Ingeus

[YorkyLad]

Hi folks,

 

I had my first appointment with Ingeus this week. It resembled more a car crash than anything constructive.

 

Immediately I was asked for sensitive personal data in an environment that was not private. "Do you have a criminal record?". I refused to give them any personal information other than what the job centre had forwarded (my name and address). My 'adviser' then told me I "was obliged by law" to give him both my telephone number and my email address. I asked him to spell it out several times that against my will he was saying he had the powers to make me surrender my personal details and he asserted himself firmly that this was the case. "Ingeus have been mandated with the authority the same as the job center. You have to give me your email address" he stated. He then threatened me with a sanction if I didnt hand over email address!! So within 10 minutes of my first appointment i'm treatened with a sanction (which would leave me the same as a lot of people have said before in this thread... homeless and destitute) for exercising my right under UK law to protect my data.

 

Satisfied that he wasn't going to acquire my email address from me he demanded my mobile phone number. Which, summarily I refused to part with too. He told me again that the law dictated that I surrender (against my will in this case) my mobile telephone number to him. I told him again of my belief that he had no authority to make such demands and I requested to see the written evidence that this private company I'd never heard of before had exemptions from all UK laws regarding personal data. I wanted to read about a law that empowered this man to have more power over me than a police officer does in the street. He was delighted at this prospect and skipped off to a cupboard.

 

"These are the documents about you having to give us information" he said nonchalantly launching the 5 sheets of paper across the desk. I could see his head sink when it became evident after a few moments that I was reading them. Not what I was expecting and he can't of read properly the 'consent to share information' and 'information disclosure' he just handed me. The information disclosure' document basicly said they abided by the data protection act and so humbly requested my data. The penultimate statement of that form states "Please be aware that not signing this form will not affect your benefits or your access to this programme". Speaks for itself... The Data Protection Act applies to them too. They do not, as my advisor stated, have any sort of exemption or powers to enable them to punish you for exercising your right to withhold from them your personal details and 'sensitive data'.

 

Then the 'consent to share information' form is a joke and I urge no one to sign it. By signing that form you allow Ingues to call your 'future employer' whenever they want to inquire about such things as "The number of hours you work", "the amount of your earnings each week", "the dates of your employment". Which is something I do not want to share with them. Luckily as they are requesting something to which they are not by law entitled to without my permission, again, the form has an advice at the end. It reads:

 

"entitlement to these benefits will not depend on whether I choose to give consent or not.

My placement on any programme with Ingeus UK Limited and 'Delivery Partners' (the ambiguously unspecified 'Delivery Partners')

I can withdraw my consent at any time by writing....."

 

I use the material he handed me as reference and I point the small matter of the law standing in the way of his attempted illegal theft of my personal data.

 

He points out that I haven't read the bit that says I must surrender my telephone number! That's on the 'Ingeus Expectations' document. He points his finger into the page and I start reading.

 

"As it is a condition of your receipt of JSA that you are available for work, you must have your mobile phone switched on and with you at all times during office hours".

 

"You see?" he inquired. Simple rebuff to such idiocy "my phone will be on.... its just that you wont be able to ring it"

 

It was then pointed out to me that 99.9% of people were happy to give that information away. He tried to force the issue again. I can quote him as saying that my actions might be judged to be sabotaging my job search and, again, this may cause my JSA to be terminated. so, in a nut shell, trying to bully me into handing over my data against my will.

 

I then told him in no uncertain terms that he was not getting my personal data off me and that we were just going around in circles. He turned to his computer and stated that the job centre would be informed of my refusal to complete the forms and surrender data. He told me to speak with the job centre about my concerns and then i was to return a week later and repeat the process (and I can assure everyone that it very much will be a case of repeating that process).

 

To conclude. It struck me very similar to a high pressure sales pitch by a lying, manipulating cheating salesman who would not take no for an answer. I feel very much that been told that Ingeus has a 'government mandate' giving this man the authority to say he is except from the law is sickening. We know why they want specifically my contact details and my personal data it is so they can ensure their own financial gain.

