Universal Credit messages

Catonthemoon

About a month ago, I received a message from UC asking if there was anything they could do to help with my situation; it stated that it was voluntary & that the intention was not to do a review. I didn’t reply. I received an almost identical message yesterday.

I’d prefer for things to carry on as they are, however, I’m wondering if this might be a bit of a ‘catch22’ … if I reply they might become proactive in getting me into work; if I don’t, that could invoke a review!

Has anyone else received these messages & would it be wise to reply or just ignore (given that it’s voluntary)?
Thank you.

NedS

Given that it's voluntary, I would be minded to politely decline otherwise I suspect they will keep sending you messages in the hope you may voluntarily engage.

KxMx

Twice is the maximum number of times they send this message currently.

I had it two consecutive months last year, I didn't reply to either.

HillStreetBlues

A friend had one, refused politely after second message, message back was get if touch if want help.

Rubyroobs

One of my work clients has received two of these messages in two days almost identical.

huckster

It is because DWP ministers have issued instruction to Job Centres that they need to be engaging with more claimants previously awarded LCWRA. It is not about getting people into work within x period of time, but moving them closer to work, by having discussions about preparation steps e.g. getting an up to date CV, looking at education/training courses, looking at different local provisions to try to remove barriers to work etc etc.

If you choose to engage with Job Centre it is a voluntary once a month appointment, at Job Centre or by phone call or by video call.

TimeLord1

Pointless process, really. The average age on LCWRA is mid-50s; many medically retired under previous systems, and I think that is about 55%, and the under-25s are around 10%, so the only thing I think people would have is medical knowledge and experience in coping with life challenges. 🧐

HillStreetBlues

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81871041#Comment_81871041

I feel a major issue is the general distrust of the DWP.

TimeLord1

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81871412#Comment_81871412

I concur, but that's a rabbit warren built over decades. We just learned and adapted to help others. All we can do really.

Altior

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81871041#Comment_81871041

I read the entire green paper (lucky me!)

This is because I may well have a choice between Support Group and LCWRA, as I am awaiting the outcome of my WCA. It's very difficult to know what will happen to people in the SG if NS ESA is disbanded, but there is a push to make LCWRA dependent upon PIP. So what happens to those on LCWRA and not been awarded PIP. At this point, nobody knows. I doubt the resources exist for everyone on LCWRA and not on PIP to be given another HCP assessment, and they surely won't want to award PIP to everyone currently in LCWRA.

Who knows whether it will ever come to fruition, but one of the aspects they are keen to change is the binary nature of SG/LCWRA. That once claimants get placed into the 'disabled' group (whatever name it is given), the current system effectively writes them off in terms of working, until SP.

They also believe that people have a fear that if they start working, or engaging in activity that might lead to work, they will risk losing their 'disabled' benefits/status forever. Apparently there is a wide misunderstanding of how this works in the current system. According to the paper at least.

It also touches on the changing nature of work. Undoubtedly the working from home element, which since lockdowns is now ubiquitous. Not least within the DWP and HCPs!

There is a very strong argument this is the case. If an individual gets awarded SG for example, from memory only 3% ever return to work. So the question is how many could/would return to working with 'support'. It also discuss the generational element, and LCWRA slanting to younger people and MH reported issues.

One could look at it both ways, I suspect the vast majority placed in the 'disabled' bucket (whatever it is labelled), have absolutely no interest in ever seeking work again, even if they could. But in the current context, it can seen how centrally, without any legislative changes, they might want to be seen as more proactive in offering 'support' to those awarded LCWRA. I suspect in the real world it's more akin to the anecdotes on this thread, rather than in the surveys conducted that the green paper references.

SimonFF

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/81871602#Comment_81871602

"We", who?