Forum Home → Discussion → Universal credit administration → Thread
UC and consent to act on a clients behalf and client interaction.
In the beginning of December 2018, the North West will dip its toes into the festering cesspit of Universal Credit. The well documented failures, trials and tribulations, of this all encompassing one size fits all system of claiming is not a welcome prospect. Even though there will be a great deal of focus on the DWP, getting this rollout correct.
After attending a UC to LA handover session yesterday, I regrettably came away feeling unconvinced on a number of fronts, those being:
Consent to act on a clients behalf. The formal response was for the claimant to identify via the journal, who wanted to speak to them (either work coach or service centre) and on what specific grounds. Therefore discarding and abandoning the traditional use of written forms of consent.
What experiences do people have of this under UC ?
Also, as UC is media driven, what experiences do people have of clients (under the vulnerable descriptor) accessing the UC portal for the purpose of claiming and what experiences have been recorded with regard to potential claimants failing due to IT illiteracy or basic lack of understanding of what is expected of them ?
Finally, what are the views of the group on the PBS (personal budgeting sheet) being offered by DWP, via the network of grant funded advice and support agencies and LA’s. Particularly in the substance abuse arena, where a claimants view of priorities, may differ from reality ?
Apologies for such a lot of questions, but views, opinions and experiences, would be welcome.
In the beginning of December 2018, the North West will dip its toes into the festering cesspit of Universal Credit. The well documented failures, trials and tribulations, of this all encompassing one size fits all system of claiming is not a welcome prospect. Even though there will be a great deal of focus on the DWP, getting this rollout correct.
After attending a UC to LA handover session yesterday, I regrettably came away feeling unconvinced on a number of fronts, those being:
Consent to act on a clients behalf. The formal response was for the claimant to identify via the journal, who wanted to speak to them (either work coach or service centre) and on what specific grounds. Therefore discarding and abandoning the traditional use of written forms of consent.
What experiences do people have of this under UC ?
Also, as UC is media driven, what experiences do people have of clients (under the vulnerable descriptor) accessing the UC portal for the purpose of claiming and what experiences have been recorded with regard to potential claimants failing due to IT illiteracy or basic lack of understanding of what is expected of them ?
Finally, what are the views of the group on the PBS (personal budgeting sheet) being offered by DWP, via the network of grant funded advice and support agencies and LA’s. Particularly in the substance abuse arena, where a claimants view of priorities, may differ from reality ?
Apologies for such a lot of questions, but views, opinions and experiences, would be welcome.
All very valid questions Keith and, like you, we’re going full service from November. I had half hoped that all the experiences, both good and bad, would be easily accessible in one place, instead of having to reinvent the piggin wheel every-time.
At the DWP/LA/CAB meetings to ‘manage the intro of FSUC to Gods County we seem to be no further forward than when the flaming thing kicked off 5 yrs ago do we?
Sorry for the rant mate, off now to another ‘lets all worship at the shrine of UC’ meeting. if anything useful comes up I’ll let you know, but please don’t hold your breath!
[ Edited: 12 Sep 2018 at 03:34 pm by shawn mach ]
Hi Keith
These may be useful for you:
- https://www.nao.org.uk/report/rolling-out-universal-credit/
- https://gmwrag.wordpress.com/2018/06/26/universally-discredited-and-yet-still-in-need-of-a-consultation/
The NAO report includes a good section on Universal Support delivered locally and on demand on advice services (including scrapping of implicit consent).