How do I take legal action against Jobcentre Plus?

Karen made this Freedom of Information request to Department for Work and Pensions

This request has been closed to new correspondence from the public body. Contact us if you think it ought be re-opened.

Department for Work and Pensions did not have the information requested.

Dear Sir or Madam,

I am requesting information on how to take legal action against Jobcentre Plus for contravening 'Health and Safety Act' - Neglect against ignoring credible medical certified letters from specialists and doctors and for the stress caused through such neglect.

Yours faithfully,

Mrs.K.V.Chong

DWP Adelphi Freedom-of-Information-Request, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been received at the DWP Central FoI Team.

We will forward your request to the relevant information owner within the
Department who will respond to you direct.

Should you also have any further queries in connection with this request
do please contact us.

For further information on the Freedom of Information Act within DWP
please click on the link below.

[1]http://www.dwp.gov.uk/foi/

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/foi/

DWP Adelphi Freedom-of-Information-Request, Department for Work and Pensions

1 Attachment

Dear Mrs Chong

Please see attached letter requesting clarification of your FoI request.

Kind regards

Central FoI Team

show quoted sections

Dear DWP Adelphi Freedom-of-Information-Request,

It is my understanding that, by law, you are ( jobcentre plus ) obliged to answer my request for information, which has been correctly sent - You have not done so - Please give a legal reason for this non compliance to the law.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs. K.V.Chong.

Karen

DWP Adelphi Freedom-of-Information-Request, Department for Work and Pensions

This is an automated confirmation that your request for information has
been received at the DWP Central FoI Team.

We will forward your request to the relevant information owner within the
Department who will respond to you direct.

Should you also have any further queries in connection with this request
do please contact us.

For further information on the Freedom of Information Act within DWP
please click on the link below.

[1]http://www.dwp.gov.uk/freedom-of-informa...

show quoted sections

Communications via the GSi may be automatically logged, monitored and/or
recorded for legal purposes.

References

Visible links
1. http://www.dwp.gov.uk/freedom-of-informa...

Karen left an annotation ()

It is an absolute waste of time trying to get anything done - one will simply be ignored by 'jobcentre plus'

Mrs Chong.

DWP Adelphi Freedom-of-Information-Request, Department for Work and Pensions

1 Attachment

Dear Mrs Chong

Please see attached response to your FoI request.

Kind regards

Central FoI Team

show quoted sections

Karen left an annotation ()

In my opinion Jobcentre Plus operate like the old Social Security Benefits Office - with one major differance and that is that they are a business and the function of business is to create funds.

They do this in a number of ways - One way is to put sick people back to work against medical advice by using their assessment methods - i.e examinations as to functionality - often deemed as totally unfair - Jobcentre will often use complicated portions of the Employment Act, carefully selecting parts to suit their mandates - thus placing the 'customer at a disadvantage on understanding complications dressed in red tape.

They often ignore expert diagnosis by the use of a point scoring system designed to be ambiguous by nature of its complexity,allowing nurses to rule against specialists and doctors.

As with all government licenced business they have the advantage of seemingly endless resources making it increasingly difficult for the 'common man/woman to hold them to account - This can be balanced against the government's desire to keep the public funds down.

There is only one way to bring change and that it for people to complain and campaign againt unfair practices - Lobby your M.P or study the Health and safety Act and the Disability Discrimination Act.Always appeal to the Independant Tribunal - They do not like adverse publicity.

The do not invite public outcry for obvious reasons - Its a business!

This Annotation is offered through experience with Jobcentre Plus and its questionable methodology.

Mrs. Chong.

Karen left an annotation ()

It is an absolute waste of time to try to take action against Jobcente Plus, in my view, - you will just go through an endless minefield of 'GOBBELDYGOOK'and red tape. You will never gain satisfaction as the system protects itself, as do the banks ( Ombudsman?) and the law - ( Ombusman?) remember that these people are paid and funded by the people that you complain about - A COMPLETE WASTE OF TIME!

It is also useless trying to get an MP to respond because there is normally an army of underlings in the way - MPs seem to be too busy doing nothing but making money for themselves through the system i.e - expences or whatever - they have little or no genuine concern for the public and as we get closer and closer to a 'general election' then you might just see one disengenuously holding a baby or something. You will not see one AFTER the election except on tv.

YOU MUST GO FOR PEOPLE POWER!

Mrs K.V.Chong.

P.s.
Remember! - the system HATES bad publicity so, in my humble opinion - try the newspapers, making sure that its a paper that does not support the present government and complain, complain, complain!

