Snooping by local government

[Slatted]

Flumps, I am not sure if there is a culture of how staff are taught about how they deliver and approach the information and requests etc...it can make a huge difference believe me.

 

Are staff not able to show they realise that what they are saying may be hard to hear or whatever? It is just that being so desparate for money and answers etc and having listened to that c...p music for what can sometimes be half an hour (and knowing how much that costs when you have no money already!) being told what we hear HOW we hear it can make us feel even worse. Or having someone going through our bank statements feels really personal...

 

So no empathic comments are encouraged? If so that is a shame....

 

It is not as if I personally do not have empathy or sympathy for those with whom I deal. I can only imagine how the people in your position feel having to take the language etc but sometimes it is so hard to be knocked back so often and get the run around etc

 

Not all staff seem as invested in their job as others and I think that is noticeable...if not understandable..

 

I also think that how the posts may read on threads can be seen as much a criticism on how the whole ethos comes across as it is meant to say about individuals or groups.

 

It is unfortunately human nature that good is not recognised or comment on as much as the negative...

[Slatted]

Don't know what happened there...was trying to edit but seems to have gone awry:lol:

[sallypotter]

Benidorm,

 

you just don't understand.

 

If you receive ESA income related you receive full hb/ctb no matter if you only receive ESA of £10 a week.

 

If people are not talking facts please don't respond as it is facts, legal issues that my cousin wants not opinions which are just that OPINIONS.

 

To people that are supportive and have given facts,

 

Thank you as always

[debt4get]

i am sorry sally that this thread has degenerated into a bit of a slanging match over this problem..however, the LA it would appear are allowed to look at bank statements and question expenditure.....i know when i applied they did this..and it does state on the form the information that they require in order to satisfy entitlement...we are all in agreement that this is not correct...but it is the system.....how to help your sister get over this problem, is going to be more difficult to answer....whilst we understand the anger that you feel...it may be worth asking them why they require this information, as they are putting a lot of stress on your sister...they have had all the statements...if they believe there is something wrong then get them to say what they think it is they are looking for? otherwise it is starting to look from your point of view as harassment....i wish you all the best

[sallypotter]

Amianne,

 

I have not been able to respond until now, was not ignoring your comments.

 

 

Mike and everyone else,

 

My cousin did provide the bank statements the day she received the letter requesting them so she is not refusing to comply with the request at all.

 

She is not trying to hide anything.

 

All she wants to know is whether the LA have a right to ask what she has spent her money on?

 

As people have agreed she fulfils the criteria for the hb/ctb, she has provided the bank statements as requested but now they want to know what she spent her inheritance on?

 

Are you saying the LA can ask any question they feel like.

 

We do not understand what bearing how she has spent her money on effects her hb/ctb?

 

That's all.

[sallypotter]

Mikey,

 

As i understand it you work for either DWP, LA or similar,

 

therefore could you please tell me what right the LA have to know what my cousin spent her money on?

 

Why do they have to know what the money was spent on?

 

Seriously, we don't seem to have an explanation as to the relevance of this?

[sallypotter]

Ah thanks debt4get,

 

My cousin went to see an advisor yesterday,

 

didn't get to the bottom of why the LA interested in her spending of the inheritance question though,

 

but she was advised to do just have you have suggested, so that looks like that may be the way forward.

 

Thank you for your advice

[debt4get]

glad she has taken some advise...it may be the best way forward at this point....take care and best wishes on getting this resolved...

[sallypotter]

Thank you,

 

Will update with any further developments.

[flumps1976]

Sally Potter as your cousin is claiming an income related benefit she is required to provide information requested to any of the departments that request it, whether it is the LA, DWP or HMRC.

Frustrating as it is these checks are required to be completed as per instructions from security and regional offices to help keep claims correct.

 

With regards to Slatted comments previously, I am "old school" and was employed when customer service courses were provided.

Personally I try my utmost to ensure that I am polite and courteous at all times, I have been both physically and verbally assaulted even held at knife point in one office so have seen the very best and worst of people.

I try to treat each person that I encounter witrh respect but some people have a natural personality that is harsh and robotic. These people can be encountered anywhere at any time and they genuinely don't realise how they come across, I currently work with someone who has a heart of gold but appears to be harsh and we frequently have to remind them that they need to think about their actions which is so unfortunate as nothing they say or do is intended to be how it appears.

 

We had a benefit processor that used to snipe at people during every contact until she did it to me the once and I told her straight that I didn't appreciate the way she spoke to me and to pass me to someone else who would speak in a civilised manner and I made a formal complaint about her too. She was monitered and her behaviour did improve then when her processing office closed she decided to leave rather than transfer office,

Monitoring is being used more and we have now had the official guidance that part of our job role is our behaviour to both our colleagues and customers. Some people in other offices are quite honestly very nervous but I will carry on as I am as never had any personal complaints as yet only frustration about the system which I cannot change alone

 

It is always the same wherever you go and although if I encounter bad customer service in a shop I am fortunate enough to have the option of taking my custom elsewhere we are aware that within the DWP it isn't an option to do that. Always take the name of the person you speak to and if you feel that their behaviour is not acceptable tohen you should complain to the customer service manager so it can be addressed.

[Guest amianne]

Mikey I used to be a Band B/AO visiting officer and my job role was to action the GMS scan and then go out to visit the pensioners to enquire about undeclared pensions and capital.

It was hard to do that as a lone female VO especially asking people outright if they had forgotten about the pension and obtaining the A42 to obtain consent to contact the pension companies/banks etc and then when the outcome came back I had to put the paperwork together to refer to overpayments to complete the calculation for the total they had to repay

That was probably the hardest job role I have ever had in my time at the DWP!

 

Slatted I wasn't really aiming my comments at you just as a general as this thread seemed to be going along the lines of the vast majority of the threads where it can be intrepeted in many ways but usually the under current is the DWP staff are incometent, nosey, lazy etc

Thaks for saying I'm one of the good ones I do try my best even if sometimes people don't like to hear whats posted :o

 

Hi I am interested in this. When these scans show up an undeclared source of capital and you go out to visit these pensioners, is it with the intention to of obtaining evidence in order to proceed with a prosecution or just the level of overpayment or both?

 

Where you obtain an admission that they had 'forgotten' about the £20,000 in a bank account, how normal is it for say a person over say 60 to be considered for a prosecution compared to a say 30 year old?

 

The only reason I ask is that I was under the impression that any act of 'hiding' capital, whether by design or intent is an absolute offence if benefit has been obtained on the strength of that failure.

 

Or are 60 year olds + less likely to be prosecuted which if correct is discrimination.

[sallypotter]

Yes, but what is to stop someone that works in one of these depts from acting outside of the scope of the necessary information required?

 

Your answer does not answer why if she meets the criteria for hb/ctb as she receives esa income related they have any legal right to ask what she spent her money on?

 

I'm sorry but if she meets the criteria she meets the criteria.

 

She's provided the bank statements.

 

What she spent the money on is asking questions for which there are no legitimate reason to do so.

 

Not that i can see anyway?

[sallypotter]

I might add that the woman that wrote my cousin the letters is a Benefit Investigation Officer, TECH IRRV. Might have got the qualification wrong.

 

It is not some general bod requesting the info.

 

She (my cousin) is to my mind being investigated for fraud. Not told her this don't want her getting more upset.

 

If so, don't know why they don't just call her in for an interview and ask her whatever they think she is up to.

 

She's not up to anything, she has mental health problems hence the ESA.

 

I think her treatment is absolutely outrageous and unnecessary.

 

They didn't even have to request the bank statements from her they could have done so without her even knowing.

[flumps1976]

I said I used to be a visiting officer and that role is now covered by the compliance section and now at the grade above me. Havent been on that role since 2005 so things my have changed also I am not part of JCP not the processing side of DWP so I really honestly cannot say how it is actioned now.

 

I don't work for the Local Authority either so I can't state the reasons why the would require this information but if someone is claiming and income related benefit they can have their circumstance checked as stated previously by DWP, Local Authority and HMRC, you could be highly unlucky and be reviewed by all 3 departments at the same time, as they are paying income realted benefits they have to ensure that the payments are being made correctly.

 

There are processes in place to ensure that people only access records because the have a legitimate business need to do so and there are random checks made within the DWP to ensure that this is followed, if you cannot show a legitimate reason for accessing records you are in serious trouble and it is the sane about requesting information, the request needs to be reasonable and within the scope of being able to complete the review only. If there are further questions raised and further information is required then it should only be a request to ensure that theenquiry can be completed and therefore you cannot juast ask because you are being nosey.

That is how it works with the WP and I can only imagine it is the same for the LA and HMRC.

[sallypotter]

Still don't understand the relevance of what someone spends their money on being the business of the LA when my cousin has met the criteria for hb/ctb.

 

I can understand questioning her incomings but her outgoings, now that really is none of their business.

 

She might as well give up her life, seems they own it anyway.

[Stan Lee]

Where you obtain an admission that they had 'forgotten' about the £20,000 in a bank account, how normal is it for say a person over say 60 to be considered for a prosecution compared to a say 30 year old? The only reason I ask is that I was under the impression that any act of 'hiding' capital, whether by design or intent is an absolute offence if benefit has been obtained on the strength of that failure. Or are 60 year olds + less likely to be prosecuted which if correct is discrimination.

 

My understanding is that pensioners are less likely to be prosecuted because it is not in the public interest to prosecute them, although this isn't a hard and fast rule and will depend on the severity of the offence. It will most likely be considered on a case by case basis (you can check the prosecution policy of local authorities -- you can always google to check).

