Universal Credit and signed off sick

dktreesea

pmlindyloo wrote: »

I am hoping that this link will answer any questions that you have:

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/305529/response/747975/attach/html/2/FOI%205057%20reply.pdf.html

You might need this too (the original question)

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/dwp_procedure_when_fit_notes_are

Thank you. Quite interesting links. But what happens if the DWP doesn't do their part, i.e. send out a letter acknowledging the fit notes and illness, and then sending out a work capability assessment questionnaire within the expected time frame? What CA were saying to me that it is not acceptable for the DWP or their agent to unnecessarily delay these steps, but at the same time there appears to be no statutory obligation on the DWP to perform their parts in the process within a certain time frame other than saying these actions should take place between the 28th day and the 13th week of the period the sickness was first notified to the DWP.


I am beginning to understand why people who really should be off work, people with sciatica, a herniated disc, people whose conditions, in order to get better, preclude sitting at a desk at a computer all day, are loading up on painkillers to get through their days rather than taking a few months off so they can take the time to heal properly. I've worked recently with two people wearing fentanyl patches, just so they can get through their working day. People needing class A drugs so they can work, when what they really need is lots of rest and therapy. That surely can't be a good outcome for the nation? Two people who both told me the alternative, of going on the ESA, was a terrible option because of the hostility and inappropriate behaviour they would have to suffer from the DWP in the process.


It's one thing to keep working - and for the nation to expect people to keep working, if, say, they break their foot, have the necessary operation(s) to get it back together again, wear a cast for 6 weeks and hobble around on crutches until it's time to take the cast off. I get that. the person has had the necessary intervention from the NHS, are on the mend, and work doesn't overly interfere with getting well.


The flip side of that is there are plenty of illnesses out there which should preclude work. Where working is going to aggravate the injury and where not everyone takes 4 to 6 weeks to heal. I don't think it unreasonable, and neither did Citizens Advice, to expect the DWP to do their job diligently and within the required timeframe, rather than just fobbing people off all the time. How are back paid benefits going to help if people are being forced to go into debt just to survive in the meantime?


One good thing about physical illness; at least when you turn up at the job centre the work coach drops all pretence of trying to get you into work because they can see how sick you are. I can't imagine how awful this process must be for people who have mental health, rather than physical health, issues.

NeilCr

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Irrespective of what you were told by Citizens Advice, and they often do get it wrong,

Have you got a link (or links) to support this assertion?

Confuseddot

dktreesea wrote: »

Yes, but all this is meant to happen within the first 13 weeks. The statement(s) of fitness for work that you have to send in are part of the assessment process. Instead we are being told the backlog for starting this process from their end is over five months. What is it the DWP are hoping, that by then the person's illness will somehow have resolved itself and the person will no longer be ill? It seems to me this is a deliberate ploy to get those who have become ill while on Universal Credit to give up on claiming their entitlement.


Not all illnesses are like flu, back on your feet and as right as rain in a couple of months.

If you find someone who has applied for ESA, regardless if they are coming from JSA, work or Universal Credit, and been assessed within the 13 weeks I would be shocked. Some people can wait up to a year for an assessment especially when they sacked ATOS etc. You have to keep sending in the fit notes until you are assessed and you will remain on the assessment rate until then.

Have you been to the job centre ? They are usually helpful and may have the form for you to fill in. Where are the fit notes being sent currently ? Is the person currently receiving any money ?

I imagine the backlog of which you speak is for the work capacity assessment. Normally there is no issue sending out the questionnaire. Have you chased the DWP for the letters ? Is there normally any problems with their mail ?

TELLIT01

NeilCr wrote: »

Have you got a link (or links) to support this assertion?

No links, just personal experience from the years I worked on ESA. Some of the things stated by CA, or at least told to me that customers had been stated by CA, were simply totally wrong.
This sort of thing about having to pay the premiums after 13 weeks, even when the claim hadn't been assessed, have been common right from the start of ESA - and totally wrong.

NeilCr

TELLIT01 wrote: »

No links, just personal experience from the years I worked on ESA. Some of the things stated by CA, or at least told to me that customers had been stated by CA, were simply totally wrong.
This sort of thing about having to pay the premiums after 13 weeks, even when the claim hadn't been assessed, have been common right from the start of ESA - and totally wrong.