 

and this is the bottom line of it all for me regarding his conduct:

 

If he knew Ingeus did not have the exemptions he stated they did when he said he did then he is in breach of TWO sections of the 2006 Fraud Act

 

Fraud by false representation

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) dishonestly makes a false representation, and

(b) intends, by making the representation—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A representation is false if—

(a) it is untrue or misleading, and

(b) the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading

 

Fraud by abuse of position

(1) A person is in breach of this section if he—

(a) occupies a position in which he is expected to safeguard, or not to act

against, the financial interests of another person,

(b) dishonestly abuses that position, and

© intends, by means of the abuse of that position—

(i) to make a gain for himself or another, or

(ii) to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.

(2) A person may be regarded as having abused his position even though his

conduct consisted of an omission rather than an act.

 

I think by anyone's standard if you threaten someone with effectively making them homeless and possibly starve unless you submit to an illegal demand is an abuse of position and there is no doubt it was a series of 'false representations'.

 

This is a company dealing with lots of vulnerable people and it makes me angry to think others who do not know their rights are are been deceived and bullied into handing over personal data that they do not have to. Fraud does not have to be just about stealing money... and the theft does not have to have taken place it is still fraud even if the [problem] fails.... therefore this is fraud!

 

Thank you for listening.... Next episode Monday! :/

Edited September 28, 2011 by YorkyLad
(problem) ?

[YorkyLad]

I've just been for my second appointment at Analingus. Eeeek.

 

Took a page out of Big Georges book and got audio (PM me your email address BG and i'll email you a copy). Here's an excerpt following my advisor telling me to "draw a line under last week" and me telling him I felt he was "brushing my concerns under the carpet":

 

Me: I am... I'm really concerned that people are been told here that you have this authority, this mandate, to against their will to seize that personal data, 'sensitive data'.

 

Advisor: If I'm honest. I'll tell you something. I've worked here for four years and in the whole time i've never had anybody refuse to [inaudible]

 

Me: So you've not been trained how to deal with me then?

 

Advisor: I wouldn't say that. In terms of train... trained how to deal with you? Am I.... Am I a psycho therapist?

 

Me: Why do you think I need psychotherapy?

 

Advisor: This is what I mean... I didnt say you needed psychotherapy

 

Me: Why Do I need a psychotherapist?

 

Advisor: Its just a psychotherapist would know how to deal with your 'behaviour'

 

 

I'll point out for the record that my 'behaviour' up to this point did not involve anything like dribbling, playing with myself out of compulsion under the table or any other activity that i've known needed the intervention of a psychotherapist. The 'behaviour' in this case was not parting with my sensitive data and voicing my concerns.

 

The link between sanctions and not giving personal info is spelt out on the tape too. I'll dig out the gems and transcribe here. Can I have advice from admin plz about whether I can post the audio here and if I can publish my advisor first name here?

 

Cheers

[YorkyLad]

I got a letter from Analingus today having signed off several weeks ago. Handed in my book to JC just having given last date of claim, signed and ticked the box confirming I expected the employment to last 5 weeks or more.

 

The letter was telling me that there is £75 available to me, "to transfer directly into my bank account"

 

Great! However there have been severe short comings with Ingeus' math ability when it came to what to what I would get when I signed off. I'll come to that shortly....

 

The start of the letter:

 

Dear Yorkylad

 

RE: Financial Support and in Work Support

 

First of all, congratulations on securing employment - I hope your job is going really well.

 

I just wanted to write regarding your return to work. As the jobcentre had refered you to Ingeus before you started work, we are able to provide some financial support for any initial in work costs (travel/clothing/etc)

 

There is £75 avaliable to to you which I am able to transfer directly into your bank account, all we need is for you to complete the two attached forms required by the jobcentre. This can be sorted immediately and paid into your account within three working days.

