work focused interview and Ingeus

Hi there, this is more a moan than a request for help, though I’d be interested in any extra information anyone has.

My client has been invited to a work-focused interview, I assume as part of Pathways to Work (given that until the Work Programme and Work Choice programme proposed by the current government is in place, the existing scheme continues to operate?)  The whole process is run by Ingeus for DWP, and Ingeus have sent her a letter telling her to attend their office, or lose her benefits.

The moan is that none of the numbers on the letter work - they are all invalid! Luckily it wasn’t that hard to find the correct numbers on the internet, but even so, this shouldn’t happen.

I’ll be putting in a complaint on behalf of the client, of course.

Meanwhile, she needs to either have the interview waived or get it done at home, as she has rapidly deteriorating MS and can hardly get out of bed. Anyone got any advice on how to get interviews done at home? It is technically possible, I believe, if the visit to the office would cause undue inconvenience or endanger her health, both of which arguably apply, but we’ve never had any success in the past. They always end up waiving them eventually, but causing the client huge amounts of stress in the meantime. She’s perfectly willing to take part if they make it physically possible, despite it being clear that work is not feasible for her.

I’m assuming that your client is claiming ESA rather than IB, and has not been placed in the support group.

For ESA there is no provision for a WFI to be waived (exempted altogether).  There is only provision under ESA Regs reg 59 for a WFI to be deferred, or treated as deferred.  This may happen when either a WFI would not assist the claimant, or would not be appropriate in the circumstances.  Reg 59 states that when a WFI is deferred then an interview at a different time MUST be arranged.

Round here Pathways is contracted to A4e and I believe they have always offered home visits if required. The DDA (or Equality Act from next months) obliges a service provider to make reasonable adjustments in how they operate their business, so home visit it is!

Very good point Steve! I will mention that in my letter.

She is actually an IB, not an ESA claimant. As such, I believe that in fact she should not be getting invited to WFIs, because she is not a ‘relevant claimant’ - due to the fact that she is exempt from the PCA. She’s on highest rate care component of DLA, and even were that not the case, she also has a severe and progressive neurological disease. See SS(IBWFI) Regs, and then SS(IFW) Regs.

When I said in my previous post that they’ve waived them in the past, what actually happens is that they withdraw the requirement, then just invite her again next time round, ie they do not defer that interview to another time, but neither do they stop inviting her to future interviews which would happen even if she had attended the first one. The call to interview has been happening on roughly a yearly basis. I accept that unless she is an exempt person (see above), then technically only deferral ought to be possible. My belief is that she is an exempt person, but would welcome comments on that!

However, even if there is a loophole which means she should be exempt, I don’t suppose that loophole will be around for long. I will be trying it for now, but I do also want to mention Steve’s argument, as this client is continually frustrated by the DWP’s refusal to engage with her needs as a disabled person.

There is some useful information on this link about the new Equality Act, but of course the old DDA would also apply to the provider.  I think the reason a lot of the DDA stuff is ignored is that the majority of people do not follow up on claims, so there is little high profile coverage to worry providers.

  http://equalities.gov.uk/equality_act_2010/equality_act_2010_what_do_i_n.aspx

I haven’t checked the regs, but I would agree that she should be exempt from Pathways to Work etc if she’s exempt from the PCA

The rules for IB claimants are not the same as for ESA.  IB claimants come under the provisions of the Social Security (Incapacity Benefit Work-focused Interviews) Regulations 2003 SI 2003/2439.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2003/2439/pdfs/uksi_20032439_en.pdf

In general there are no exemptions from the requirement to participate in WFIs, even for claimants who are exempt from the PCA.  Provisions under reg 6(1)  allow for an interview to be waived altogether if it is thought that an interview would either not assist the claimant or would be inappropriate.  Reg 7(1) provides for interviews to be deferred (put off to another date) .

However, decisions to either waive or defer are made by “an officer” ie a DWP employee, and not by contractors who make recommendtaions to the DWP.

Hi - thanks for the link Steve. I got some info yesterday that suggested (and I agree) that if it’s an ongoing act of discrimination you should refer to both old and new law, although since I’ll be writing the letter before 1st Oct, DDA should suffice.

Ruth, I’m not sure about that. Aren’t the 2003 regs revoked by the 2008 regs? And in the 2008 regs, the definition of relevant claimant I think excludes my client.

I just checked it looks to me like Reg 3 (5) of The Incapacity Benefit (Work Focussed Interviews) 2008 means that she’s not a relevant person for WFI’s if she’s exempt under reg 10 of the Incapacity for Work regs 1995.

Reg 10’s exemptions includes high rate care DLA

or am I reading this wrongly?

PS Social Security (incapacity Benefit Work Focused Interviews) Regulations 2008 SI 2928. See reg 3 of these regs - I think para 5 applies.

Yes, sorry, our posts crossed, but that is exactly what I think too. Thanks!

Ooops.  Rhadwen:  thank you for putting me right so politely.

Ruth

It’s very difficult to see what’s going on especially as CPAG online (dunno if you use this) still has the 2003 regs up.  Btw Ruth, your info re ESA earlier was useful for other clients I have.  I’m hoping this particular client would get put in the support group when she is transferred. It’s a lot less likely for some of my other clients though. And I also have a lot of clients on ESA already of course.