Thanks

I think the important bit there lies around the words " told to me". My experience is that often something you are told turns out not to be the whole story. Switching it the other way round I have heard a lot of stories about "lies" told to clients by DWP about ESA (and other benefits)- after a bit of delving you find out that there are a lot of misunderstandings, etc which can be explained and clarified

CItA deal with an awful lot of clients with problems and queries ranging over a number of topics. I don't doubt that mistakes are made but I just don't agree with your comment about often getting it wrong. I did a bit of a Google search before responding to your post and struggled to find anything that supported your viewpoint - which was why I asked if you had any links

In these days of government cutbacks there are less and less organisations out there who support and help people with issues - especially for free. It bothers me that such folks read on a forum like this that CitA "often get it wrong" and may be deterred from going to them - particularly, if there is no solid evidence to back up the statement

It's worth pointing out that CitA are public and can be challenged on what they have said. As was said earlier in this thread much of what advisers (in many cases volunteers) say to clients is checked and, if necessary, a follow up is done with more information or amendments. In contrast posters on MSE, many who are very helpful and knowledgable I know, are anonymous and there is no comeback if what they say turns out to be wrong

Apologies to the OP for going off topic!

Bananas123

it takes along time, some people have to wait 1yr+ for things to happen...

this is why there are sooo many questions about back-payments.

(because the timeframes "go out the window" (seemingly more regularly then not ?) > you "should" have recieved one according to their (not our) guidelines, but you also have to understand, that they are running behind / guidlines NOT law and you don't have the right to demand money more quickly etc

Bananas123

if helpful / struggling:

Cash in a crisis

Waiting for benefits or wages can leave you short of money to pay your rent, food and utility bills. Find out about help available to get you through a cash crisis.
Short-term benefit advance

If you have claimed benefits, you may be able to ask for an advance payment of benefits.
You can ask for this if there is a delay in processing your benefit claim which isn't your fault, or you are waiting for an increase in your benefit payments due to a change in your circumstances.
To be eligible for this short-term benefit advance, you must be claiming an income-related benefit such as jobseeker's allowance, income support or universal credit. You need to prove that you are experiencing financial hardship.
Contact your local Jobcentre Plus office to apply for a short-term benefit advance.
You usually have to repay the benefit advance within 3 months, but in some circumstances you have up to 6 months to pay back the money.

TELLIT01

NeilCr wrote: »

Thanks

I think the important bit there lies around the words " told to me". My experience is that often something you are told turns out not to be the whole story.

Precisely. That was why I was careful to include those words. Obviously, as DWP employees, we weren't there when the customer was apparently provided with incorrect information. What I would add though, is that there would be certain statements made which had come from more than one CA office. That would tend to suggest that there was a common misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the regulations within CA.
To be fair, that's not really all that surprising, even within DWP we often had to request clarification of what the 'rules' meant, particularly in the early days of ESA.

pmlindyloo

I am not totally sure about what is happening with your family member's UC claim.

Are you saying that it has been stopped or that it is continuing but they are having to wait for an assessment and then get paid the element if they are awarded the extra element?

I am not sure whether you are having a moan in general or are referring to how UC in particular is not working effectively.

The process for those who become ill is exactly the same as for those applying for ESA. Mistakes are made and you should keep asking for another copy of the relevant form. If the WCA is done they will get an element backdated.

The mistakes, the waiting for the WCA is no different to thousands of other claiming the old ESA.

Your family member is still receiving UC and (if you read the links) will not have to carry out the claimant commitment as they did when they were well.

If your family member has extra financial expenditure because of their disability then I suggest that they apply for PIP.

If the legislation goes through the element for the work related group will end in April 2017 for those on UC as well as the old ESA (another topic for discussion) but at the moment I cannot see (other than their admin incompetence) that there is too much to get angry about. The system is as it is and you just have to get on with it. Yes, have a moan, lobby your MP but other than the 28 day rule before sending out the form it is really no different. (I can actually understand that rule!)

NeilCr

TELLIT01 wrote: »

Precisely. That was why I was careful to include those words. Obviously, as DWP employees, we weren't there when the customer was apparently provided with incorrect information. What I would add though, is that there would be certain statements made which had come from more than one CA office. That would tend to suggest that there was a common misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the regulations within CA.
To be fair, that's not really all that surprising, even within DWP we often had to request clarification of what the 'rules' meant, particularly in the early days of ESA.

Thanks. And fair enough!

I'll leave this thread to the original topic now and apologise, once again, for the derail