 

Ok... All I have to do is fill in two forms and I will get £75. It's the 'Information Disclosure' and 'Consent to Share Information' forms. I thought for £75 I would in fact sign them knowing that they have no idea where i'm working and how to get hold of any possible employer i may have.

 

However our idea of "all we need" and their's is two different things because filling out the two forms I dont want to fill out will not get me any much needed help getting back into employment! The letter goes on:

 

The only additional information we would need would be name, address and contact details of your employer

 

given that (in my advisers words) 99% of people have already signed those forms (later he went on to say on tape I was the only person he knew in all his experience who had ever not signed them) they are in fact offering £75 for the contact details of your next employer not for the signing of the two forms.

 

So i'm in a position now where I will lose the much needed help I was teased with today because I will not give that information away. More concerning is that should I decide to employ somebody in the coming weeks, months and years my personal information, contact details etc will be compromised should I employ somebody who is on a work programme. This is due to them been paid (or punished with financial help restricted if they refuse) to give my contact details (as their employer) away against my will!

 

Anyway any aspirations of sustaining employment are dying quickly. What Ingeus said I would get when I started work in regards to financial help and the reality are very different. The reality is Ingeus were telling me I would get payments that later I have been informed by letter I will not get.

 

I was told I would get £200 back to work bonus. Ended up been £100.

 

I was told I would get Housing benefit run on. Letter here saying that is not the case (i'm thinking because although on JSA for more than 12 months I have only been on Housing Benefit for 7 months... I need to look into this).

 

I was told there would additional financial help when I got into work. Yup that has been determined to be conditional in today's letter. Conditions I cannot meet so no help there either.

 

Laughably, into this calculation, my advisor told me that it is common for people to ask their new employers for their wages in advance if they need help to get them into the employment. Although I'm sure this may happen once or twice here and there any major employer or company is just going to laugh at you if you was to ask this and my thinking is this is not going to give the best impression to your new employer. However, far be it for me, to question the advice of Ingeus.

 

Needless to say 'Jimmy Hoffa Allowance' was not included in my back of envelope budget calculation to see if I could survive on what I would receive from the work I would undertake and the financial help I was told to expect.

 

Also I had hoped the DWP would square up with me to but sadly they are still holding a £130 payment from April. Please can I have it? (This was withheld from me as punishment for not giving 'working bank details' even though I had!!! The DWP were too lazy to look up which two letters needed inserting in before my account number)

 

So that's where I am now. Struggling because I Have received about 1/4 of the financial support I was told to expect.

 

THANKS!! SEE YOU SOON INGEUS!!!

[YorkyLad]

I wonder if the £75 is still payable if you went self employed?

 

If you told them you were self-employed you'd need to provide, at the very least, your VAT number for them to check i think. You'd have signed (in order to get the £75) for the provider to be able to communicate with bodies about your earnings etc for the next two years. Very intrusive I think.

[YorkyLad]

I'm back at Analingus... They've ****ed me off big time today.

 

First Appointment back..... Missed by my advisor about two weeks ago

 

Then today, the 9th, I receive a letter in a franked envelope (so had to posted the day stated, the 6th) for my next appointment on the 8th!!! Yesterday! But listen to this... despite the envelope been franked for the 6th the letter itself was dated the 2nd!!

 

WTF?!?!

 

One of two things have happened

 

1. The letter was printed out on the 2nd and has sat on someone 's desk until the 6th

 

or

 

2. The letter has been printed out after that date (I suspect the 5th or 6th) with a fraudulent date attached.

 

It's a laughable attempt at trying to get me sanctioned either way.

 

NO CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE IS GOING TO BULLY ME! IDIOTS!!

[YorkyLad]

I think Bizzaro's post is really saddening. As clients of the company i'm sure i speak for everyone in that we want staff like him to be employed. Someone who is driven to achieve results but not to his clients detriment. Unfortunetly looking at it from Analingus' prospective though I imagine someone with common sense and scoring high emotional intelligence is probably not welcome. A caring person is not going to achieve the same results (on paper.... bullsh*t manipulated results that do not reflect the true picture) as one of the idiots.

