We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
We're aware that some users are experiencing technical issues which the team are working to resolve. See the Community Noticeboard for more info. Thank you for your patience.
📨 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!
HELP What is a customer compliance officer @Job Centre
Options
Comments
-
Skeenfleent wrote: »Any time THEY mess up e.g. a payment due to employee incompetence (and there's plenty of those examples), they don't give you interest as a compensation, or discipline the employee,
Erm they do pay compensation for errors in fact they pay out a shed load of compensation :eek:
Read the report "Small mistakes, big consequences" located on this page here and you'll be amazed http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/news/press_releases/pr2009-11.htmlMistakes happen - failure to put them right quickly and properly can make them considerably worse
Parliamentary Ombudsman, Ann Abraham, today urged public bodies to improve customer service by acting swiftly and effectively to resolve complaints.
Small mistakes, big consequences contains eleven case studies illustrating how the relatively minor mistakes of large government departments can have a major impact on the people they are attempting to serve and on the public purse.0 -
It does not change the fact that people should be honest and abide by the rules.
Sure, I agree with that. Honesty is a philosophy, not a part-time habit.
Still, the point I was making originally is that someone should be judged by both the principle of welfare provision for the needy as a filter for the rules - at least when there's any ambiguity in the rules. There usually IS some sort of ambiguity in many of these rules, I find from anecdotal research. It's just often played down as it takes a lot less brain power to pretend there's a constant instead of a variable in the algorithm.0 -
speedfreek1000 wrote: »Erm they do pay compensation for errors in fact they pay out a shed load of compensation :eek:
Read the report "Small mistakes, big consequences" located on this page here and you'll be amazed http://www.ombudsman.org.uk/news/press_releases/pr2009-11.html
You're quoting one single case for your "shedload of compensation". I've seen plenty of unreported mistakes and delays over the years, so the quoted statistics must be the tip of the iceberg. Many people in society are not so good at advocating for themselves, and don't receive help for this. People who're often the same as those who need the most services from the government.
By the way, that whole website is completely down, apart from a holding page from the proxy server. (I got a cached version from Google, which didn't have the linked .pdf, so may have missed some evidence). Ironic, though - can we complain to the Ombudsman about the poor performance of the Ombudsman's website?! :rotfl:0 -
How do these people check what accounts u have got i.e current/savings etc?0
-
How do these people check what accounts u have got i.e current/savings etc?
There is an ever growing array of matching services to compare data against what is held by the DWP and/or local authorities.
The data is fed to the DWP / LA, they check against their benefit claimant data bases and if there is a discrepancy, enquiries follow.0 -
what kind of data?
why are u a benefits bod? are u an expert on this stuff? x0 -
what kind of data?
why are u a benefits bod? are u an expert on this stuff? x
Examples of checked data (far from exhaustive): bank / building society / post office accounts; employment records - HMRC; ownership of property - land registry. There are numerous databases that can be checked; all perfectly legally.
Where social security benefits and tax credits are concerned, "expert" is a relative term - I shy away from it (pride before a fall etc). The whole system is so hugely complex, there is always someone who knows something someone else doesn't. Even the Courts have commented on the complexity: "It is deplorable that legislation which affects some of the most disadvantaged people in society should be couched in language which is so difficult for even a lawyer trained and practising in this field to understand". That was in 1996. It hasn't improved....0 -
thanks for the info.
appreciated0 -
genuine ...........0
-
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 350.9K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.5K Spending & Discounts
- 243.9K Work, Benefits & Business
- 598.8K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 176.9K Life & Family
- 257.2K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards