forcing benefit applicants online

by odd means of links to other cases (I didn’t have a lot to do this afternoon!) i found this

http://www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKFTT/TC/2013/TC02910.html

and i warn you it’s VERY VERY long - 933 paragraphs

it’s actually a vat case, re HMRC’s compulsory online VAT return strategy, and was an appeal by various elderly/disabled/computer illiterate persons to challenge HMRC’s attempts to force them to use the online service.

one was computer illiterate and lived where there was no broadband

one was computer illiterate and disabled from using a computer

one had a computer and the internet, but his disabilities had reached the stage where he couldn’t use the computer effectively or at all.

there was another applicant, but it lost as its case wasn’t about that sort of discrimination.

the VAT tribunal decided that their human rights were breached…

doesn’t this have some application to benefits claimants with no internet ability for various reasons?  or has this been tried?

I will certainly be trying.

Interesting, thanks for this.

It looks like the outcome of that VAT case was consulted on:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/267997/Filing_of_VAT_Returns_-_Consultation_document.pdf

.. and then the regs amended to allow telephone filing by those “whom the Commissioners are satisfied that it is not reasonably practicable to make a return using an electronic return system (including any electronic return system that that person is authorised to use) for reasons of disability, age, remoteness of location or any other reason”:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/1497/made

The government’s defence to a challenge to UC being online would presumably include that, as outlined in the equalities impact assessment, alternative claiming routes have always been allowed:

“To mitigate the risk that some disabled people may not be able to make claims online, alternative access routes will be offered, predominantly by phone but also face to face for those who really need it. It is expected that these channels will be reserved for the minority who cannot use, or be helped to use, online services and therefore the use of alternative services will be kept to a minimum.”

I guess the real issue though, is not making the UC claim, it is maintaining the claim going forward by offline communications.

(This reminds me, the debtor bankruptcy application process has recently gone exclusively online. That is a little different to VAT filing or benefit claims, in that going bankrupt is not going to be a frequent requirement, and the system the online process replaced was not a paper form or telephone application, it was a rather onerous physical attendance at court. Still, I thought it interesting that when online bankruptcy was mooted, the EIA implicitly accepted that requiring online application could have an adverse/disproportionate effect on those with disabilities, and there should - initially at least - be made available a postable paper version of the application. This never happened.)