Request for UC phone appointments being made needlessly stressful

CMB3

Hi all,

I am a universal credit claimant suffering from severe anxiety with agoraphobia. I am currently awaiting my work capability assessment.

A few months ago, DWP management confirmed with me by email that my future appointments will be conducted over the phone. Unfortunately, my next appointment has been scheduled as a face-to-face appointment; I have tried several times via my journal to ask for it to be changed to a phone appointment.

The response that I am getting on my journal is “don’t worry, your work coach will call you,” however, my request to get the appointment properly changed on the system is being ignored.

I am not understanding why they won’t officially change the appointment details so that it is clear that I am having a phone appointment (not a face to face appointment) and there are no mishaps/misunderstandings on the day of the appointment. In other words, on my To Do list, the appointment instructions remain the same, stating that I am required to attend the interview at the specified jobcentre address.

Because my appointments have been frequently changed in the past with the press of a button, the apparent refusal to properly change the appointment is creating so much additional stress for me a) because it just seems so odd and b) I fear being sanctioned if the appointment isn't properly changed and I don't turn up for the appointment in person.

I am wondering what people’s thoughts are on this. I have set out below what I was expecting when an appointment is amended.

When a change is made to my DWP appointment, I typically receive a number of notifications/updates on my universal credit account.

1) I receive an email  message in the following format:

Subject: Your Universal Credit appointment has changed
To:  my email address

Dear ______________
Your phone appointment at 10:30am on Monday 11 July 2022 has changed. Your appointment is now at 12:00pm on Friday 15 July 2022.
Sign in to your account for details.
From,
Universal Credit

2) My journal is updated as shown below:

Work Focused Interview

Monday 11 July 2022 at 10:30am by phone

Rebooked:

Work Focused Interview

Friday 15 July 2022 at 12:00pm by phone

3) The appointment details on the To Do List change to reflect the amended appointment.

NedS

CMB3 said:

Hi all,

I am a universal credit claimant suffering from severe anxiety with agoraphobia. I am currently awaiting my work capability assessment.

A few months ago, DWP management confirmed with me by email that my future appointments will be conducted over the phone. Unfortunately, my next appointment has been scheduled as a face-to-face appointment; I have tried several times via my journal to ask for it to be changed to a phone appointment.

Phone appointments were only introduced during Covid where it was not considered safe to ask people to attend in person. Since Covid restrictions have now ended, the expectation is that claimants will attend mandatory appointments face to face in the job centre.

CMB3 said:

The response that I am getting on my journal is “don’t worry, your work coach will call you,” however, my request to get the appointment properly changed on the system is being ignored.

I am not understanding why they won’t officially change the appointment details so that it is clear that I am having a phone appointment (not a face to face appointment) and there are no mishaps/misunderstandings on the day of the appointment. In other words, on my To Do list, the appointment instructions remain the same, stating that I am required to attend the interview at the specified jobcentre address.

Because my appointments have been frequently changed in the past with the press of a button, the apparent refusal to properly change the appointment is creating so much additional stress for me a) because it just seems so odd and b) I fear being sanctioned if the appointment isn't properly changed and I don't turn up for the appointment in person.

Work coaches are currently under a lot of pressure to ensure all appointments are seen face to face in the job centre. That is why they will not (re)book it as a phone appointment. IF your work coach agrees to phone you at the appointment time and conduct the appointment over the phone, they are doing you a favour and manipulating the stats so your appointment will still show on the system as having been attended face to face ((a) they want to be able to mark the appointment as attended, and (b) they want it to show as attended face to face).

Has the work coach agreed in writing on your journal to phone you for that specific appointment? If they have, and they then fail to phone you or you then fail to answer the call, it would not be reasonable to sanction you. However, if there is no evidence that an agreement to conduct that specific appointment by phone has been reached, you are liable to be sanctions for failure to attend.

Ultimately you have no right to expect a phone appointment. You are required to attend mandatory appointments at the jobcentre until you have had your work capability assessment if you wish to claim UC. Hopefully the above helps explain the work coach's actions.

KxMx

Given OP's mental health problems I fail to see why UC shouldn't make a "reasonable adjustment" in this case:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services1/disability-discrimination-and-welfare-benefits/

NedS

KxMx said:

Given OP's mental health problems I fail to see why UC shouldn't make a "reasonable adjustment" in this case:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services1/disability-discrimination-and-welfare-benefits/

I agree, but discretion and what may be considered reasonable often goes out of the window when the work coach is under pressure to hit targets for how many face to face appointments they achieve each day/week.

