After the Post Office scandal, do you feel safe with a DWP "police force"?

Well, its encouraging to hear it takes a whole team of people to make such a mess, Jane.

We also attended the job centre several times whose primary focus seems to be to get people onto universal credit. She had to visit the job centre 3 times to get universal credit and had to have a fit for work assessment. I had to take unpaid leave from my full time job and a support worker had to attend. We had to queue up outside for a 9am appointment with loads of other people, many of whom stand across the road etc. It is humiliating. Some people are clearly ill. My dd is clearly very disabled. I am only adding this because this is not something I have experience of normally

youtu.be/jbq0bf2ptbA?si=fqPlw6sMzdc_SjVd

Oops! The assessor accidentally recorded his lung capacity to be double the amount she clearly reads out when it's done.

AGAA4

A doctor's assessment is only part of the evidence. They only have a short time to assess someone as they are very busy people.
The claimant themselves give evidence and are seen regularly by DWP staff.
It's up to the examiner of all the evidence to decide whether benefit is given or continued.

What sort of experience and training/qualifications does the "examiner of all the evidence" have AGAA4?

If you have a rules based system then surely everyone must be able to show how the rules have been followed and that the applicant has been put in a position to present their evidence, including proper medical reports.

In the post office case they have homed in on the fact that while asking the sub-postmasters to prove they hadn't stolen any money, they denied access to that evidence. If a doctor is not given enough time the the PIP applicant is denied the opportunity to do that.

It also looks as if some of this PO team will be prosecuted. They knew what was happening and facilitated it. I think there have already been some sharp words from Tribunal judges to the DWP.

More than anything it seems to be a system that is not fit for purpose being sustained by those who that very unfitness serves, i.e., government and those managing the DWP.

JaneJudge

We also attended the job centre several times whose primary focus seems to be to get people onto universal credit. She had to visit the job centre 3 times to get universal credit and had to have a fit for work assessment. I had to take unpaid leave from my full time job and a support worker had to attend. We had to queue up outside for a 9am appointment with loads of other people, many of whom stand across the road etc. It is humiliating. Some people are clearly ill. My dd is clearly very disabled. I am only adding this because this is not something I have experience of normally

I am so sorry to hear this JaneJudge. I think many claimants feel very isolated and are not going to chat about their position. So, like the sub-postmasters, it's not generally known how widespread it is. Except, I assume, by those in charge, although even that doesn't seem to be a given.

It's true that the DWP are "under the cosh" from the government who want everyone in work.
There is a highly trained team of experienced people who assess claims and who will defy government if necessary and come down on the side of the claimant.
DWP is a huge organisation and like many of these large organisations will make mistakes.
If you want to attribute blame then it should be the government who take it as they really don't want anybody on benefits.
Like many other areas this government has failed in it's failing in this.

Thats why involving AI is a terrible idea, as is giving the dwp extra powers.

AI is everywhere now. I had a text from my internet bot last week who fixed my broadband.

AGAA4

You can't condemn the whole DWP on one case.

I hope you’re able to read this.

MissAdventure

Thats why involving AI is a terrible idea, as is giving the dwp extra powers.

AI isn't the start of the problems; it's that the law is a terrible undemocratic law. It is also going to put pressure on an already creaking gate that is the DWP.

It's the government I blame. They are diabolical at planning. They come up with an idea but not plan. I would also blame those at the top of the DWP. They earn a great deal of money and should be the ones to speak truth to power.

I really don't envy those getting on with the day to day stuff and it does feel like an accident waiting to happen.

petra, what you have posted is of no evidential value.

So sorry to hear of your experience JaneJudge, I did wonder if you would post on this thread as most of us aware of your DD's situation (not in detail, of course).

This proposal is frightening, but will likely go through due to the demonisation of benefit claimants or 'cheats' as the tabloid press like to call them. Add into the mix the fictional, urban myths about people living in Majorca, renting out properties and still, claiming benefits, those of the 'if you have nothing to hide, nothing to worry about' school with their heads in the sand, and we have the perfect storm. I do not approve of cheating the benefit system, but neither do I approve of large corporations 'cheating' the exchequer by so called legitimate means of offshore taxation. Please, GSM, no lectures about the difference between tax avoidance. Most on here understand the concerns raised, and to have yet another area of public life self policing, as the Post Office did, should raise serious concerns in us all.

People need to realise that benefit fraud impacts on all of us and particularly those on benefits. Scrutiny wouldn't need to happen if people, as most are, were honest.
I would like to know how to discover who is abusing the system without checking.
The police can't take on benefit fraud so who will stop the fraudsters from from getting away with money they aren't entitled to?

On the contrary, DAR, the use of AI to find potential fraud frees up a great deal of civil servants’ time. The evidence produced by AI can then be reviewed and evaluated by a civil servant. AI is going to be very widely used in all areas of our lives. You can’t fight the inevitable march of progress - and yes, it is progress.

AGAA4

People need to realise that benefit fraud impacts on all of us and particularly those on benefits. Scrutiny wouldn't need to happen if people, as most are, were honest.
I would like to know how to discover who is abusing the system without checking.
The police can't take on benefit fraud so who will stop the fraudsters from from getting away with money they aren't entitled to?

Thats fair comment, as long as people are aware and agree that if they treat family on their birthdays or christmas, or just because, the recipient should be declaring it to the dwp if they are on benefits.

And I have seen many, many, posts in here about who treats their adult children, and buy their shopping, etc etc.
Like a badge of honour.

