Forum Home → Discussion → Disability benefits → Thread
Who do I complain to as a representative about poor service from the PIP appeals team?
When I decided to complain about the unreasonable delays and obstruction I experienced in trying to get the papers for a PIP appeal last March, I found that the online complaint routes all make the assumption that the complainant is the claimant. I rang the PIP helpline, told them I wanted to complain as a rep and was given the address “PIP5, Post Handling Site B, Wolverhampton, WV99 1AB”. My complaint sent to this address was ignored. Two months later, I sent another letter, enclosing a copy of the original complaint, and requesting a copy of the DWP’s complaints procedure. This too received was ignored. Does anyone have any suggestions as to how I might get a response to my complaint/an escalation route I can use?
MPs are usually good for this sort of thing.
Thanks, I’ll give it a try. I’m sure I would have thought of that if it had been a client with a complaint!
Try emailing .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) Two things happen:
1 - there’s an audit trail and they seem to monitor whether those to whom they pass it on have done something.
2 - they always find the right office.
That said, what’s your end game here? What are you looking to gain?
MPs are usually good for this sort of thing.
Shame that there aren’t any!
Not used an MP in 30 odd years. I can occasionally imagine scenarios where I might or ought but by and large it strikes me as
- asking someone with authority to delegate it to their caseworker
- who will rarely have the knowledge
- in order to write a letter to someone at DWP
- who can literally tell them anything
- and the caseworker/MP will be none the wiser as to the accuracy of what they’ve been told.
Of course there are exceptions to the above but who wants to spend the time finding that out? I can think of more focused ways of proceeding.
The Organ Grinder
https://www.gov.uk/government/people/therese-coffey
Caxton House, Tothill St, Westminster, London SW1H 9NA
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Carltona principle
A principle that permits civil servants to act as the Secretary of State. The principle was recognised by the courts in Carltona v Commissioner of Works [1943] 2 All ER 560.
... if the statute confers a power on a minister, and it is then delegated to a civil servant of sufficient seniority, the principle of ministerial responsibility maintains that the minister is still responsible for the acts of the civil servant. The civil servant is treated as the minister’s alter ego, and therefore any decisions are seen as those of the minister too. In that sense, there is not really a delegation of power, but rather devolution of power.
In other words complain to them in the first person as it’s their failure, they own it (not the DWP.)
MPs are usually good for this sort of thing.
Shame that there aren’t any!
Then I must be imagining the several referrals I have received from one local MP since Parliament was dissolved…...
Not used an MP in 30 odd years. I can occasionally imagine scenarios where I might or ought but by and large it strikes me as
- asking someone with authority to delegate it to their caseworker
- who will rarely have the knowledge
- in order to write a letter to someone at DWP
- who can literally tell them anything
- and the caseworker/MP will be none the wiser as to the accuracy of what they’ve been told.Of course there are exceptions to the above but who wants to spend the time finding that out? I can think of more focused ways of proceeding.
We have built up a very good working relationship with our local MP who has exceptional knowledge of the benefits system. In my previous role as a caseworker I did have the knowledge but was well aware others didn’t. Therefore its the responsibility of the worker to outline the complaint so that it can be taken up. At the end ot the day caseworkers have to deal with many other types of cases not just benefits so bear that in mind. However I would say get to know your MPs office they are a valuable resource
As I said, there are exceptions, but nowadays they are increasingly exceptions. My further and personal observation though would be that in the past dealing with an MP meant dealing with a caseworker with considerable experience as you describe. However, for the most part, that’s no longer the case and that’s a comment very much rooted in dealing with multiple MPs over a long period and listening to claimants talking about their experiences both face to face and online. The pattern of “I’ve written. Here’s the answer. I don’t see that there’s anything else to be done.” is depressingly repetitive. An MPs caseworker would in the recent past have had three big things in their corner:
1 - they were not interns, volunteers, university students and/or young party members with enthusiasm but limited life experience.
2 - when the MP put their name to a letter to the DWP they did so in the expectation that the response usually addressed the issues raised and did so with no agenda or politicisation. That is no longer necessarily true.
3 - the two things above often now combine in a perfect storm of a nonsense response from the DWP which the MPs office take as an empirical truth until perhaps someone such as ourselves says “Hang on a moment, that’s…” and so on. So, at that point, who is doing the work? The MPs caseworker or a WRO advising the caseworker?
I’m not saying never use your MP. If it’s a known successful route then fine. Otherwise…
From experience I would suggest it depends very much on the MP and/or their constituency office team. For example:
One former local MP who was also PM for a period was extremely helpful in raising constituent’s benefits issues with DWP etc. In practice this was due to a very good and eager constituency office team. As long as they were provided with appropriate information they would obtain a response.
Another (current PM) was no help whatsoever with constituent’s issues and his office never responded to requests for help.
A third was SSWP for a period which was quite helpful!
If the MP / office is willing to take up constituents cases I would suggest it is worth developing a relationship with the MP/case worker. As they have a direct route to DWP official correspondence team they can often get a response very quickly. You will probably have to provide clear instructions on the issue and what you want DWP to do - whether the reply from DWP etc is helpful is, of course, another matter! But sometimes it what they don’t tell you that is helpful!
So I suppose in practice it’s ‘horses for courses’ depending on whether or not they are a good constituency MP.
Not to forget, of course, the social policy aspect of using MPs. To use the CitA model for example, a report to an MP by a constituent can be a threefold hit, particularly if a WRO is involved - hit 1: the client’s story “I’ve been affected by a PIP assessment which incorrectly recorded… etc”. Hit 2: the WRO: “we’ve got a client who is having an issue with their PIP assessment. They have gone through the complaints procedure but neither the DWP or Capita are accepting that there was an issue… Hit3: CitA produce a social policy report based on the green tops (all right I’m showing my age - that’s an e-bef, I think, in new money): “We’ve received a number of reports form our officers that there is a problem with PIP assessments… etc. This report lands on the desk of the MP (or more likely their assistant… “Ah. I think I had a constituent that was affected by this, so I have something useful to add to the debate…”
Okay that’s somewhat oversimplified but you get the picture.
I agree, from experience, that MPs are sometimes satisified by the first response but there are some who will take the issues up and this can lead to change. It’s a slow but satisfying process when that happens!