[bio]

Stan Lee is correct, although the age can vary - but as I said before, you would be most surprised just how many pensioners do omit to fully declare all of their capital.

[Guest amianne]

I said I used to be a visiting officer and that role is now covered by the compliance section and now at the grade above me. Havent been on that role since 2005 so things my have changed also I am not part of JCP not the processing side of DWP so I really honestly cannot say how it is actioned now.

 

I don't work for the Local Authority either so I can't state the reasons why the would require this information but if someone is claiming and income related benefit they can have their circumstance checked as stated previously by DWP, Local Authority and HMRC, you could be highly unlucky and be reviewed by all 3 departments at the same time, as they are paying income realted benefits they have to ensure that the payments are being made correctly.

 

There are processes in place to ensure that people only access records because the have a legitimate business need to do so and there are random checks made within the DWP to ensure that this is followed, if you cannot show a legitimate reason for accessing records you are in serious trouble and it is the sane about requesting information, the request needs to be reasonable and within the scope of being able to complete the review only. If there are further questions raised and further information is required then it should only be a request to ensure that theenquiry can be completed and therefore you cannot juast ask because you are being nosey.

That is how it works with the WP and I can only imagine it is the same for the LA and HMRC.

 

Current workings within HMRC is new to me and cannot comment on them. But I can comment with authority within other departments, namely the Insolvency Service for one.

 

There is no restriction whatsoever on any examiner as to what or how he or she obtains information. They do not have to show any reasonabe reason to access anything. Yes they could be nosey, but time restraints and targets make that unusual.

Many investigations start with a 'feeling' - 'a 6th sense' and then a 'fishing expedition' to see where it goes.

[Guest amianne]

My understanding is that pensioners are less likely to be prosecuted because it is not in the public interest to prosecute them, although this isn't a hard and fast rule and will depend on the severity of the offence. It will most likely be considered on a case by case basis (you can check the prosecution policy of local authorities -- you can always google to check).

 

I have done, but there does not seem to be a rule or policy. I think a case by case basis should be adopted.

However I have heard said both outside and within the Civil Service, that anybody over 60 is less likely to be considered for prosecution compared to a person of say 30 who may have done the same exact thing.

 

In my opinion, this is the case but I do not agree with it whatsoever. I have found that those over 60 appear to be doddier than a 30 year old, but they are more wiley and tend to be more deceptive, always playing the age card if they think it will help them.

 

As for snooping, yes I believe it does go on, within and outside the rules. For some obscure reason it appears to me that the LA's are more prone to delving into matters than the DWP are. You have more of a chance of getting away with something if the LA isn't involved with a claim than you are with a claim being made for HB/CTB.

[Guest amianne]

Stan Lee is correct, although the age can vary - but as I said before, you would be most surprised just how many pensioners do omit to fully declare all of their capital.

 

Yes and you would not believe how many use the age card if they think it will help them!

[Dilizjo]

I have done, but there does not seem to be a rule or policy. I think a case by case basis should be adopted.

However I have heard said both outside and within the Civil Service, that anybody over 60 is less likely to be considered for prosecution compared to a person of say 30 who may have done the same exact thing.

 

In my opinion, this is the case but I do not agree with it whatsoever. I have found that those over 60 appear to be doddier than a 30 year old, but they are more wiley and tend to be more deceptive, always playing the age card if they think it will help them.

 

 

I am asking politely........ Please stop voicing biased views on here. I have seen you do it a few times and now twice to the elderly. One thing I like about these forums is the rule that nobody prejudges anyone and offer support where they can.

 

If you feel you cannot do this please don't bother posting.........

[Guest amianne]

I am asking politely........ Please stop voicing biased views on here. I have seen you do it a few times and now twice to the elderly. One thing I like about these forums is the rule that nobody prejudges anyone and offer support where they can.

 

If you feel you cannot do this please don't bother posting.........

 

For a start my views are not biased! My experience is backed up by personal knowledge. By actions I have carried out and by actions that other officers have carried out.

 

Besides which I am entitled to my opinion - whether you agree with it is not my concern.

 

My comments in that posting are fair and reasonable.

 

The elderly (those over 60) do play the age card when it would help them.

 

I have nothing against anyone, age, sex, religion or race. But I do not think it is right to say nothing on the off chance that it might upset someone that does not hold the same views as I do.

 

I do not pre-judge anyone, but I say as I find!

[sadone]

If we're not careful this site is going to turn into a mirror of MSE, and that imo would be a tragedy.

 

I am asking politely........ Please stop voicing biased views on here. I have seen you do it a few times and now twice to the elderly. One thing I like about these forums is the rule that nobody prejudges anyone and offer support where they can.

 

Ditto.

[sparky514]

Sally, why don't you contact your cousins MP and see if they can offer you any information and help with the problem. I hope it gets sorted soon if it is affecting your cousins health. X

[sallypotter]

Thank you Sparky,

 

Will see her over the weekend and find out how she wants to take things.