× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit administration  →  Thread

UC phone access

 1 2 3 > 

ASH
forum member

Welfare officer - St Christopher's Hospice, SE London

Send message

Total Posts: 110

Joined: 16 June 2010

This is for full service UC.  Tried on Friday - gave up after 45 minutes.  Tried several times so far today.  Engaged tone each time once past the recorded message.  Patient too sick to sort online.  Any thoughts anyone.

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

Have you got the escalation telephone numbers, available from Daphne on here if not.

The service you have experienced from the helpline is shocking.  Anyone else experiencing a worse service from the Full Service helpline to the Live Service?  This bodes ill ......

ClairemHodgson
forum member

Solicitor, SC Law, Harrow

Send message

Total Posts: 1221

Joined: 13 April 2016

sounds like you need to start another wait time thread, as per the PIP etc ones…..

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

I’ve sent you the UC escalation numbers in a direct message Ash in case they can be of any help

ASH
forum member

Welfare officer - St Christopher's Hospice, SE London

Send message

Total Posts: 110

Joined: 16 June 2010

Thanks.  Got through this morning after 25 minutes.  Not allowed to use implicit consent .  This is really not acceptable for my clients.  They are very sick and I am mostly seeing them in a hospital bed or at home in their own beds.  Waiting half an hour plus for a phone to be answered (maybe) is a big deal either way.

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

ASH - 15 November 2016 10:55 AM

Thanks.  Got through this morning after 25 minutes.  Not allowed to use implicit consent .  This is really not acceptable for my clients.  They are very sick and I am mostly seeing them in a hospital bed or at home in their own beds.  Waiting half an hour plus for a phone to be answered (maybe) is a big deal either way.

Are you going to the OSEF in a couple of weeks? I’ve asked about implicit consent before at those meetings and the UC representatives aren’t really terribly interested in this situation it seems. The party line seems to be that a client must make the call and speak to a call handler and then pass the adviser over, which is clearly nonsense in all kinds of situations, let alone something as serious as the clients that you’re dealing with.

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

We very recently raised the issue of implicit consent and full Service UC with our local DWP Partnership Manager (who covers a district that includes Full Service areas) and the possibility that it would not apply. The response was:

“I had a quick word with our security lead yesterday and she said that what you indicated about Full Service sounds about right (although I will check this more thoroughly with my contacts) and in fact it sounds like it will help things from our perspective because at the moment consent forms etc. are not really helpful as they are not kept anywhere centrally and they can quickly get out of date whereas if we have the Full Service account noted with permissions/consent then although this will mean more work to get the claimant to have the case noted but once it happens then it will be easier to action afterwards (although again I need to check this).”

It remains unclear whether the claimant can give consent by phone or whether it must be done in writing (with the resulting obvious delay while it is recorded - or lost down the black hole in the Black Country).

That still leaves questions unanswered like:

- how long will the consent operate for?
- for what issues?
- what info. will DWP actually give to a rep. - will it be the same as under implicit consent or more limited?

I do get the impression that issues with telephome contact and the requirement for specific consent may change significantly the way many advisers have to work, at least on initial contact, with a UC client under Full Service and may delay the ability to take effective action on behalf of a client (particularly those who are vulnerable and cannot attend an advice centre etc).

ASH
forum member

Welfare officer - St Christopher's Hospice, SE London

Send message

Total Posts: 110

Joined: 16 June 2010

Is there somewhere we can send written consent and query letters?  I thought the only way is to upload it onto the claimant UC profile.  This means access to a scanner when you are with the client (not usually possible when you are seeing them at home or in hospital) or asking for their log in details which is not a good option . 

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

I will take these issues to operational stakeholders - will email them in advance of the meeting in a couple of weeks.

Just in the meantime Ash - can you photo the documents on your phone and then email/upload as appropriate - that’s what I often do when I don’t have access to a scanner

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

One suggestion for DWP to solve consent where it cannot be given by tel by client either due to rubbishness of phone service or medical issues but can or has been given via signed consent form. Provide customer reps with a secure email address to send in urgent situations.
The big question is, under the test and learn approach why hasn’t this issue of consent been tested and learned from in full service areas?

[ Edited: 16 Nov 2016 at 05:57 pm by SarahJBatty ]
ASH
forum member

Welfare officer - St Christopher's Hospice, SE London

Send message

Total Posts: 110

Joined: 16 June 2010

SarahJBatty - 15 November 2016 04:50 PM

One suggestion for DWP to solve consent where it cannot be given by tel by client either due to rubbishness of phone service or medical issues but can or has been given via signed consent form. Provide customer reps with a secure email address to send in urgent situations.

I vote for the above idea too. 

I guess - thinking about the UC policy bods -  it is difficult to imagine there are some people who are so unwell that signing a piece of paper is all they can manage but I can testify that this is the case.  And this may also be a problem for those acting for some people with mental health issues as well. 