Mr J.C left an annotation ()

I am having the same problems with Jobcentre after attending a medical that can only be described as an insult to the medical professions name, after taking many years to feel trusting enough to speak to my GP about mental health problem the Jobcentre come along and expect me to speak in depth to an ignorant medical examiner that i neither know nor trust and is more interested in interrupting my answers and hammering on their keyboard. i have absolutely no more faith in this countries ability to treat people reasonably and fairly.

Neville Topham left an annotation ()

Hi Folks.
I assume that like myself people in our situation incur increased phone cost in our quest for justice. These are reclaimable under the Special Payments scheme. You will need to send an itemised bill and a letter requesting re-imbursement to you local office who deals with your claim

paul nomad left an annotation ()

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/court...

GO TO THIS SITE TO FILL IN A CIVIL COURT CLAIM FORM even if you dont take the case it makes a serious situation that the job centre plus or anyone esp govt bodies, will have to deal with you rather than ignore you at their risk as the costs will be high for them and virtually nil for you if you are reasonable, and espcially if you are unemployed or have low income.

good luck
GOLDEN

R.S Bowie left an annotation ()

You are asking them to provide you with information under the FOI act which they do not hold under the FOI act. This has been explained to you and they have directed you to an organisation which can offer free advice, to start you off. It is not a waste of time taking legal action against DWP. Many have done so successfully, when they have had a good case.

Frankly if you cannot comprehend the basics of the FOI or what sort of information the DWP would hold then I would urge you to use the services of a solicitor if you intend to take legal action because it appears you would not be capable of understanding more complex areas of law, and would look a fool in court which will do very little to support your case.

You may qualify for legal aid but this is not dependent only on a means test. There is also a merit test whereby the legal aid board will only fund your case if they believe there is a good chance of you winning.

Karen left an annotation ()

I note with scorn the stupid remarks about the ability to sue 'jobcentre plus' in short YOU CANNOT SUE JOBCENTRE PLUS. because you are in effect suing the government!

Jobcentre pose as a business and they call you 'client' and I successfully beat them twice! - HERE IS WHAT YOU MUST DO!

If they say that you are fit and your doctors and specialists say that you are ill?

1. Obtain a doctors report.

2.obtain a specialists report.

3. Obtain a health and safety report.

Submit all to a tribunal THUS SUPPLYING THREE INDEPENDENT REPORTS.

You would probably need to produce evidence of 'special circumstance - for example and in my case -

I was refused benefit because I did not score enough points on their stupid fitness movement form - and a nurse over ruled specialists and doctors diagnosis and prognosis - yes a nurse! Jobcentre qualified her by saying that she was trained as a health expert!!!! - She over ruled highly qualified experts and prognosed that I would be fit in 3 months - this caused me a year of misery and hardship.REMEMBER THAT THEIR JOB IS TO SAVE THE GOVERNMENT FUNDING.

I beat them in tribunal which was fortunately presided over by an actual qualified judge.

BASICALLY I PROVED THAT MY CONDITION WAS VOLATILE AND DID NOT CONFORM TO A DEFINITE TIMESCALE - THUS MAKING MY CONDITION UNSAFE TO FELLOW WORKERS AND CLEARLY INDICATING 'SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE'

The court agreed and awarded me 15 points on both cases that I appealed.

You cannot beat the stupid 'ability to move' form criteria unless you can show evidence of 'SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE -so to the reader who poo poo'd my last offering - You obviously have no first hand experience of what I went through, basically making your comments unhelpful!

SO ALL OUT THERE WITH m.e OR WHATEVER - DON'T GIVE UP.

It is very sad that jobcentre and a lot of the unfit for purpose decision makers in its ranks have a mandate to pile misery onto the genuinely sick by using every means at their disposal to deny funding to the public - thus saving the government money!

Mrs. K.Chong.

Neville Topham left an annotation ()

