Anonymity

I doubt it. Assisted Digital just involves the powers that be inputting to the normal, wider system.

They can;t even deal with appointees never mind people who don’t want their details disclosed!

Dan Manville - 21 December 2017 12:10 PM

I doubt it. Assisted Digital just involves the powers that be inputting to the normal, wider system.

They can;t even deal with appointees never mind people who don’t want their details disclosed!

Thanks Dan, oh gawd!

i remember reading that the DWP has special provisions for e.g. transgender people, but that still requires front office staff knowing the person’s current name etc

and anyway, an NI number is essential and that gives identity.

ClairemHodgson - 21 December 2017 05:46 PM

i remember reading that the DWP has special provisions for e.g. transgender people, but that still requires front office staff knowing the person’s current name etc

and anyway, an NI number is essential and that gives identity.

Thanks Claire, i was thinking along the lines of the olden days where although the NI is a prequisite and nominated staff at the relevant office would know the person’s name, the claim would be clerical, so nothing on the computer system.

I don’t think there is any provision to go dark.

Witness Protection is covered by UC in the attached document

- claimants whom arrangements have been made for under section 82 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 for a period of up to 3 months (witness protection)

Then there is the case of R (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Feb)

https://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/clj-reporter/R-application-C-v-Secretary-State-Work-and-Pensions-2016-All-ER-D-107-Feb

John Birks - 22 December 2017 10:33 AM

I don’t think there is any provision to go dark.

Witness Protection is covered by UC in the attached document

- claimants whom arrangements have been made for under section 82 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 for a period of up to 3 months (witness protection)

Then there is the case of R (on the application of C) v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions [2016] All ER (D) 107 (Feb)

https://www.criminallawandjustice.co.uk/clj-reporter/R-application-C-v-Secretary-State-Work-and-Pensions-2016-All-ER-D-107-Feb

Thanks John, Dan, and Claire, we’ve trawled through the Rightsnet UC resources including the stuff from the commons library, and all the usual other sources, and no apparent provision.

The scenario is not Witness protection, but we have actually posed that question as a separate issue because that was something that had occurred to us too,  and we’re awaiting a response from upcountry people?

This is an extract from an email from a local DWP contact, in the mean time we are awaiting a response from higher up.

‘I have also checked the guidance for UCFS and can find no provision to allow for an anonymous claim to be made. All UCFS cases are managed online and the methods of managing the information held are operated in line with strict data protection standards. We can also annotate the claim, within the Claimant Profile, of the need for additional precaution.  There are several levels of security in managing the online claim. If we even ring the claimant we have to go through verification questions and vice versa’.

On a different tack. We also found out that there is one Work Coach managing UCFS claims in Bridport JCP, and claims are processed and managed in Belfast.

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District - 22 December 2017 01:10 PM

The scenario is not Witness protection, but we have actually posed that question as a separate issue because that was something that had occurred to us too,  and we’re awaiting a response from upcountry people?

whilst i’m not wholly sure, i do rather think that witness protection involves changing names as well as moving area, so a different issue - if that’s right, such a person wouldn’t need anonymity, but only their new name etc.  One would assume that in such a circ the witness would also be given a new NI number and that there would be no links between the new and old info (so that no hacker could get to the new info)

ClairemHodgson - 07 January 2018 11:40 AM

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District - 22 December 2017 01:10 PM

The scenario is not Witness protection, but we have actually posed that question as a separate issue because that was something that had occurred to us too,  and we’re awaiting a response from upcountry people?

whilst i’m not wholly sure, i do rather think that witness protection involves changing names as well as moving area, so a different issue - if that’s right, such a person wouldn’t need anonymity, but only their new name etc.  One would assume that in such a circ the witness would also be given a new NI number and that there would be no links between the new and old info (so that no hacker could get to the new info)

Don’t doubt what you say Claire! I do have however, doubts UC will have prepared for ‘witness protection’, so that is why we posed that question as a separate albeit unconnected issue.

ClairemHodgson - 07 January 2018 11:40 AM

Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District - 22 December 2017 01:10 PM

The scenario is not Witness protection, but we have actually posed that question as a separate issue because that was something that had occurred to us too,  and we’re awaiting a response from upcountry people?

whilst i’m not wholly sure, i do rather think that witness protection involves changing names as well as moving area, so a different issue - if that’s right, such a person wouldn’t need anonymity, but only their new name etc.  One would assume that in such a circ the witness would also be given a new NI number and that there would be no links between the new and old info (so that no hacker could get to the new info)

#

Have dealt with a small number of these in the dim and distant past when I worked in a different part of the world and they do generally involve all you describe - new name, new NINO, change of address and sometimes change of appearance. My suspicion is that there probably is an IT link which could be traced if someone knew what they were doing, if only because surprisingly little thought goes into such things.

Hi Andy, did you get a response from higher up on this?

We have a new client who has fled domestic violence - she had a joint claim for UC with the abusive partner and the social work team are worried about him finding out her new address when she claims UC as a single person.