Getting a consent form uploaded onto the client’s account still means that the client would have to log in on my device or take a photo of the consent on their own device to upload themselves.  But if this is the only possibility - can we check with the operational stakeholders that this will be acceptable with all the questions above on format and how long etc.

GWRS adviser
forum member

Welfare Rights Service, Greenwich Council, London

Send message

Total Posts: 211

Joined: 8 August 2012

Written consent is terrible for telephone advice services.  Implicit consent is surely a DWP wide policy regardless of UC or legacy benefit?

Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 3537

Joined: 14 March 2014

Owen Stevens - 16 November 2016 11:28 AM

Written consent is terrible for telephone advice services.  Implicit consent is surely a DWP wide policy regardless of UC or legacy benefit?

That’s what i said in my email to them Owen - and sent them a copy of their working with representatives document in case they didn’t know about it. I’m waiting to hear and will let you know when I hear anything.

Sarah and Ash - I have already asked them to identify a method which can be used to easily and reliably send in written consent - will see what they say…

[ Edited: 16 Nov 2016 at 01:10 pm by Daphne ]
GWRS adviser
forum member

Welfare Rights Service, Greenwich Council, London

Send message

Total Posts: 211

Joined: 8 August 2012

Excellent.  Given that UC escalation contact numbers are being circulated by DWP it would make very little sense if they were not to use implicit consent

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

Owen Stevens - 16 November 2016 11:28 AM

Written consent is terrible for telephone advice services.  Implicit consent is surely a DWP wide policy regardless of UC or legacy benefit?

Totally agree that Implicit Consent is the actual answer

ASH
forum member

Welfare officer - St Christopher's Hospice, SE London

Send message

Total Posts: 110

Joined: 16 June 2010

We need implicit consent and a way of presenting evidence (sick notes, ds1500, MR requests) without a log in.

Lee Forrest
forum member

Team leader of Financial and Social Inclusion - Karbon Homes, Newcastle

Send message

Total Posts: 92

Joined: 16 May 2011

Hello.

I don’t know if you’ve seen this more recent guide that deals with consent: ‘Universal Credit housing costs and disclosure: guide for landlords’ (refers to landlords/ representatives).

Pointedly states that ‘this guide is for claimants who do not maintain an online Universal Credit account.’

Lee

File Attachments

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

So how are you managing this in full service in Newcastle then Lee? What is happeningwhen advisers phone the helpline?

[ Edited: 18 Nov 2016 at 02:34 pm by SarahJBatty ]
Lee Forrest
forum member

Team leader of Financial and Social Inclusion - Karbon Homes, Newcastle

Send message

Total Posts: 92

Joined: 16 May 2011

Conference calling is the default position live or digital; it’s usually easier than trying to explain implicit consent, and we’ve had full service staff tell us that they’ve been explicitly advised not to discuss cases with anyone except the claimant (to the point of actually saying that they had been advised not to accept implicit consent)


Just had an interesting case where we’ve had to get the DWP manage the UC account of a severely disabled claimant in a full service area, though it wasn’t fun getting to that stage.

Lee Forrest
forum member

Team leader of Financial and Social Inclusion - Karbon Homes, Newcastle

Send message

Total Posts: 92

Joined: 16 May 2011

This just in from Nat Fed Gareth:

Full service issues
                                   
Associations operating in the full service area have recently expressed their concern about how it is working. They have reported it being very difficult to get responses to queries, and raised concerns about a lack of escalation for those cases where there are urgent issues. Payments have been reported to be delayed by up to eight weeks.
                                     
The full service is being run on agile project management principles, which means updates can be introduced every two weeks to change and improve the system. Currently, there are 40,000 claimants using the full service, which is around 0.5% of the total expected users when the service is fully rolled out. This allows for changes to be made while the service is relatively small. Because the full service involves transactional claimant accounts, there is a greater need for security, which means that the DWP cannot share the same level of information within the full digital service as it can within the live service.
                             
                       
The telephony service has also faced some criticism and has been removed from all but two service centres in Grimsby and Middlesbrough. This allows those staff to be dedicated to answering calls, and freeing staff in other service centres to process claims. Performance is expected to improve over the next four to six weeks as a result of this change. The DWP has asked associations to use email for non-essential communication.           
                       
There remain plans to introduce a landlord portal that will automate how landlords share information with the DWP. It is hoped that the first iteration will be in place by the end of 2017.         
                       

[ Edited: 18 Nov 2016 at 03:40 pm by Lee Forrest ]
SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

Thanks Lee.

