× Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit administration  →  Thread

Claimant commitment whilst handing in sick notes: 

DDP
forum member

The Terrence Higgins Trust

Send message

Total Posts: 102

Joined: 7 September 2010

Hi Everyone,

I was just wondering if someone could help. I have a lot of tenants at present who are in the full service area and are handing in sick notes in order to hopefully have the limited capability for work element as part of the UC payments.

The majority of my tenants are being told whilst they hand in the sick notes (Before being assessed) they are required to look for work.

I have looked everywhere to see if there are specific rules on this, but with no luck.

Is it the discretion of the work coach to decide whether they should be searching fro work?

Any replies would be greatly appreciated.

Regards

Craig

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1955

Joined: 12 October 2012

I think that Reg 99 UC Regs (4) and (5) disallows work search and work availability in this period, but does not rule out lesser conditionality.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/376/regulation/99/made

I’d be interested in what other people think as we are starting to get this now, and full service is still months away for us.

hkrishna
forum member

Welfare rights worker - CPAG in Scotland, Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 257

Joined: 17 June 2010

The legislation suspends work search and availability for two weeks only while claimant is sick. Beyond that it is at SSWP discretion (ie work coaches) if medical evidence provided. What DWP have been telling us is that they’d like work coaches to be using that discretion appropriately and want to hear about it if it appears they aren’t (use local partnership contacts and complaints procedures, and feed into our Early Warning System - http://www.cpag.org.uk/universal-credit). Cases we’ve been dealing with suggest mixed experience - some work coaches are using that discretion and turning off conditionality altogether but others aren’t. See examples cited in the ‘UC watch’ item here: http://www.cpag.org.uk/sites/default/files/uploads/CPAG-Scot-EWS-newsletter-July-2016.pdf. Also article in last WRB - http://www.cpag.org.uk/content/universal-credit-full-service-early-warning

[ Edited: 1 Feb 2017 at 11:55 am by hkrishna ]
DDP
forum member

The Terrence Higgins Trust

Send message

Total Posts: 102

Joined: 7 September 2010

Thanks for the replies. Yea I got the feeling it was discretion of the work coaches.

I think I will start writing letters for my tenants explaining their conditions and why they cant look for work and hope discretion can be used.

Lets just see how that goes.

Cheers

Jon (CANY)
forum member

Welfare benefits - Craven CAB, North Yorkshire

Send message

Total Posts: 1362

Joined: 16 June 2010

Is it different if you are also in the assessment phase of new-style c-ESA, and can therefore be treated as having LCW? Haven’t run into this in practice yet.

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1955

Joined: 12 October 2012

Ah, I can see that (5) is governed by the SoS finding it ‘unreasonable’ to require compliance. Is there perhaps something of a clash with the ‘must not’ in 1(a)?

hkrishna
forum member

Welfare rights worker - CPAG in Scotland, Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 257

Joined: 17 June 2010

Jon (CHDCA) - 01 February 2017 12:01 PM

Is it different if you are also in the assessment phase of new-style c-ESA, and can therefore be treated as having LCW? Haven’t run into this in practice yet.

Reg 39 only treats an UC claimant as having LCW if a ‘determination’ of LCW has been carried out for ESA, so this doesn’t cover a period where someone is just treated as having LCW until such time as a determination is made under reg 26 of the new style ESA regs.

hkrishna
forum member

Welfare rights worker - CPAG in Scotland, Glasgow

Send message

Total Posts: 257

Joined: 17 June 2010

Andrew Dutton - 01 February 2017 12:12 PM

Ah, I can see that (5) is governed by the SoS finding it ‘unreasonable’ to require compliance. Is there perhaps something of a clash with the ‘must not’ in 1(a)?

99(1)(a) doesn’t cover para 5 (amended by SI 2014/597 - same amendments means that that only suspends work search requirement and not work availability)

[ Edited: 1 Feb 2017 at 12:27 pm by hkrishna ]
Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1955

Joined: 12 October 2012

I’d like to pick this up again so I can get some things straight.

In the case I’m thinking of, the claimant has been handing in sick notes for over six months, suffers depression (an ‘invisible’ disability) and a physical disability which is, sadly, very visible and clearly painful. The claimant has also been awarded PIP.

I am told that WCA is under consideration but DWP cannot say when this will be done.

In the meantime, the claimant is subject to maximum conditionality. DWP have advised that the claimant ‘can discuss and review his UC conditionality with his work coach at any time.’

This seems to place the onus entirely upon the claimant. Given his state of mental health especially, he is very unlikely to initiate that discussion.

The work coach has before them the evidence of months’ worth of sick notes, the fact that PIP has been awarded, and the very obvious and painful physical condition of the claimant. What more is needed for them to consider some form of action to reduce conditionality and review the Claimant Commitment?

S14(2) of the Welfare Reform Act 2012 also allows the Claimant Commitment to be ‘reviewed and updated as the Secretary of State thinks fit’.  This opens the door to a claimant requesting a review, but there is no barrier to a work coach undertaking that review of their own motion, given the evidence of illness/disability before them.  This would be especially appropriate in cases where the claimant plainly requires support and is unlikely to make assertive suggestions about his/her own case.

I also cannot see that it is required for the claimant to say something (or anything) to the work coach before other protections are triggered, such as those in Reg 99.

[ Edited: 22 Jun 2017 at 10:28 am by Andrew Dutton ]
davidsmithp1000
forum member

Brighton Unemployed Centre Families Project

Send message

Total Posts: 195

Joined: 22 May 2016

hi. I’m not too good at reading regs; but can someone please explain what the qualitative difference is between old style ESA and UC in regard work search requirements and handing in sick notes? - what was the reasoning behind no search requirements for ESA while in assessment period, and why this has not been transferred to UC?

This probably ties into current discussions on migration from ESA to UC,