Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Other universal credit issues  →  Thread

Sending things into the ether (MR requests and the journal)

 

JPCHC
forum member

Cardinal Hume Centre - Welfare Rights

Send message

Total Posts: 99

Joined: 24 November 2014

Whilst I am well-versed in sending things into the ether, may I please just double-check I’m giving my MRs the best chance of getting some human attention at some point in the very distant future?

I’m currently putting most of them on the journals under ‘service issues’ as I hope that would then go to the case manager but please correct me if you’ve had better luck elsewhere.  As an example, the last one was a WCA disallowance recon request. 

Thank you!

     
S2uABZ
forum member

Money Adviser, Aberdeen City Council Financial Inclusion Team

Send message

Total Posts: 82

Joined: 17 June 2010

I’m still posting to:
Universal Credit
FREEPOST PLUS RTEU-LGUJ-SZLG
UC Post Handling Site B
Wolverhampton
WV99 1AJ

Think i need to get with the flow tho!

     
Daphne
Administrator

rightsnet writer / editor

Send message

Total Posts: 2228

Joined: 14 March 2014

If you put it on the journal and then ring the case manager - once they start looking at your claim they have to deal with any outstanding actions on it so the MR should get processed.

At stakeholders meeting yesterday we had an interesting insight into what the case manager/work coach sees on their screens and how it works for them. I’m going to write it all up with photos of the screens when I get a minute and them I’ll post it on the forum…

     
NeverSayNo
forum member

Northumbria Healthcare, Welfare Rights Dept.

Send message

Total Posts: 161

Joined: 21 December 2011

I have experience where putting an entry in the journal, asking a case manager over the phone,  and then asking at the job centre where each one refused to accept an MR.  The issue is about the amount of payment of UC as a result of late reporting by the employer of a wage affecting new assessment period.

Each UC officer stated no MR could be done because a “technical investigation” had to be performed (currently this has taken 3 weeks with no sign of being sorted). This is apparently because UC “have” to accept HMRC’s RTI and until the employer corrects the date the pay was made through the technical investigation even showing a payslip or bank account will not suffice.

A complaint was raised and in the response to that it was said that “as their is no UC decision there cannot be a MR”.
It was poiinted out that the online journal where the UC payment decision was issued states “if you disagree with the decision you can ask for a MR”. Ignored.

     
Timothy Seaside
forum member

Housing Services, Arun District Council

Send message

Total Posts: 140

Joined: 20 September 2018

I have very real concerns about the claim managers’ understanding of MRs. I’ve had several completely ignored, some where they’ve revised their decision but never actually explained the new decision or issued a MRN, and even some where they say things like, “we can’t submit an MR because…” and then go on to explain why they think the original decision was correct. It’s frustrating and time consuming.

     
Sarah-B
forum member

Caseworker - Laura Pidcock MP

Send message

Total Posts: 43

Joined: 4 July 2018

NeverSayNo - 08 March 2019 03:13 PM

I have experience where putting an entry in the journal, asking a case manager over the phone,  and then asking at the job centre where each one refused to accept an MR.  The issue is about the amount of payment of UC as a result of late reporting by the employer of a wage affecting new assessment period.

Each UC officer stated no MR could be done because a “technical investigation” had to be performed (currently this has taken 3 weeks with no sign of being sorted). This is apparently because UC “have” to accept HMRC’s RTI and until the employer corrects the date the pay was made through the technical investigation even showing a payslip or bank account will not suffice.

A complaint was raised and in the response to that it was said that “as their is no UC decision there cannot be a MR”.
It was poiinted out that the online journal where the UC payment decision was issued states “if you disagree with the decision you can ask for a MR”. Ignored.

I have had exactly the same issue and felt so furious.

I feel that they are treating the ‘RTI dispute’ as an additional stage in the appeal process which does not show up anywhere in the law.  I can see why they have this ‘technical process’ in case it is something that the employer can correct, or in case there is inaccuracies in the employer’s reporting which need investigating.  But I feel that this should be treat as part of the MR process and should still go to a Decision Maker because they do not in fact ‘have to’ accept the HMRC record - Reg 61 says otherwise.

I have raised this as an issue but it has so far been ignored.

 

     
Andyp5 Citizens Advice Bridport & District
forum member

Citizens Advice Bridport & District

Send message

Total Posts: 428

Joined: 9 January 2017

Timothy Seaside - 11 March 2019 10:05 AM

I have very real concerns about the claim managers’ understanding of MRs. I’ve had several completely ignored, some where they’ve revised their decision but never actually explained the new decision or issued a MRN, and even some where they say things like, “we can’t submit an MR because…” and then go on to explain why they think the original decision was correct. It’s frustrating and time consuming.

We do too!

Our experience too i.e. Its the norm for UC, and we advise strategies accordingly for client’s advising of the above obstacles and escalation routes to get pass the logjams!

We had one case shared with CPAG’s EWS in which the client a lone parent lived her teenage daughter in a two bedroom flat. Client couldn’t understand why she was getting deductions in her housing element, she assumed it was a mistake to do with LHA rates because her rent was actually below our local cap. She had successively contacted the CM via journal and there was the usual terse one liner Timothy subliminally hints at.

After trawling through 8 months worth of journal entries. We realised the deductions were for HCC’s/non dependents - it appeared client had two non existent adults and 5 kids living in her household (don’t ask)!

Anyway we got the client through the usual rigmarole described far more eloquently by the other contributor’s.

But the aspect of the case that really stayed with me was my reaction, when she contacted us to say it had all been sorted and she had received all her arrears etc.

I had to stop myself from blurting out are you sure?