I have just had this response to THE question

“there is no implicit Consent on Full Service as the Claimant can access there account and advise LA accordingly.  If the LA require further information they can support the claimant to request this via their account”

So the options so far where there is no access to the online account because adviser not with claimant / no internet connection etc are -
- Conference call adviser / customer / DWP (assumes you have the appropriate telephony facility)
- Customer phones separately to give explicit consent and then adviser phones when registered (this assumes customer can use/access phone)
- Use of email address if you are a social landlord and restrict to non-urgent issues (can this be used to send written consent??)
- Adviser uses escalation number and explains that UC helpline will not use implicit consent and it is an urgent issue

1964
forum member

Deputy Manager, Reading Community Welfare Rights Unit

Send message

Total Posts: 1711

Joined: 16 June 2010

It’s appalling on so many levels isn’t it?

I’m dreading the day we become a full service area and so are my colleagues.

Lee Forrest
forum member

Team leader of Financial and Social Inclusion - Karbon Homes, Newcastle

Send message

Total Posts: 92

Joined: 16 May 2011

SarahJBatty - 18 November 2016 02:33 PM

Thanks Lee.

I have just had this response to THE question

“there is no implicit Consent on Full Service as the Claimant can access there account and advise LA accordingly.  If the LA require further information they can support the claimant to request this via their account”

So the options so far where there is no access to the online account because adviser not with claimant / no internet connection etc are -
- Conference call adviser / customer / DWP (assumes you have the appropriate telephony facility)
- Customer phones separately to give explicit consent and then adviser phones when registered (this assumes customer can use/access phone)
- Use of email address if you are a social landlord and restrict to non-urgent issues (can this be used to send written consent??)
- Adviser uses escalation number and explains that UC helpline will not use implicit consent and it is an urgent issue

The claimant could upload a consent form to their account, too. One of the team says they’ve been able to get explicit consent this way.

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

Upload a consent form .... assumes the person is able to scan/photograph and upload. 
Can they write on their ‘journal’ that they authorise adviser?

SarahJBatty
forum member

Money Adviser, Thirteen, Middlesbrough

Send message

Total Posts: 345

Joined: 12 July 2012

1964 - 18 November 2016 02:38 PM

It’s appalling on so many levels isn’t it?]

Yep.  I have just listed to a manager about 27 scenarios involving vulnerable and non-vulnerable people in which the current situation is totally unacceptable ....

Alice SF
forum member

Welfare Benefit & Debt Advisor, Hounslow Foodbank Project, Staying First London

Send message

Total Posts: 43

Joined: 13 March 2012

Just had my first refusal for implicit consent for a full service claimant.  The officer advised that this is just for full digital service claims and includes both advisors and landlord as they also do not use the apollo system.

I’ve also raised it with our local DWP partnership manager and asked him to highlight the issue on a regional if not national level within the DWP.

In the meantime, I’m glad I found this thread as I will email my client our authority form to upload onto his account.  Just relieved that he is one of my more IT literate clients and will know what to do.

Alice SF
forum member

Welfare Benefit & Debt Advisor, Hounslow Foodbank Project, Staying First London

Send message

Total Posts: 43

Joined: 13 March 2012

Partnership Manager replied and another partner only yesterday reported to him the same issue.  He has a team meeting with a rep from the UC planning team and will raise it with them.

Peter Turville
forum member

Welfare rights worker - Oxford Community Work Agency

Send message

Total Posts: 1659

Joined: 18 June 2010

Alice SF - 24 November 2016 10:14 AM

Partnership Manager replied and another partner only yesterday reported to him the same issue.  He has a team meeting with a rep from the UC planning team and will raise it with them.

latest feed back we have received from local partnership team:

‘Done some more digging and I have found our advice on Explicit Consent regarding the Full Service and it does say that the person has to be present with the 3rd party and that implicit consent should not be used due to the fact that the claimant will have less need of it due to the access they have to their own account. I was wrong in my earlier email as I don’t think there is any facility for marking up the account with 3rd party details, it looks like the claimant being present is the only option available’.

So if the last sentence is correct I read that to mean there will be no facility for recording explicit consent to be used in the absence of the claimant i.e. no facility for the claimant to provide that consent either through their account or by some other method, like snailmail, that can be recorded by DWP and will allow telephone contact by an adviser without the claimant present on every occassion.

We don’t go full service until next Oct but agencies are now asking us how it will all work in practice. Its difficult to see how we would deliver a service to clients at a local level let alone county wide if that is really the case.

AngelaM
forum member

Staying First, Shepherds Bush Housing Group

Send message

Total Posts: 13

Joined: 1 September 2016

I wonder whether implicit consent would be allowed if the claimant is claiming under special rules?

Paul_Treloar_AgeUK
forum member

Information and advice resources - Age UK

Send message

Total Posts: 3196

Joined: 7 January 2016

AngelaM - 05 December 2016 01:06 PM

I wonder whether implicit consent would be allowed if the claimant is claiming under special rules?

The original post is from someone working in a hospice dealing with people with terminal illnesses. So no.

shawn mach
Administrator

rightsnet.org.uk

Send message

Total Posts: 3773

Joined: 14 April 2010

Raised with Neil Couling, Director General of Universal Credit Service, on Twitter

https://twitter.com/albar11111/status/806460951214100480