Search rightsnet
Search options

Where

Benefit

Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction

From

to

Forum Home  →  Discussion  →  Universal credit migration  →  Thread

You may be the appointee but we still want to see the claimant – and we have no time to read Journal entries

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1553

Joined: 12 October 2012

Claimant was on IRESA, Support Group (severe disability from birth, has never needed ftf assessment) – lost entitlement 4 years ago as he inherited over £16000.

Savings dropped below capital limit this year: appointee (who also has Power of Attorney) was told by DWP to complete an ESA3, also put in IS10 for SDP.

Both were refused as there was no remaining ESA claim, it was credits only – told by DWP after considerable delay to claim UC.

Appointee attends verification interview at Jobcentre with all necessary evidence – staff took details but then said the computer system would allow them to go no further and a new appointment was needed, claimant has to be there.

Appointee also told that UC would also need to visit her before they will accept the appointeeship.
Appointee sends multiple messages to UC via the Journal to ask what is happening – is finally telephoned and told that staff don’t always have time to read Journal entries and she should always phone.

To add to the fun, everyone including DWP advised that claimant would get LCWRA right away, but now they have concluded that credits-only ESA doesn’t count for Reg 19 Transitional Regs (which I think is correct, sadly) – so in to the WCA sausage-machine he goes. I’m looking for him to be treated as having LCWRA under Sch 9.

Gad, gad and thrice gad!!!! Complaints, backdating request, general arrrrrg.

Charles
forum member

Accountant, Haffner Hoff Ltd, Manchester

Send message

Total Posts: 441

Joined: 27 February 2019

Reg 21 does the same job as Reg 19 for credits only cases.

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1553

Joined: 12 October 2012

Thanks Charles I will look again.

Dan Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2235

Joined: 15 October 2012

Other than echoing Charles’ comments, UC have a discrete process to approve an appointee; the status doesn’t really travel from ESA to UC. It should but in practice, even we, as Corporate Acting Body have had to be reappointed when we’ve made UC claims for people.

[ Edited: 11 Nov 2019 at 04:51 pm by Dan Manville ]
Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1553

Joined: 12 October 2012

Dan Manville - 08 November 2019 09:42 AM

Other than echoing Charles’ comments, UC have a discrete process to approve an appointee; the status doesn’t really travel from ESA to UC. It should but in practice, even we, as CAB have had to be reappointed when we’ve made UC claims for people.

Can you point me to the details of this process? I can’t find anything.

Dan Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2235

Joined: 15 October 2012

Andrew Dutton - 08 November 2019 09:45 AM
Dan Manville - 08 November 2019 09:42 AM

Other than echoing Charles’ comments, UC have a discrete process to approve an appointee; the status doesn’t really travel from ESA to UC. It should but in practice, even we, as CAB have had to be reappointed when we’ve made UC claims for people.

Can you point me to the details of this process? I can’t find anything.

No; it’s just that when we first claimed UC for some of our people under appointeeship they had to approve us, despite the fact we’d been appointee for years under legacy.

It was pretty straightforward tbh.

Andrew Dutton
forum member

Welfare rights service - Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 1553

Joined: 12 October 2012

Fair enough but this case isn’t, it’s a mess and the appointee is getting very stressed. I’ve asked DWP to clarify their policy and will share any rich nuggets they provide.

wbamic
forum member

Mind in Croydon

Send message

Total Posts: 10

Joined: 19 June 2019

I am also struggling to find anything about how it works when a person already has a claim up and running but becomes unwell and then requires an appointee.  I am going to be phoning the helpline with someone later this week to look into his mother becoming his appointee.  The UC claim has been running along for a few years with various issues.  I might be wrong, and i know there would be no legal basis for this, but i expect we might be told that a new claim is required in order to allow an appointee to be added?

Dan Manville
forum member

Mental health & welfare rights service - Wolverhampton City Council

Send message

Total Posts: 2235

Joined: 15 October 2012

wbamic - 11 November 2019 01:44 PM

I expect we might be told that a new claim is required in order to allow an appointee to be added?

yep. They can’t see the full email address or the security questions so unless your client can remember them you’ll need to submit a new claim.

It’s worth calling UC to test whether your client does remember them though as they’re usually answers that people instinctively know.

Timothy Seaside
forum member

Housing services - Arun District Council

Send message

Total Posts: 177

Joined: 20 September 2018

Dan Manville - 11 November 2019 04:43 PM
wbamic - 11 November 2019 01:44 PM

I expect we might be told that a new claim is required in order to allow an appointee to be added?

yep. They can’t see the full email address or the security questions so unless your client can remember them you’ll need to submit a new claim.

One of my clients had a severe stroke just after applying for UC earlier this year - unable to communicate. I don’t think we’d have got anywhere calling UC on the phone, but JCP were really helpful and managed to get the client’s mum set up as appointee.

 

ninja9girl
forum member

Derbyshire County Council

Send message

Total Posts: 23

Joined: 7 March 2013

Dan Manville - 08 November 2019 09:42 AM

Other than echoing Charles’ comments, UC have a discrete process to approve an appointee; the status doesn’t really travel from ESA to UC. It should but in practice, even we, as Corporate Acting Body have had to be reappointed when we’ve made UC claims for people.

In Derbyshire we have not had to do that and have been accepted as appointee

Abi Sheridan
forum member

Universal Credit Support - Citizens Advice North & West Gloucestershire

Send message

Total Posts: 11

Joined: 26 April 2019

ninja9girl - 14 November 2019 10:32 AM
Dan Manville - 08 November 2019 09:42 AM

Other than echoing Charles’ comments, UC have a discrete process to approve an appointee; the status doesn’t really travel from ESA to UC. It should but in practice, even we, as Corporate Acting Body have had to be reappointed when we’ve made UC claims for people.

In Derbyshire we have not had to do that and have been accepted as appointee

I’ve got a case where cl has an appointee for PIP and it is not carrying over to UC. Our local JCP have said that they need to re-verify every new appointee for UC to ensure they are computer literate…..even the ones who have a telephone claim. Seems ridiculous to me, as JCPs set up online UC claims for everyone, even people who are illiterate or cant use a computer, but to be an appointee you need to be a whiz?
More importantly, I can’t find anything in the legislation or guidance that overules Regulation 16 of UC (TP) Regs 2014, so I’m not sure on what legal basis they are allowed to do this?