Hi Karen.
I whole heatedly agree with your overview of the system and it's function.
I have my first appeal prepared to go to Strasbourg, but as you say I am having difficulty finding legal representation due to the fact that they would be challenging the hand that feeds them.
I am however facing a second hearing at first tier level and this time there are clear procedural errors in the way a Decision Maker arrive at their decision.In addition having got under the FoI copies of the Esa training package and LIMA it is clear as a friend of mine started the ATOS training that there is an expectation towards finding the maximum number of people fit for work,once this became abundantly clear my friend told them to stuff it.
In relation to the medical report and the Decision Makers submissions these are classed as "Material Evidence" and such evidence must be proven to be factually based,in my case which is one of Mental Health all recognised theory concludes that the DWP and ATOS's views on my condition differ greatly on the theory base used in training Medical professionals.
In relation to matters which it is my intention to put before the ECHR, I have lodged my intentions with them and once I have been successful in engaging legal representation,I shall make the Email address available through this site as I am sure many people may wish to assign to this challenge.
The basic principle of my challenge is that at times when we were well we all contributed National Insurance contributions to provide cover for if we became ill.The insurers have changed the terms under which we can now make a claim, it is arguable in law that the qualification for benefits has changed dramatically since we paid our contributions in good faith that we were covered for benefits should we become ill,when now part of the qualifying criteria may well be seen as you having been measured up by an Undertaker,and even then the DWP may seek to delay matters until one has expired this life.
Finally I agree wholeheartedly with you comments on those who poo poo matters, at least they might at least employ more then one brain-cell in the preparation of their comments.

Karen left an annotation ()

Hi Neville.

Your comments were indeed welcome, however it is unclear what you are appealing.
If you are appealing against jobcentre decision makers decisions you must think outside the box - you cannot simply reveal their failings as they cover themselves by claiming that they are trained as medical experts in evaluating evidence from G.Ps, specialists etc - We both know that this is rubbish otherwise we simply would not need experts - we could just go and get sorted by their expert nurse or something.

It is disgraceful behavior - but is is undoubtedly political in mandate.

My advice to you, for what it is worth is 'SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE' If your condition is volatile in symptom e.g 'does not conform to a set time table' - then according to 'Health and Safety - You would endanger fellow workers.

You need both doctor and specialist to concur thus creating three independent pieces of evidence - all reading off the same page - Then you should succeed as I did.

They will do all in their power to see that you fail.
If they quote any articles in evidence ( which you have a right to study prior to your case ) Download the article and you will probably see that they have quoted only the part which seems to support their argument. The other parts will probably support your own argument as it did with me.

You must remember that the government will use any means at their disposal - This is why the system is so unfair.

In closing - I believe it futile to sue the government as it is unbalanced in favor of the government due to their form criteria. so SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE is the only way to win at tribunal. Do not listen to the 'street lawyers' and 'know alls' Forget costly solicitors - they just want money! Do it yourself - SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE IS THE KEY - ALL OTHER EVIDENCE IS COVERED BY THEIR SHADY FORM FILLING NONSENSE AND INTERVIEWER ATTITUDE.DECISION MAKERS,IN MY VIEW ARE BIASED TOWARDS THEIR PAYMASTERS!

All evidence is available on the nett so when they hit you with their rubbish - download it and find the part which supports you - You must send ALL evidence to the tribunal - prior to your hearing date.

Hope this helps - this is my precedence of fact.

Neville Topham left an annotation ()

Hi Karen.
Thanks for your views on my position, which are received in the spirit in which they were sent.
My condition is Depression and in addition I have a mild form of asbergers syndrome, which I have never felt the need to have a formal diagnosis for,were I to seek this I would be exempted from the Medical Examination.
Furthermore I do not seek to be placed as never going to work again merely to be placed in the support group to get support to get me in the position to return to Employment.
In relation to your views on their Medical Professional.They have not even had the decency to seek that views of other Medical professionals involved in the treatment of my condition.I have also submitted in evidence GMC held details of all involved in this matter and these clearly indicate that Atos Dr is the least well qualified,What a suprise.In addition I asked the ATOS Dr to tell me what the term PRN meant in the prescription of medicines, he understood it means "As and when required" When challenged for a verbatim meaning he could not tell me so I informed him and his response was Latin has not been used in the medical field for many years. Male genetailia comes to mind there
I shall get this SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE approach researched and may well use it as additional submission in my case.
In relation to Other professionals views, They are all in the process of preparing their evidence on this matter as is an eminently recognised Prof of Psychiatry who specialises in both my conditions.They will use the DWP descriptors as a part of this so everyone is reading in the same language, Esperanto comes to mind!!.
A nurse of my acquaintance sought to undertake the ATOS training,however after the first day and a half of the course told them to stuff it as there was clear conflict with her medical ethics, which may well explain why ATOS has such a high degree of Eastern European trained staff in their employ.
I by enlarge agree that the degree of nepotism within the tribunals service and judicial system would make challenging the government difficult.
That is why my challenge will go to Strasbourg and the ECHR and my representation will come from either Spain or Holland, and negotiations are currently ongoing to select the best person for the job.
I have also submitted into evidence the ESA training manual and LIMA in hard copy,which i got under the FoI. There are clear misgivings in the decision maker's approach to my case when account of these is considered.
I shall also on submission of my final evidence In form the tribunals service that all contributers to my evidence are available to attend the hearing if so desired by the panel and would expect the same opportunity of verbal challenging of evidence to be afforded to my team.
They are treating the DWP's submission as Material Evidence and as such this must be proven, failure to do so would automatically constitute an error of law.
In closing, I feel that we are exploring the possibilities of our both becoming successful in our challenges in a most in depth way, which other readers may well find too complex to understand. The moderator may feel that our exchanges are not in the true spirit of the site.
If this is the case.I give you my permission the pass on to Mrs Karen Chong my personal contact details and exempt you from the Data Protection act in so doing.
I look forward to hearing from you at a later date either on here or by other means

Karen left an annotation ()

Dear Neville.