 

Does anyone know if someone is pushed into work that they cant do and as a result leave after a period of time...then return to Analingus.... and then the process is repeated a second time...

 

Have Analingus managed to secure TWO job placements and secure payment for each?

 

and to answer your question Gil_Jnr

 

if Disingenous contact me to offer a similar 'bribe' to sign the forms once have signed off, what's to stop anyone from signing their forms with their own name, address, and phone number as 'self-employed' details and taking the money as soon as it hits their account, and then sending the DWP and prime provider a full withdrawal of DPA consent letter?

 

the question should be: why the hell are people signing the forms in the first place at the start if later you are paid £75 if you haven't?

 

There's nothing to stop someone from doing that. It's just personally I will not. I do not trust them with my data at all.

[YorkyLad]

and for the record: letter received here from them today for me... letter dated 8th (thats a date before i actually received the last letter lol) posted in a franked envelope dated 9th for an appointment on the 16th. In order this time.

[YorkyLad]

"If they're willing to offer £75, then why not try and and negotiate upwards and demand a bigger sum?"

 

In my opinion it's an illegal payment. It's a dangling carrot that they are offering to persuade you to co-operate with them in breaking the law. Do they ask if your employer has given his consent to give their data? Do they care? Do they heckers!

 

If i was to start a thread on CAD offering to pay people £75 for peoples contact details. How long would it last before the admin (very rightly) removed it? There is no difference at all.

 

In regards to whether people should be signing the data waiver forms. I'd say: Do what you want just remember that if freedom isn't excersised it's lost.

[YorkyLad]

I went for my next interview. No help. It last barely lasted five minutes. I was asked to give details of my employer during December/Jan and I said no.

 

I was then told to come back in a weeks time with my job search history thing filled in. I offered either a document baring the true reflection of job search minus the contact details or alternatively the bastardised version showing job point/ingeus jobs. I was asked to come back to show the bastardised version. No interest in seeing anything real and genuine. Crazy.

[YorkyLad]

They should have ALL their Books investigated

 

Anal examinations all round I say

 

Article here regarding the recent NAO (National Audit Office) report says the programme is wide-open to abuse http://www.feweek.co.uk/2012/01/24/work-programme-at-risk-of-fraud-and-under-delivery-say-nao/

 

Over inflated figures regarding the provider's capability that can't be achieved are going to mean the providers may feel the need to falsify things in order to just stay afloat as a business. The figures we hear of what they are going to get are based on the DWP's projected figure of 40% over 25's helped back into work by the work programme. The reality is they will probably get a fraction of what is the millions quoted and probably incur, one can hope, country-wide bankruptcy and failure.

 

The NAO says that currently they can do whatever they want

 

The Work Programme, introduced by government to try and tackle rising unemployment in June 2011, is currently operating without the IT systems needed to prevent fraud and administrative errors, the report added

 

Administrative errors like sending me letters after the appointment, the advisor's not turning up for more appointments than me and then saying my attendance is 'sporadic'

 

Administrative errors like the former Analingus employee with 44 designer handbags

 

or administrative errors that the Analingus staff do when they trolling forums like here: http://tomcat4.prospects.ac.uk:8080/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2734

 

he/she says:

I am appalled at the misinformation being legitimised here! I went for the assessment day in July 2009

 

and then

I have worked for them now since July 2008

 

Interesting when considering whats said (without proof) in the second post about the possibility of these provider's been able to claim something for folks who attend their job fairs/work-shops with a view to becoming Analingus employees.

[YorkyLad]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/feb/22/a4e-repay-irregularities?newsfeed=true

 

A4E have had to pay back money to the DWP several times now following 'irregularities'

 

I do not understand how we as clients can be forced to attend. If there was an airline company that falsified its documentation I wouldnt be blamed for not wanting to fly with them. A world where i'm forced to fly with them is a crazy frightening one. I see no difference.

