PIP Telephone Enquires by representatives

More of a rant than anything specific but it has become increasingly difficult to contact PIP by phone and get them to assist me.

In the past couple of weeks I’ve spoken to the call centre staff several times, all quoting difference and new rules to me on how they deal with the calls.

Is there any specific guidance other than ‘Working with representatives: guidance for DWP staff’? They don’t seem to follow half the guidance.  It’s so frustrating. My last 4 calls to DWP have been something of a joke.

1. Wouldn’t send the PA4 out to the client unless they were on the phone with me despite not asking for information, just the report to be sent to the client.
2. Wouldn’t deal with more than one client enquiry, said I would have to ring back (and hold another hour) for the 2nd clients request.
3. Wouldn’t issue me a bundle of documents for tribunal, because the client wasn’t on the line, despite me being listed as the representative and never getting a bundle.
4. Wouldn’t tell me information despite written authority being sent they said they would only do that if I was an appointee (?)

I never normally or have previously had issues with this.

All of these were sent written & signed authority with the case at some point, but they never seem to log it on their system. Is there a specific format or way to do this? I deal with most of my clients over phone and video call so I am not often with them, I am also unable to do 3 way calls via our phone provider at the moment.

I’m sure they used to be like a list of people they accepted as Representatives or something…maybe I’m just making that part up. (?)

Any advice, help, or support greatly appreciated.

The Apollo list is something their more confused (a relative term) call handlers periodically throw in when they yet again fail to understand the difference between the security questions for a claimant and the implied consent questions for a rep. It refers to a list of local authority staff, usually working in HB/their benefits team rather than us on the WR side. Been going on for decades and simply not a priority for them to fix.

Most often they deny knowledge of the guidance. Essentially because they do not appear to be trained on its existence. The focus is on security rather than enablement.

When you send consents in they get stored in a location which again is often not known or accessible to call handlers. It’s easier for them to come up with arcane nonsense than to say “I’m sorry. I work for G4S and I have no clue where that is.” It’s not especially hidden as I understand it but it may not be obvious.

It was some time ago now but I was advised their staff turnover was 100%. I can’t imagine that basic competence or quality is easy to achieve in those circumstances and thus this is what we get.

What would PIP have to do with 3? That’s one you’ll get more help on if you approach HMCTS and use rule 8 in extreme circumstances to force the issue. Mostly HMCTS get this sorted pretty quickly though.

The flip side of this is their putting a rep down as “appointee” in any case in which you have represented in an appeal - in consequence of which I continue to be copied into letters reminding clients to complete their review or renewal forms or letting me know the outcome of said reviews, when the last contact I had with said client was some four or five years ago, at the point the original appeal was allowed…..

Yes, I think a prior staff member did that for several clients and we have had various letters with reminders.

To get the bundle through the HMCTS do I email them? & what do I say?
Sorry I have never had to do this before.
It’s because we have become representatives after the appeal was submitted by someone else.

Email with an attached written consent form from the client should do the job.

You will need to advise that you have taken over as rep. from the previous one and - sadly you do have to be really explicit - they should remove the previous rep. from the case and note whatever contact details you choose to provide.

You’re then just asking them for a copy of the appeal papers to be sent to your work address and that, given the need to change rep, the case should not be listed until you advise HMCTS it is ready for listing.

They can disregard that last part. They have targets of their own to meet and the logic of listing certain appeals unnecessarily isn’t top of their list when the priority is just to get a backlog listed, but, it’s still worth saying in writing because if it does then get listed before you have appeal papers; have had a chance to assess the merits or perhaps prepare a submission etc. then you do at least have something to refer back to when asking for a postponement. Justice should of course be timely and quick but HMCTS list plenty of cases in these circumstances where it clearly isn’t logical to do so and yet it doesn’t stop it happening.

I’ve just had an email via the stakeholder forum to say that DWP picked up on this thread and would like to pass on the following message -

The issues within the thread have been escalated to our PIP Products team. A reminder has been included in the weekly update which will be issued across the PIP teams this week. They are also going to raise the issue at a senior leadership team meeting and ask to ensure that the message has been delivered and understood throughout the PIP telephony teams. If a representative is refused to progress their request under alternative enquiry, then we do advise that they ask to speak to a Team leader so the issue can hopefully be resolved on the call.

Just as a reminder too – if any of the advisors do have specific examples of where the telephony service has fallen short of what is expected, then if they provide us with the number that the call was made from and/or a date and time of the call we can listen to that specific call and provide feedback to the individual if they haven’t delivered the level of service we would expect.

If anyone has details of specific calls they want DWP to look into then please pass them on to me and I’ll feed them up.