Appointeeship guidance withdrawn?

Hi all
We noticed that the guidance at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/procedures-for-dealing-with-agents-appointees-attorneys-deputies-and-third-parties was apparently withdrawn earlier this year. due to being out of date.

Can’t see that it has been replaced.

Anybody know anything more about this before I submit a FOI request?

Hadn’t noticed this and this guidance is something we regularly signpost our advisers to. I’ll ask a colleague if they can make further enquiries.

Not only that, but I was looking for a BF56 form on which to apply to become an appointee, and that appears to have been withdrawn as well.  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1095345/withdrawn-Appendix-01_An_example_of_form_BF56.pdf 

I fear that DWP are up to something, but haven’t been able to work out quite what.

Ruth_T - 13 December 2022 08:28 PM

Not only that, but I was looking for a BF56 form on which to apply to become an appointee, and that appears to have been withdrawn as well.  https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1095345/withdrawn-Appendix-01_An_example_of_form_BF56.pdf 

I fear that DWP are up to something, but haven’t been able to work out quite what.

They’ve made benefits so easy to manage that anyone can do it even if they’re in a persistent vegetative state?

I’ve asked our Dep team if they still have access to BF56s.

Have written to OSEF to see what they come back with.

OSEF reply as follows. I’ve gone back already to ask for the internal guidance to be shared and pointing out this isn’t about appointees as much as people acting with LPA’s and Deputy arrangements.

In reference to the Agents, appointees, attorneys, deputies and third parties: staff guide, this has been archived following internal activity to develop clear internal instructions for use by DWP colleagues. This ensures we are able to keep information up to date and accurate in a more timely manner. The document held on the Gov.uk page, although visible to all was primarily a ‘staff guide’ and unfortunately had not been kept up to date or maintained as internal processes changed.

This link Become an appointee for someone claiming benefits - GOV.UK (http://www.gov.uk) explains the correct application route (ie to contact the product line). The relevant product line would start the appointee process, which would involve the completion of a BF56 application. For example for personal appointees a visiting officer would bring the BF56 to complete during the visit.

Thanks Paul. That’s disappointing - I used the guidance quite often. Hope they follow up your suggestion. Forgive me if I’m a little cynical about their “clear internal instructions”.

Here’s hoping they finally make clear the difference between reps and appointees. 10 years late, mind…

The Gods love an optimist.

Yep thanks Paul. If you do get a reply I’d be interested to hear it.

I think the case which prompted me to look for this in the first place was one where the claimant had been subject to coercive control by the appointee. They wanted advice on how to resolve after their calls to PIP were immediately being knocked back with operators advising they could only talk to the appointee and not the claimant. Worth noting that the Gov.uk link shared by OSEF contains nothing to help a claimant in that situation.

Chased again and this is the follow-up response.

The Universal Credit programme uses modern agile ways of working where Universal Credit continuously learns to be able to iterate and identify improvements and develop both the digital and non-digital side of the service. The Universal Credit service is still in development with elements at various levels of maturity.

Universal Credit makes guidance publicly available by depositing papers in the House of Commons library twice a year, Deposited papers - UK Parliament. The latest deposited Universal Credit guidance, October 2022, Deposited paper DEP2022-0860 - Deposited papers - UK Parliament include the appointee guidance in place at that time.

So guidance that applied to all benefits, including State Pension and Pension Credit, has been withdrawn and we’re supposed to rely on a three page document hidden away in the House of Commons library? Honestly, this is so stupid and so annoying. Have written back again trying to express my frustration but doubt very much we’re going to make much headway here.

I’m probably being paranoid - but wondering if this has anything to do with UC refusing to provide an upload facility so our corporate appointee can upload bank statements showing increase in capital. And insisting it has to be posted or physically taken to the JC. We’ve never had a problem with it before so it’s more likely to be a UC bod being obstructive.

So the latest response is probably the most unhelpful yet. Basically stone walling it completely with no apparent desire to give any idea about what might be happening with this guidance.

The primary decision to completely remove the guidance recently was due to the inaccuracies of the guidance and conflicting information held on DWP intranet and gov.uk. With a root and branch review currently underway, we will be reviewing internal guidance fully however, at this point in time there has been no decision made about publicising these instructions on gov.uk.

In line with magical thinking am manifesting that this is because DWP don’t have a clue of what the difference is between reps/appointees/deputyships/LPAs and their policies and de facto policies are legal breaches ....that someone has now challenged. Hopefully through the courts rather than civil servants realising some things need to be aligned.

Same problems as listed by others but also notably LPAs are completely misunderstood to the point that it is impossible for the claimant to ever manage their own claim despite the law being crystal clear . Had a number of Kafkaesque situations - a couple escalated through complaints that resulted in quite generous compensation being offered which lends to my magical thinking as this is what you do when something screams ‘court case’ . Mind you was a couple of years back…

What has been confirmed a number of times that for PIP there is no tick box for LPA on the claim system so the guidance then varies as to where any LPA is noted.
So it goes under appointeeship. Or sometimes guardianship.

Have had many ‘customer support centre’ frontline staff and managers say that for LPA to be removed an application to court has to happen…...Even when the attorney has gone to the trouble of applying to the OPG to get a certificate saying they no longer hold the role and DWP has this ( and ofc then no idea what to do with it ! This may also be the case on other DWP systems- that they are not consistent and not compliant and new guidance is needed .
In meantime just adds to the complaints pile.

Maverick - 20 April 2023 09:15 AM

In line with magical thinking am manifesting that this is because DWP don’t have a clue of what the difference is between reps/appointees/deputyships/LPAs and their policies and de facto policies are legal breaches ....that someone has now challenged.

Yesterday I have seen a client with help of BSL interpreter. Because his Jobcentre has hardly ever provided BSL interpreter for his work coach appointments, my client took an acquittance (not even a close friend) to one of such appointments. My client does not read or write and only communicates via BSL.
Do you know what the work coach did?
They gave the “friend”  BF57 form…without any explanation besides saying that this would make it easier to communicate with the client.
When I explained to the client what that form was, he was horrified.

I will complain. My complain will go down big black hole where all DWP complaints go to die.

My oh my oh my…..Think would f/u with an ICO complaint because seems would be a breach. Well you’d hope so . ...