Alice_Holt

NedS said:

KxMx said:

Given OP's mental health problems I fail to see why UC shouldn't make a "reasonable adjustment" in this case:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services1/disability-discrimination-and-welfare-benefits/

....when the work coach is under pressure to hit targets for how many face to face appointments they achieve each day/week.

        When I started as a volunteer adviser at my local advice charity back in 2006, the DWP had an escalation line we could ring to help client's sort out benefit issues / problems. It worked really well, the DWP staff members were experienced, knowledgeable, helpful, and enabled to resolve issues then and there.

   It seems very different now, ringing the UC helpline gets you (after a long telephone wait) to an inexperienced call handler (obviously with call number targets), who has little knowledge of the benefit system, poor training, and seems to lack any resources to begin to address the issue. Some colleagues have even been cut off by DWP employees, telling them, incorrectly, that UC don't take 3 way calls (vulnerable customer, DWP, and a Cit A adviser). 

huckster

Reasonable adjustments are still part of the Job Centres responsibilities.Agree with Ned, Government through DWP ministers have introduced a level of targets into the service provided, meaning that there is an expectation of a certain number of appointments based on Work Coach numbers, how these are held, frequency of appointments for each claimant and what is expected from claimants.

If a claimant is genuinely unable to attend Job Centre appointments, then by arrangement, the appointments can be held by phone call, but due to restrictions on numbers of specific phone call appointments available, they will be booked as face to face, with the request noted that there is a reasonable adjustment request for the appointment to be held by phone call.

Would always suggest, claimants send a journal message for Work Coach requesting reasonable adjustments due to health condition ( state health conditions and reason for adjustment)  for appointments to be held by phone call.  If the health condition has not been reported, that the change of circumstances under the health section should also be completed.

Robbie64

Alice_Holt said:

NedS said:

KxMx said:

Given OP's mental health problems I fail to see why UC shouldn't make a "reasonable adjustment" in this case:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services/discrimination-in-the-provision-of-goods-and-services1/disability-discrimination-and-welfare-benefits/

....when the work coach is under pressure to hit targets for how many face to face appointments they achieve each day/week.

        When I started as a volunteer adviser at my local advice charity back in 2006, the DWP had an escalation line we could ring to help client's sort out benefit issues / problems. It worked really well, the DWP staff members were experienced, knowledgeable, helpful, and enabled to resolve issues then and there.

   It seems very different now, ringing the UC helpline gets you (after a long telephone wait) to an inexperienced call handler (obviously with call number targets), who has little knowledge of the benefit system, poor training, and seems to lack any resources to begin to address the issue. Some colleagues have even been cut off by DWP employees, telling them, incorrectly, that UC don't take 3 way calls (vulnerable customer, DWP, and a Cit A adviser). 

The problem there was that the DWP dismantled the local office structure at around that time and a number of staff - usually the most experienced ones - took early severance under enhanced redundancy payments. I left around the time that JobCentre Plus was introduced as did a number of my colleagues. That was the first real tranche of staff cuts in the early 2000s.

The staff that are recruited these days are often given the most basic training based on using crib (I think that's what they are called) sheets. They often seem to lack basic common sense or have little knowledge of how benefits are worked out.

When I started working at what was then the DHSS, staff training lasted 12 weeks and as I was what was then known as an Adjudication Offer (what are now Decision Makers) we had a further 4 weeks training on benefit legislation. we also had to attend training courses on things like mental health and welfare concerns which may surprise some people as this was 1986 when mental health was often seen as less of a concern. Now staff training is only 4 weeks and often for contact centre staff it's simply the most basic training. Admittedly the training was as long as 12 weeks back in the mid 1980s as benefit calculations were done by pen and paper back then but at least we gained knowledge on how to work out benefits and also apply some common sense. The only thing was that local offices were basically underfunded and often were the scene of conflict between staff and claimants (I lost count of the amount of times someone threatened to kill me! Plus our office reception was regularly smashed up, one guy came in to reception with a home made bomb which led to the office being overrun with armed police, and some staff were assaulted by claimants who waited outside for them finishing work).

mongoose2009

theres no money left

expect it to get worse

poppy12345

mongoose2009 said:

theres no money left

expect it to get worse

Not sure what that has to do with the question the OP has asked.

Just_2Tired_2_Dance

Last month i had a face to face app on that interview she said on my next app i could have a phone app as i was finding it difficult to get there because of disability, Next month comes it was changed from a phone app to a face to face, At this one i asked again for a phone app he said they dont do phone app any more, 

ripplyuk

This seems completely unreasonable and unrealistic. How are the most severely disabled people ever meant to claim UC if they insist on face to face appointments? As an example, a relative of mine was left disabled after a brain aneurysm. The only way she could leave the house involved several large ambulance men getting her onto a stretcher. How is someone like that supposed to claim benefits?