread, is to say, that the JCP advisor was polite and pleasant, became slighly miffed when I refused to allow photocopying, but remained professional and complied with my suggestion about noting down in my file what I had presented and what the documents had said.

After that person I went to see my claim handler or supervisor, and this person was very helpful and professional and pleasant to deal with.

Deary65 has it right, "A line has to be drawn"

bengal-stripe

It is always the new posters, who have those extraordinary stories.

Why is it, that I do not believe the entire thread?

scotty1971

maybe or maybe not the op's intention to cause animosity,but he/she has certainly done that,think it's time to ignore the thread,and get on with something else more important,like watching paint dry!

ben500

It's probably an AE due to the fact that this forum is full of predatory posters who have nothing better to do than attack those that dare to be different.

Sugarfree_Babe

Well I agree with the OP.

The verification framework says in red lettering that officers should not ask for MORE information than they need to make the decision.

I had this argument some years ago regarding my council tax - and won it. They told me they needed my bank statements to prove I was getting income support. I provided them with at letter from DWP, giving them the proof they needed. I have given signed authority for them to contact DWP in respect of my claims and have had no bother since then.

I suggest a letter from your bank stating that your savings are below £6k should suffice.

My objection to providing bank statements to my LA is because 1. I live in a small rural area and I know confidentiality is not what it should be. 2. I am not happy to have my bank statements lying around in LA offices. I have been a victim of fraud 3 times in the last year alone. I have a duty to protect my financial information. 3 The LA is apt to put other information gained this way to inappropriate use.

I challenged them another matter, and won. They were found to have commited maladministation and I was given some compensation for this. (Not enough, IMO)

I do not have quite the same objections to the DWP but their record of losing personal financial information gives me cause for concern.

OP You do not take Govt departments to court. They are subject to what is called a Judicial Review.

If you google the Community Legal Services, you should be able to find a lawyer specialising in this area of law. Most lawyers will give a free interview to see if you have a case. If you have, and you are eligible for income support etc, you may be eligible for legal aid.

Sugarfree_Babe

OOps Did not read the whole of the thread before answering. I see OP has now resolved the matter.

As other have said, a line has to be drawn.