 

I DO NOT WANT TO FLY WITH ANALINGUS AIR

[YorkyLad]

[YorkyLad]

excellent spot Silver Surfer

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/feb/22/a4e-compelled-jobseekers-unpaid-offices?newsfeed=true

 

The company at the centre of a police investigation into an alleged abuse of government back-to-work contracts compelled jobseekers to work unpaid in its own offices for at least a month at a time, the Guardian can reveal.

 

and...

 

Those on benefits were, in effect, forced to work for free for the company or have their benefits stripped.

 

Jeez!

[YorkyLad]

small correction to one of my previous rants. It was 22 handbags not 44 as I stated, sorry.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2004722/Treasury-assistant-stole-70-000-bosses-buy-22-designer-handbags-jailed.html

 

£70,000 does not equal 44 handbags. Dont know what I was thinking.

[YorkyLad]

I had left the job point reference numbers on but removed the contact details when copying my jobcentre job search diary onto my Analingus job search s****t.

 

BUT

 

It was said.... and they know I have not signed the permission to contact form (I'm the only person in the world in living history according to them)... that they would happily use the reference number to find the details to call them to check if I'd applied and/or "follow up for me"

 

WTF?!

 

I DO NOT WANT THIS

[YorkyLad]

Cheers for the advice. Unfortunately work programme staff wield imaginary powers and 'government mandated' authority they dont really have and I fully expect at any given time a breach will/would be made. Given my advisor's admission that she intends to breach the data protection act it might be wise for me to 'protect' her and not include any details. I dont believe, based on what Analingus have told me, that they have the system in place to identify those who have signed data waivers and those who haven't.

 

Furthermore it seems the same can be said about DWP! I was nothing short of gobsmacked that the jobcenter had informed Analingus that I'd been self employed for the period of December/January.

 

I'd pointed out in my last interview with my work programme advisor that the law had been misrepresented in my first interview and that despite not having given my phone number and email address to Analingus I was still a free man.

 

My advisor was not amused:

 

"I can ring the job centre and get your information any time I want! Your phone number or your email address! You didn't want to give us your new address so I rung them and got it"

 

I cant remember how it was worded but she went on to say that she'd been told by DWP I'd been 'self-employed' for the period of December/January. I could tell though by the amount of spit been ejected at this point that this information was obviously given 'off the record' and was not the proof needed for Analingus to secure the money as a result of (them doing nothing towards) me getting that job.

[YorkyLad]

A doubt has arisen over Yorkylad's claim for JSA

 

The DWP have been told that on 02/02/12 Yorkylad was notified to attend a mandatory work programme related appointment on 08/02/12 but Yorkylad failed to do so.

 

LETTERGATE!

 

Explained the situation to the DWP.... "that sounds about right" the response.

 

Bottom line: Misleading and false information provided to the DWP by Analingus with no attempt to rectify the mistake after it was pointed out to them more than two weeks ago.

[YorkyLad]

Interesting....

 

My 'advisor' when pinged backed from today's readnotify has me named as them

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcG47CpsU6c ?

 

IT'S MADE MANDATORY I MEET WITH THESE PEOPLE AND IT SCARES ME

Edited March 3, 2012 by YorkyLad
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vcG47CpsU6c ?

[YorkyLad]

Hiya Flumps, This is my understanding too. Ingeus, in this instance, has provided misleading and false information to the DWP and when the matter was brought up no attempt by Ingeus to rectify this provision of false data was made. This in my eyes is much worse than the initial anomaly/administrative error because there was opportunity to rectify it.

 

I do not blame DWP or JC for acting on what was bad information. We are, sadly, in a position where larger amounts of trust are placed (misplaced) onto these work providers who we should expect are providing accurate data about us. Furthermore, should it come to light they have provided wrong information they should attempt to change that provision of bad information.

 

No attempt was made

 

and I'm sure you dont have your clients named as 'them' that's naughty

[YorkyLad]

@Masso, I agree with Bakatcha. Given the choice of not receiving their bonus or been sly and misrepresenting who they are or what their 'authority' is... they'd choose the later. If my advisor was happy enough to lie to me telling me I was legally obliged to surrender my phone number and email address then I presume too they'd be happy enough to lie to my future employer and possibly bully them into giving data.

