Forum Home → Discussion → Work capability issues and ESA → Thread
JCP advice to appeal WCA decision
We are seeing an increasing number of clients who are advised by Jobcentre Plus to appeal WCA decisions either where they have been ‘found fit’ and are now on JSA or to go from WRAC to SG.
The sting is that these are either decisions many months ago (sometimes beyond the 13 month time limit) or were tribunal decisions (again mostly given months ago). Local JCP staff appear to have no idea of time limits or what decisions can actually be appealed.
Are we seeing a return to JCP trying to get claimants off JSA / into SG to massage the unemployment / Work Programme referral etc figures?
Us too. It’s happening a lot with clients who passed the WCA and were placed in the WRAC. Client attends WFI, is obviously struggling, and is advised by interviewing officer to ‘appeal’ to be placed in SG. I can think of two recent examples where in both cases, client had been placed in WRAG well over 13 months previously (one following tribunal hearing). Both clients appealed as per advice given and both were eventually informed they were outside absolute time limits. I’m arguing that the ‘appeals’ should have been treated as supersession requests.
In both the above cases, the clients have good grounds for being placed in SG so the advice from JC+, whilst incorrect, was at least well intentioned. However, we’ve also had a spate of clients recently who have been given the same advice whilst clearly not meeting the SG criteria.
Local JCP staff appear to have no idea of time limits or what decisions can actually be appealed
^^^^^^
This is definitely the case. I attended a WFI with one of our tenants on ESA and she was told by her (very nice otherwise) adviser that ‘an appeal can be made at any time’. Rather than argue with him I put her right as we were leaving. (I’m fed up being told I’m wrong by JC+ staff when I know that in fact they are - not worth a stand up row - I mist be getting old!!)
Mairi
The real damage they do is on right to reside cases for EEA nationals. I’ve just spent the last 6 months putting right one of their well meaning bits of advice. And, this is not the first time either. My client (single parent with a child under the age of 5) was made redundant and claimed JSA. When she went to sign on she was advised to claim Income Support. Guess what? Claim disallowed as no right to reside. Last week the decision was finally overturned but this didn’t prevent 6 months of financial hardship, stress and worry.
The real damage they do is on right to reside cases for EEA nationals. I’ve just spent the last 6 months putting right one of their well meaning bits of advice. And, this is not the first time either. My client (single parent with a child under the age of 5) was made redundant and claimed JSA. When she went to sign on she was advised to claim Income Support. Guess what? Claim disallowed as no right to reside. Last week the decision was finally overturned but this didn’t prevent 6 months of financial hardship, stress and worry.
Yep - familiar story - but now outnumbered by the WCA issue!
This doesn’t say much for the prospects of any positive influence from mandatory reconsideration. A representative of the Secretary of State realises the decision is likely to be wrong, but cannot do a thing to get it changed other than recommend an appeal.
This doesn’t say much for the prospects of any positive influence from mandatory reconsideration. A representative of the Secretary of State realises the decision is likely to be wrong, but cannot do a thing to get it changed other than recommend an appeal.
Whilst in the broadest sense that is correct, the truth is that very few staff in Jobcentres (rather than those who make decisions on ESA in Benefit Centres) have any idea what the criteria for LCW or LCWRA are. Their role is about people finding employment, and they probably take a practical view of the difficulties an increasing number of people who are sent to them,with significant health problems, will have in undertaking remunerative work.
Interesting! I thought it was just one rogue personal adviser in one particular local jobcentre who has repeatedly sent people to me to appeal allocation to the WRAG when they are months outside the normal time limit to appeal. Unless there are good grounds for a late appeal I usually deal with these as supersession requests.
The jobcentre in question is also frequently guilty of mis-advising EEA national lone parents to claim IS. When we raised this with them we were told it was a training issue, as their front line staff are not trained to give benefits advice (yet still do, and routinely tell claimants the CAB don’t know what we are talking about!!!).
Surely if front line jobcentre staff are not qualified to give benefit advice, or are not aware of the regulations they are supposed to be administering, Jobcentre Plus should be obliged to put up big disclaimer notices in all their offices warning the public (who expect them to know what they’re talking about) not to take their advice seriously.
A lot of JCP advisers are telling clients “you’re clearly not fit for this you should be in the support group” and giving them GL24s.
I’m sympathetic the the old conspiracy to massage figures but suspect it’s more as Sovietleader says; now that they’re under more pressure to mandate people to WP, with less leeway to defer, it’s the only option left… appeal. They’re then outside the risk of referral to WP.
and to be honest with the Work Program such a demon (never mind elephant) in the room is there an interest in simply appealing, whatever the prospects, to keep people off the scheme?
I can almost feel the Tribunals Service trembling…
broken fingers edit
Got to agree. Don’t think there’s any deliberate intent to massage figures. We have significant numbers of people coming through who have been knocked off ESA; go to claim JSA and are advised at the first appt. that they really ought not to be claiming the latter. They’re encouraged to contact agencies such as ourselves. We may have time limit issues in some cases but I’m not aware of it. Entirely believable though.
Problem is that JS staff have no clue as to whether person will be entitled to ESA or why they were knocked off in the first place, which is often (sadly) a correct decision, so, much false hope is created. Of course there are scenarios where a new ESA claim is a good idea.
Generally though this isn’t going away. It may even be well intentioned from JC staff. It’s just sad that it’s so misguided and underpinned and undermined by both a lack of knowledge and training.
I’ve just posted a reply on appeal appeal appeal re the number of referrals we are getting via the job centre and the partner organisations. The staff are quite well informed and we are having success even with very late appeals - a lot of these claimants who have been ‘migrated’ have no idea what group they are in really and the implications until they are called for their WFI or told to go to the Work Programme. It is only when they do go that it is all explained to them alongside their appeal rights. The fact that their money has often remained the same only adds to the confusion. The other scenario when they are prompted to appeal is 9 months down the line when they get the 365 day letter. This is often the first time they seek any sort of advice. To a degree I think the lack of clarity and confusion in the system adds to the potential grounds for late appeal (obviously alongside the arguments on functional ability grounds re the actual decision itself). I think the numbers are also increasing since the JC+ had to curtail their ‘soft touch approach’ and refer more conversion claimants to the Work Programme. Means that claimants are not just carrying on assuming that nothing has changed really.
We have asked JCP staff to provide us with their reasons why they think the client should be in the support group.
The response was (by telephone and not in writing) that they cannot reply to this type of request because it is more than there job is worth. They are not officially allowed to disagree with an ESA DM’s decision.
We have asked JCP staff to provide us with their reasons why they think the client should be in the support group.
The response was (by telephone and not in writing) that they cannot reply to this type of request because it is more than there job is worth. They are not officially allowed to disagree with an ESA DM’s decision.
A culture in which it’s more than a job is worth to challenge a decision made elsewhere within effectively the same organisation. Yup, those mandatory reconsiderations are really going to make a difference!!!