Bad UC FoH training?

Hi gang

linked to my other post but a discrete issue. I’ve just been told by a UC call handler that they can’t accept a recon request outside the one month time limit.

I twisted her arm and she’s sent it upstairs, but she was completely ignorant of the long stop deadline!

is this common?

‘Bad training’ casts it in a very generous light.

Yes, gatekeeping of MRs is widespread and has been for yonks.

Some or all of:
-i’ve checked the system and the calculation is correct so I don’t know what you want done about it.
-I’ll ask your case manager to ring you with an explanation of the decision.
-It’s a policy issue, so you can’t request an MR
-You aren’t providing any new evidence or information so there’s no point putting it forward to a DM
-You’re outside of the 28 day time limit so you can’t request an MR now.
-Your request is late and you don’t have any exceptional circumstances, so its not a valid request.

My policy is to do them in writing only.

Today, re a request for an MR of the failure to include the transitional Severe Disability element:

With regards to the severe disability premium I did check this with our technical team and they confirmed it would not be payable. i will have to speak to them again prior to referring for a mandatory reconsideration.

CA Adviser - 31 July 2023 04:23 PM

With regards to the severe disability premium I did check this with our technical team and they confirmed it would not be payable. i will have to speak to them again prior to referring for a mandatory reconsideration.

I’d just hit that with an SSCS1 arguing that it’s a decision with no requirement for MR. That’s worked a couple of times up here.

I somehow failed to plug the excellent CPAG “You reap what you code” report in my rant above, which deals with this sort of thing quite a bit.

https://cpag.org.uk/policy-and-campaigns/report/you-reap-what-you-code

Clearly DWP has a complete and utter lack of supervision of their work - down to the very basics of their case management. Presumably when something like this happens the call handler just selects “reason for customer call: random rant/nothing to report here”.
I.e. they either haven’t been taught how to use their systems, or they deliberately/on instruction neglect it, or the system isn’t designed for monitoring (the latter seems improbable, but nothing surprises me with DWP).

It’s not as if they have to provide a response when a client asks for a reconsideration. The call handler doesn’t have to understand any of it, all they have to do is log it!
Best case scenario: they are correct about a decision not being appealable, but in that case they’d still have to confirm that with someone who knows what they’re doing - and that would be more efficiently done with a review of their notes.

This is why I always do things in writing too: Provided the letter/email/journal note reaches its destination, it will definitely be accurately logged.

Although, I generally advise my client’s to chase by phone if it’s been more than x months - and a few of those calls do come back: “oh yeah, we’ve received that, but it doesn’t look like anyone has logged it”

Have had clients actively advised by UC that they’re already outside one month so that’s the end of the matter. Keeps happening.

Then again every written UC MR I’ve ever done has mysteriously gone awol.