 

I've been trying to sort 'Letter-Gate' out here but it's hard work. Emails from my 'advisor' bare no correct dates in regards to the problem and it seems to be impossible for them to understand that my grievance is their seeming incapability to use the term 'notify' correctly.

 

Hi ****, given that we're addressing an issue of inaccuracy I think everyone would be better served if the correct dates were presented.

 

The date on the letter is in no way an indication of what day the letter was printed out and irrespective of this I still fail to understand why printing a letter out is classified as notifying an Ingeus client. The notification can only occur once the client has received the letter. It is impossible for the client to be notified before the letter has been posted as you've told the DWP.

 

Just to make this extra clear for you: you have told the DWP I was notified on the 2/2/12

 

This is 7 days before I was actually notified and one day after the appointment for which I was supposedly been 'notified'

 

A further inquiry I have: why do you my name entered with my email as 'them'? I'm not sure I like been referred to in the collective and I dont think it creates an exceptionally great image for Ingeus that my 'advisor' has an 'us and them' philosophy.

 

YORKYLAD (THEM)

 

I can't wait for the response about the 'them' issue. I think this inquiry might be 'overlooked'

[YorkyLad]

It says on the little booklet you complete to sign off that you don't have to complete this information.

 

So don't!

 

Raven's right. There are 4 parts to the 'stopping your claim section' and its prefixed with You do not have to provide the information we ask for in parts 1-4 below

 

However I've always completed part 4. which is necessary if you're want to claim benefit for 'an advance period' (anytime after the day you have last signed)

 

If you sign for the last time on the 1st of a month and your job starts on the 13th of the month then you'll lose 13 days JSA and Housing/Council Tax if you don't complete part 4

 

Next Time myself i'll complete Part 3 too. Which is 'stopping your claim for any other reason' (thus implying not full time work or education)

 

Bakatcha's recommendation of 'My circumstances have changed' is the best thing to stick into that!

[YorkyLad]

from wiki:

In 2002 the company was rebranded as Ingeus to reflect the spirit of human ingenuity

 

I think 'the spirit of human ingenuity' was indeed reflected.... but they should have looked to absorb it.

[YorkyLad]

typing in Ingeus here: http://www.ico.gov.uk/ESDWebPages/DoSearch.asp gives you their data control terms

 

I notice under 'purpose 2' of their reasons for holding data is listed as for "Advertising, Marketing & Public Relations" and one of the parties they are permitted to disclose or acquire data about you are "Traders in personal data"

 

So, in order to improve their PR they are permitted to trade our data??

[YorkyLad]

purpose 5

 

Data subjects are:

 

Staff including volunteers, agents, temporary and casual workers

Customers and clients

Suppliers

Members or supporters

Complainants, correspondents and enquirers

Relatives, guardians and associates of the data subject

Advisers, consultants and other professional experts

Students and pupils

Offenders and suspected offenders

 

Data classes are:

 

Personal Details

Family, Lifestyle and Social Circumstances

Racial or Ethnic Origin

Political Opinions

Religious or Other Beliefs Of A Similar Nature

Trade Union Membership

Physical or Mental Health or Condition

Sexual Life

Offences (Including Alleged Offences)

 

Sexual life????

[YorkyLad]

This clears up any ambiguity regarding the changes of name http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/ingeus-uk

 

Previous Company Names

WORKDIRECTIONS UK LIMITED

Changed 27 Aug 09

 

WORKDIRECTIONS LIMITED

Changed 24 Sep 02

 

STOLI LIMITED

Changed 11 Mar 02

 

Here is the same page for A4e http://www.companiesintheuk.co.uk/ltd/a4e

 

I think most notably on that page it shows A4e have managed to record 10 billion pounds worth of transactions with the DWP

 

(Source: Company House)