I fully understand your dilemma- however,having said that- I cannot impress on you enough that the system works to a criteria and the principal part of this is of course DIAGNOSIS AND PROGNOSIS. - Without this in place, I feel it would be almost impossible to go forward.

I also would like to work, as many others would concur.
I also believe that as you are articulate and apparently of reasonable mind that without DIAGNOSIS you may encounter great difficulty in proving SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE as their criteria looks for ability, movement etc and you would be saying 'ah yes - but! my condition falls under your own circumstance clause - thus being relevant - if you cannot indicate this, sadly, I feel you will fail.

VOLATILITY OF SYMPTOM ( HEALTH AND SAFETY ) is the obvious way forward but you would need the 3 parts of evidence previously outlined.

The system only responds to definite evidence and as you have no diagnosis and supporting report criteria - I do not believe that you will succeed.

In their view anyone could remonstrate regarding their condition, but in the absence of clear accepted evidence - You may be wasting your time.

I engaged the citizens advice to present my evidence- but the evidence WAS obtained under my own volition.

You can only argue a case that falls within the criteria of the system.

Hope this helps you- It is the ONLY way forward - I had 3 years of frustration regarding this matter.
You need to put your evidence in order and first present it to the TRIBUNAL- then if unsatisfied -you have reference to precedence.

Karen Chong.

R.S Bowie left an annotation ()

You CAN sue the government - look up judgnments in the links below of cases where people have taken legal action. You can use the search function for legal action involving the Department of Work and Pensions, which JCP belongs to.

http://www.bailii.org/

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa...

http://www.supremecourt.gov.uk/decided-c...

Mr Taylor left an annotation ()

Dear Karen,

Would you perhaps have more success asking for the briefing's issued by the DWP to their "medical experts" setting the percentage quota of people required to fail the medical tests in order to satisfy the governments stated intention to remove a specified number of "welfare scroungers" from the register?

Many thanks for making the request

Karen left an annotation ()

HI.

Ms.Taylor-

I think that you have me confused with some one else.

I have no need to approach anyone else as I won my cases at tribunal in front of a court judge.

I presented clear evidence and proved that the DWP relied on only part of an available article - I simply downloaded the full article and presented the part that supported MY case and pointed out their 'gamesmanship'. Articles are quite long and are in sections, there will always be a part of it that relates to your side. The DWP often use articles to beat you - DO THE SAME!

The DWP will go to any measures, including only presenting PART evidence to support their case.

One should remember that their actions are governed by their own mandate which in turn is supported by legal articles. If you take time and download the FULL article you will no doubt see part of the document that indeed supports YOUR side. It is your own responsibility, unfortunately, to present evidence if you are indeed appealing to tribunal - They are bound by the law.

As far as asking for details from any department - This is not important to me as I have won both of my cases officially and and have a ruling by a court.

To take this from me, they would, first, have to change the law in my case, as I have legal ruling.

Remember that the key is in the very article that they quote as supporting their case - but, it seems that they are not bound to inform you of any part of this that may support you and that is where they win - DON'T LET THEM - just download the whole article and read it properly as I did and WON!

DON'T GET ANGRY- PRESENT YOUR CASE WITH MANNERS - RESEARCH what they claim and remain REASONABLE. If you don't then you will fail because you are UNREASONABLE.

Finally - use their own language - if you cannot articulate reasonably - then find somebody who can!

Quote from the very same article driven evidence as they do and GET DOCTORS, SPECIALIST and HEALTH AND SAFETY reports to them (DWP) and to the tribunal.

I believe that the 'over ruling' of expert evidence by a nurse to be disgraceful behaviour and that people should complain in support of the experts. It is a classic case of the lunatics running the asylum as -ALL! INVOLVED ARE PART OF THE NHS! And all involve suck of the PUBLIC PURSE! Public not being the operative word!

This is the way forward and I am living proof.

regards and good luck - you'll need it!

Mrs.K.V.Chong.