We have only just entered full service and in my role at least I don’t deal with a huge amount of couples. If anyone is able to give me an absolute idiot’s guide to how it works on the computer system that would be very helpful? Does each member of the couple have a separate account for the same claim? Or do they have one account with two separate sets of log in details? If two single people on UC become a couple does one account get shut down? I’ve seen there is an option to use a ‘couple code’ to link accounts but have no experience of how this works in practice.

SamW - 20 February 2018 11:46 AM

Hi Andy, did you get a response from higher up on this?

We have a new client who has fled domestic violence - she had a joint claim for UC with the abusive partner and the social work team are worried about him finding out her new address when she claims UC as a single person.

We have only just entered full service and in my role at least I don’t deal with a huge amount of couples. If anyone is able to give me an absolute idiot’s guide to how it works on the computer system that would be very helpful? Does each member of the couple have a separate account for the same claim? Or do they have one account with two separate sets of log in details? If two single people on UC become a couple does one account get shut down? I’ve seen there is an option to use a ‘couple code’ to link accounts but have no experience of how this works in practice.

Hi sam

Unfortunately not, i’ll chase it up! Our MP wrote to David Gauke 22/12/2017.

She can make a fresh claim for UC based her new circs, assuming he has not contacted the DWP, if he has then her award can be reassessed - see CPAG UC what you need to know page 31. Its really handy book for us that just entered the world of UCFS complimenting the usual sources.

SamW - 20 February 2018 11:46 AM

Hi Andy, did you get a response from higher up on this?

We have a new client who has fled domestic violence - she had a joint claim for UC with the abusive partner and the social work team are worried about him finding out her new address when she claims UC as a single person.

We have only just entered full service and in my role at least I don’t deal with a huge amount of couples. If anyone is able to give me an absolute idiot’s guide to how it works on the computer system that would be very helpful? Does each member of the couple have a separate account for the same claim? Or do they have one account with two separate sets of log in details? If two single people on UC become a couple does one account get shut down? I’ve seen there is an option to use a ‘couple code’ to link accounts but have no experience of how this works in practice.

In my experience once a claim is closed there is no access to the old claim online…therefore once your client makes a single claim in her own right, the joint claim will be closed and the ex partner will need to make a new one as a single person too…therefore he will only be able to see his own information…tell me if I’m wrong…

There is provision under the legacy benefits for claims to be “restricted access” - don’t know if this exists with UC.  This means that claims can only be accessed by managers.  It is aimed at staff at DWP who are claiming, their relatives and transgender people.  In practice it means that your claim takes months longer than everyone else’s to be processed, while you wait for someone to apply to IT for access to your claim.  It also means that staff on the phone can never answer your query, and you have to wait for someone to call you back.  (Although I guess this isn’t an issue with UCFS anyway!)  In fact I helped a transgender client to ask for restricted access to be taken of their claim recently because of the delays it was causing.

zoeycorker - 20 February 2018 07:50 PM

SamW - 20 February 2018 11:46 AM

Hi Andy, did you get a response from higher up on this?

We have a new client who has fled domestic violence - she had a joint claim for UC with the abusive partner and the social work team are worried about him finding out her new address when she claims UC as a single person.

We have only just entered full service and in my role at least I don’t deal with a huge amount of couples. If anyone is able to give me an absolute idiot’s guide to how it works on the computer system that would be very helpful? Does each member of the couple have a separate account for the same claim? Or do they have one account with two separate sets of log in details? If two single people on UC become a couple does one account get shut down? I’ve seen there is an option to use a ‘couple code’ to link accounts but have no experience of how this works in practice.

In my experience once a claim is closed there is no access to the old claim online…therefore once your client makes a single claim in her own right, the joint claim will be closed and the ex partner will need to make a new one as a single person too…therefore he will only be able to see his own information…tell me if I’m wrong…

We have only entered UCFS recently too, and how UC is supposed to work in theory, is very different in the way it is applied by the DWP in practice. So thanks for sharing your experience!

Helen Rogers - 21 February 2018 08:58 AM

There is provision under the legacy benefits for claims to be “restricted access” - don’t know if this exists with UC.  This means that claims can only be accessed by managers.  It is aimed at staff at DWP who are claiming, their relatives and transgender people.  In practice it means that your claim takes months longer than everyone else’s to be processed, while you wait for someone to apply to IT for access to your claim.  It also means that staff on the phone can never answer your query, and you have to wait for someone to call you back.  (Although I guess this isn’t an issue with UCFS anyway!)  In fact I helped a transgender client to ask for restricted access to be taken of their claim recently because of the delays it was causing.

Thanks Helen, originally i imagined something akin to the above. Erm regarding UCFS hopefully we will get a response and etc etc.

Thanks all for responses. Will update if I get any useful info at my end!

We’ve received a reply from the higher uppers which confirms stuff said above e.g. no facility for clerical claims or offline claims, doesn’t get us any further.

It actually mirrors Damian Hinds response to East Oxford’s MP last October re claimants needing digital help etc etc, but worth a read.

Our local MP has written a further response, so we’ll see what materialises.

Anyway see attached letter.