Appointee Query Re: ESA to UC

Jack'sMum

Appreciate your common sense perspective!

Jack'sMum

I quite agree!

Claimants are not scrutinised in this way so why should appointees be? Especially since appointees act for claimants, not the other way round!

Ineededaname

Please stop taking something personal that was in no way personal. Sorry if my wording upset you, but surely you can see what was being said. Appointees are usually family members or close friends. There is no guarantee they will have the ability to do what is required to manage Universal Credit. It needs to be checked.

Just because you are capable does not mean everyone is. Not having these checks in place places people at risk. Do you think that some inconvenience is more important than safeguarding vulnerable people? As I said before I have seen an appointee for UC refused by the DWP and rightly so. The person was not capable of doing the job, even though they had been managing the persons previous benefits as an appointee for many years.

Nothing is stopping an existing appointee from making the claim for the person and assisting them to get it up and running. They are just checking at this point you are capable of taking on the responsibilites required which are totally different to how any previous benefits have been managed.

Existing appointees wishing to claim UC could have their digital competency checked by a simple phone call from the UC department. An information pack explaining the responsibilities and workings of UC could be sent out by post. This would save the tax payer a fortune in unnecessary service visits and administration!

This I agree with in part, I do not know why they have to do a home visit when you were previously an appointee. Maybe there is a reason behind it, but nothing I can think of. Maybe you can ask them when they do your appointment?

Personally I don't think a telephone call and information pack is sufficient however, and believe it should be face to face.

Claimants are not scrutinised in this way so why should appointees be? Especially since appointees act for claimants, not the other way round!

Their ID is checked again even if they were claiming another benefit before.
Their ability to manage the claim should be covered in the initial appointments.
These are the same checks done with the Appointee.
The only difference is they do this in the office (usually) as opposed to a home visit. Again I don't know why this is.