I would suggest a system that doesn't create so many errors first of all AGAA4. There is a higher percentage of errors, by DWP and claimants, than fraud. The whole thing is far too complex.

If people are receiving a few amounts into their accounts during the year this will be discounted. They will only take issue if the claimant is getting regular amounts that they have not disclosed.

It clearly states on the pip form that it goes to AN ASSESSOR, who makes the decision.

Will the AI be programmed to make logical assessments of where the money comes from.
Eg - same surname, always pays in on a particular date - must be a family member sending birthday money?
I hope so.

MissAdventure

AGAA4

People need to realise that benefit fraud impacts on all of us and particularly those on benefits. Scrutiny wouldn't need to happen if people, as most are, were honest.
I would like to know how to discover who is abusing the system without checking.
The police can't take on benefit fraud so who will stop the fraudsters from from getting away with money they aren't entitled to?

Thats fair comment, as long as people are aware and agree that if they treat family on their birthdays or christmas, or just because, the recipient should be declaring it to the dwp if they are on benefits.

And I have seen many, many, posts in here about who treats their adult children, and buy their shopping, etc etc.
Like a badge of honour.

Are you saying that you should have to declare your Christmas Presents MissAdventure? Why? Does everyone declare them on their tax return?

That doesn’t mean they can’t use AI to assist in their investigations where the benefit is means-tested.

Maybe AI will make the system better. This thread has been negative from the start and we have no evidence that AI will cause all these problems.
As I mentioned earlier a bot fixed my broadband within a few minutes of me reporting the fault. It took hours for a human to do it beforeAI.

AGAA4

Yes DAR they sometimes override medical submissions but on the claimants behalf. Some doctors will state the claimant is fit for work when they clearly aren't and they get their benefits.
To call the DWP staff Nazis is just unbelievable.

You only need to look on online disability forums and even MN and GN threads to realise that the disability benefit assessment system is not fit for purpose.

Take PIP claims for example. The assessment does not actually consider the extent of disability itself, but rather the effect it has on a range of activities in daily living (personal care, cooking, general day to day living tasks( and mobility (the degree to which the condition affects your ability to generally move around and walk certain distances). Most conventional medical evidence won’t give the assessor much of an idea of how the claimant manages from day to day, because it’s a straightforward description of the condition, so it’s easy for assessors to dismiss medical evidence in favour of their own opinion as to the degree to which the claimant is affected.

The assessor doesn’t make the decision as to the benefit award. Their report goes to the case manager at DWP, who looks at all the evidence the claimant has supplied. But the case manager has no medical training so will always go with what the assessor has said.

You may think, OK, all well and good. But then you have to factor in that assessors are not doctors, they are recruited from NHS and other sources and tend to be nurses, physios, paramedics and other HCPs. They are trained in disability recognition for a few days by the assessment provider and then unleashed on the claimants as ‘disability analysts’. Most have no specialist knowledge of the conditions they are assessing, beyond this training. So you end up with claimants who have, for example, complex neurological conditions who supply specialist medical reports from consultants involved with their treatment being overruled by the opinions of paramedics and physiotherapist, nurses and the like. The unfitness for purpose is perfectly illustrated by the number of claimants who are successful at tribunal and the number of times the DWP have been reprimanded for the poor quality of their decision making.

Similarly with the work capability assessment for ESA. The assessors are recruited and trained in the same way, and provide the assessment reports on which a claimants’ fitness to even look for work is decided through similar procedures.

This is no way to treat vulnerable people, and although I wouldn’t agree with the description of DWP staff as Nazis, I well remember a campaign launched by the Cameron/Clegg coalition to discredit disabled claimants. At one stage it involved posters in JobCentre Plus which were utterly dehumanising to disabled claimants. One was depicting disabled claimants as bots in a space invaders game and they were ‘picked off’ one by one implying the savings made as they were denied benefits. This caused an outcry and was compared with similar posters in Nazi Germany era, depicting sick and disabled people as ‘Useless Eaters’ in preparation for what they were about to do. DWP were forced to remove the posters and apologise for the deep offence they caused.

DaisyAnne
Someone posted earlier in the thread the dwps stance on receiving money.
I don't make the rules...

DaisyAnneReturns

MissAdventure

AGAA4

People need to realise that benefit fraud impacts on all of us and particularly those on benefits. Scrutiny wouldn't need to happen if people, as most are, were honest.
I would like to know how to discover who is abusing the system without checking.
The police can't take on benefit fraud so who will stop the fraudsters from from getting away with money they aren't entitled to?

Thats fair comment, as long as people are aware and agree that if they treat family on their birthdays or christmas, or just because, the recipient should be declaring it to the dwp if they are on benefits.

And I have seen many, many, posts in here about who treats their adult children, and buy their shopping, etc etc.
Like a badge of honour.

Are you saying that you should have to declare your Christmas Presents MissAdventure? Why? Does everyone declare them on their tax return?

No, people don’t declare Christmas presents on their tax returns because there is no obligation to do so - it’s not earned income. But benefit claimants are under legal obligation to declare all money they receive to DWP if they are claiming means tested benefits. DWP then decide whether the nature of the payment is treated as income or not. It’s unlikely that these one offs would be seen as income but that doesn’t absolve the claimant from the responsibility to declare them. It’s common sense too because if DWP request bank statements - as they do periodically for means tested benefits - then these payment will likely be picked up and benefit suspended while they investigate. Easier to just declare it - or ask people not to make bank transfers for these things.