We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Ewan Gillies please sign in and let everyone know.

UC journal entries

We're waiting for Ewan Gillies to read recent responses and update the status.

Dear Department for Work and Pensions,

When makimg a journal entry you are given various option:
1. A payment
2. A change
3. An appointment
4. Job applications
5. Add a work search note
6. A message for my work coach
7. Service issues

Can you explain who and what departments look at various options listed above.
If you want a mandatory reconsideration via the journal which option would you use?
The statement shows payments and deductions. Where is the breakdown of the debt management reductions on the journal?
At the dept management call centre, what are the guidelines and info they can give you?

Yours faithfully,

Ewan Gillies

DWP freedom-of-information-requests, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been accepted by the DWP FoI mailbox.
 
By the next working day your request will be forwarded to the relevant
information owner within the Department who will respond to you direct. 
 
If your email is a Freedom of Information request you can normally
expect a response within 20 working days.
 
Email FOI responses will be issued from [1][email address]
We recommend that you add this address to your email contacts otherwise
the response may be treated as Spam or Junk mail.  
 
Should you have any further queries in connection with this request do
please contact us.
 
[2]http://www.gov.uk/dwp
 
 

show quoted sections

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]
2. http://www.gov.uk/dwp

no-reply@dwp.ecase.co.uk on behalf of DWP Policy Group Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

Our ref: FOI2020/10980

Contact email: [1][email address]

Dear Ewan Gillies,

Thank you for your request for information which was received on 7th
March. Your request is being considered under the terms of the Freedom of
Information Act 2000.

You can normally expect a response to your FoI request within 20 working
days. However due to the current situation with COVID-19 it may not be
possible for us to reply to you within this timeframe.

The DWP will make every effort to respond to FOIs as we would usually but
the current situation may mean that available Departmental resources are
needed on other high priority areas.

We kindly ask for your understanding during this unpreceden ted situation
and we will aim to deal with your FOI request as soon as is practically
possible.

If you have any queries about this letter, please contact the department
using the email address and reference number above.

Yours sincerely,

DWP Central FoI Team

Department for Work and Pensions

References

Visible links
1. mailto:[email address]

no-reply@dwp.ecase.co.uk on behalf of DWP Policy Group Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

2 Attachments

Dear Ewan Gillies,

I am writing in response to your request for information, received 7th
March.

Yours sincerely,

DWP Central FoI Team

J Roberts left an annotation ()

'If you want a mandatory reconsideration via the journal which option would you use?'

You may be interested in the UT decision PP v SSWP (UC)[2020] UKUT 0109(AAC):

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk...

'7. To take just one example, which is central to the present appeal, the DWP sent the Appellant an electronic notification in his universal credit Journal on 14 May 2018, stating starkly that “Your claim has been closed”, together with a one-line explanation reading:“Reason for closure: You didn’t book your appointment”(p.70). The concept of “case closure” is jurisprudentially highly suspect. Over the years the former Social Security Commissioners and now the Upper Tribunal Judges have done their best to try and eliminate this usage (see CJSA/2327/2001 at paragraph 12 and CE/747/2017at paragraph 4).

8.Unfortunately, the notion of case closure, so beloved of frontline benefits administrators, has proven resistant to all such judicial attempts at erasure...

9. ... The FTT administration, being uncertain as to the status of the case (there being no mandatory reconsideration notice (MRN)), did not log it on its computer system (hence the absence of a case registration number) and dealt with the matter offline and on paper, referring the file to a judge.'

We don't know whether the most recent response to this request contains information or not – if you are Ewan Gillies please sign in and let everyone know.