We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Snotty letters asking for evidence to support UC claim when not asked for in applying

13»

Comments

  • The letters still go out causing worry and upset needlessly
    It was not the letter itself that caused worry and upset, it was your over-reaction to it.


    Even if it had asked to show the same documents again, so what if you have nothing to hide??
  • Mersey_2
    Mersey_2 Posts: 1,679 Forumite
    AnthonyUK wrote: »
    I went to Job Centre yesterday and used their phones to contact the office at Wolverhampton, they said ignore the letter, it's just a standard automated Sorted. ;)



    That's good to hear and sadly this is an all too common error by the UC IT system at the moment.


    But the DWP promised the Select Committee that it will be addressed later this year, with new upgrades.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
  • Mersey_2
    Mersey_2 Posts: 1,679 Forumite
    The OP hasn't provided it once, or he certainly hasnt stated

    At no point does he suggest that he has already shown them whatever evidence they are asking for. He ONLY mentions ID when he says he gave them ID documents at his meeting. We don't know what the additional info

    Anyway the OP hasnt been back since his initial post so whats the point in arguing over something we dont have enough info on.



    Incorrect (again), sadly. It was requesting the ID info for all UC claims and sadly is a standard error letter sent by Wolvs quite often.


    The OP stated that they had indeed provided the evidence docs to the JCP.


    At least the OP has now been back since to confirm what I suspected.


    This is a common error by the Wolvs office with new UC claims which the DWP have pledged to address.
    Please be polite to OPs and remember this is a site for Claimants and Appellants to seek redress against their bank, ex-boss or retailer. If they wanted morality or the view of the IoD or Bank they'd ask them.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.