Mr Taylor left an annotation ()

Thank you for the further information Karen,

I hadn't confused you with anyone else as I was in fact referring to your unsuccessful FOI request on this website, and implying that you would be likely to have about as much success with my suggestion as you did with your own request.

Although, of course, in reality I doubt if you, I or anyone else are actually naive enough to expect Authorities to fully comply with their legal responsibilities under the FOI Act or any other.

Karen left an annotation ()

Hi Mr. Taylor.

At the beginning I requested information and as you say authorities are not generous with information.

The point I was making was that you simply don't need these people because all law/articles/public office criteria and rights are all available as a download and if you are careful with research you can win by using their own criteria for your benefit as they obviously do.

As explained all articles are quite long and there will be a section that supports you for sure. They simply quote the part that seems to support them.

I have won twice so I believe that I have set a clear methodology on how to win.

The DWP will use any means to stop your payments, one must do the same - using the very same criteria as they use.

I overturned their decision makers twice at tribunal.

It is clear that asking for information simply presents an opportunity for 'the other side to muddy the waters - so in my opinion the best way forward is to do it yourself.

Health and safety regs are there to be downloaded as is ALL government criteria.

Evidence is the key.

regards.

Karen Chong.

andrew left an annotation ()

some times going to your mp can be worth it let me tell you what has happened to me and the reason why i am considering taking what i call The Department for Wankers and Pricks..... like most people have said they do not care about us the people who matter what is there phrase with jsa? "here to help you back to work" what a joke....

this all started in june this year when my now ex- partener was interview and accepted for a admin job under the future jobs fund that labour brought in because we was claiming as a couple she signs off and i tell them i want to continue to claim. right my ex's hours total 25 per week 1 hour over what they say a joint claiming couple can work but read the booklet "you may still be to claim" right this to them is a lie..... i was told i could NOT claim anything

so i start phoning around and gets the info i was wanting i could in fact still claim "national insurance credits" only so my pesion would be protected
by this time its late june so i decide to pay my now conservative mp who then writes to the cheif exec of job centre plus who wrote in his letter back to mp he worte "during his visit he told us his partener had found work and we closed their claim from the 25th june.this was a mistake and i appologise for our error"

the other thing i was being refused was access to training course under new deal but once mp intervened i got put on one just to keep me quiet but it aint working out that way as what they put me on was a farce 13 week course and still not got what i went for...

but i can beat this!!!

for the last 2 months i have been having to beg borrow or even steal food money to live as i was offered a job but the agency had not been straight with us or the company we was sent to so was asked to leave after only 6 hours worked why did i not try for a crisis loan I DID but i am up to the 1500 limit... so i go back to the mp's office ad gets sent to CAB gets told something different there so off i go back to the mp's office they called CAB and realised their mistake and then took out a 20 pound not and placed in my hand and said i cant see you go with out at this time of year this was some 2 weeks ago now since then i have had one payment but was skint gain after having to pay people back so i am no better off than before....

Allen left an annotation ()

If you are in any way disabled under the Equality Act 2010 then in fact you CAN sue the DWP C**NTS using form N1 via county court.

I.e. Unfavourable treatment, less favourable treatment, failure to take into account disability, substantial disadvantage and detriment, failure to make reasonable adjustments, the list is endless under the Equality Act 2010.

Allen Vincent

S. Naylor left an annotation ()

I have now been a year without payment, I was given a nil points on my medical examination, the paper work I have received that states why I was given nil point is a pack of lies, its as if they just write what they like and the fact that my problems are mental and they have ignored every answer I gave disgusts me, they gave one reason that I was able to look into the NURSES eyes while in the interview which was complete and utter lies as I spent the whole time looking into the windows on the building opposite as I was so uncomfortable in the room. Yes that is correct a whole YEAR without payment, like others begging boring and eventually stealing food just to survive. I was eventually forced to claim JSA to receive benefits yet after 4 weeks of claiming JSA I find myself still without benefit, the reason they gave for non payment of JSA was because my appeal is upholding them being able to set my claim live. I have also had STAR team and SURE START behind me and numerous contact to Rory Palmer deputy Mayor of Leicester. I assure you, you will get know where with the job center pricks. They refuse to help in any way and would in my honest opinion rather I just died than pay out. They would rather pay to have me kept behind bars. I have a friends father die of the disability of which they say he was fit to work, he appealed for 3 years before dying 5 weeks ago.

I have been a YEAR with nothing but a £20 crisis loan and they tell me I could be another 18 months minimum before it gets sorted

YOU TRULY ARE WASTING YOUR TIME