Statutory basis for checking all claimants' income and savings regularly

The request was successful.

Dear Department for Work and Pensions,

I received a letter recently from the DWP advising that "We [DWP] are required to check all claimants' income and savings regularly ..."

I am therefore seeking the statutory basis for this review or income and savings, bearing in mind that claimants are placed on notice of their requirement to advise the DWP of changes in these two areas as they arise.

I am also looking for some sort of definition of how regularly the DWP are required to check these details for all their claimants and what the basis in law is for this period.

Yours faithfully,

Ian Howgate

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.
 
Should you 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

References

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

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

Thank you for your Freedom of Information request.

You can expect a reply by 3 December unless I need to come back to you to clarify your request or the balance of the public interest test needs to be considered.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

DWP Strategy FoI Team

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act

If you are not happy with this response you may request an internal review by e-mailing [DWP request email] or by writing to DWP, Central FoI Team,
Caxton House, Tothill Street, SW1H 9NA. Any review request should be submitted within two months of the date of this letter. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF
www.ico.org.uk/Global/contact_us or telephone 0303 123 1113 or 01625 545745

show quoted sections

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

1 Attachment

Please see the attached reply to your Freedom of Information request

Yours sincerely

DWP Strategy FoI team

show quoted sections

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

DWP response for reference

Dear Ian Howgate,
Thank you for your Freedom of Information request of 5 November 2015. You asked:
“I received a letter recently from the DWP advising that "We [DWP] are required to check all claimants' income and savings regularly ..."
I am therefore seeking the statutory basis for this review or income and savings, bearing in mind that claimants are placed on notice of their requirement to advise the DWP of changes in these two areas as they arise.
I am also looking for some sort of definition of how regularly the DWP are required to check these details for all their claimants and what the basis in law is for this period.”
All claimants’ who receive benefit must notify the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) every time there is a change in their circumstances that may affect their benefit payment. For example, if there is a change in their occupational pension, change of address, or if someone moves into their household. Reporting changes on time enables DWP to ensure that they continue to fully meet the conditions of their benefit, and that they are paid the correct amount.
You are correct in that it’s the responsibility of the claimant to tell us about these changes. However, to help them do this, from 27 April 2015, DWP introduced the Annual Verification check.
This means that DWP will send an ‘Annual Verification’ letter asking claimants, who have been receiving income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance for 12 months or more, to confirm or update their circumstances, and sign a declaration included in the letter.
The legal basis for the Annual Verification for Jobseeker’s Allowance is provided by Regulations 24 of The Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulation 1996, in conjunction with Regulations 17 and 18 of The Social Security and Child Support (Decision and Appeals) Regulations 1999:
 The Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/207) can be found at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1996/...
DWP Central Freedom of Information Team
e-mail: freedom-of-information-request@dwp.gsi.gov.uk Our Ref: VTR 4729 DATE: 23 November 2015
 The Social Security and Child Support (Decision and Appeals) Regulations 1999 (S.I. 1999/991) can be found at: http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1999/...
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely,
DWP Strategy FoI Team

Dear DWP Strategy Freedom of Information,

Thank you for the attached, in order to complete my request I believe it is beholden upon the DWP to send me the guidance upon the application of the Annual Verification check they claim to have instigated from April 2015, in particular, what information will be sought, whether it will be a simple - nothing has changed return - as the tax credits Office do - and in particular when each individual will be expected to make a return of updated information

Regulations 24 of The Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulation 1996 seems to apply only to JSA cases and only to instances of applications for benefit.
Regulations 17 and 18 of The Social Security and Child Support (Decision and Appeals) Regulations 1999: does relate to a series of circumstances in which information can be sought during the process of a claim but none of these include a) annually from every claimant whether inside or outside of the list whose circumstances are of any nature whether inside or outside of the list in Reg 17 and b) when someone makes a complaint about the DWP (indeed the DWP have now written to me explaining that such intrusive investigations are automatically started when someone makes a complaint about the JCP or DWP.

Hence please supply information on the Annual Verification Check, how it works and who it applies to and when along with information which justifies applying the AVC to all claimants arbitrarily once a year as well as to claimants who raise complaints against the DWP whether those complaints are direct or through a third party. I have to say here that the latter case sounds like classic victimisation and therefore if the legislation does state that this is a justifiable reason to investigate a claimant then I really need to know so that I can get the law makers to review this law which sounds very suspect to me.

Yours sincerely,

Ian Howgate

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

Thank you for your Freedom of Information review request.

Please note that it is our internal target to answer reviews within 20 working days unless I need to come back to you to clarify your request, or the balance of the public interest test needs to be considered which we will keep you informed about.

If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.

Yours sincerely

DWP Strategy FoI Team

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your right to complain under the Freedom of Information Act

If you are not happy with this response you may request an internal review by e-mailing [DWP request email] or by writing to DWP, Central FoI Team,
Caxton House, Tothill Street, SW1H 9NA. Any review request should be submitted within two months of the date of this letter. Please remember to quote the reference number above in any future communications.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review you may apply directly to the Information Commissioner’s Office for a decision. Generally the Commissioner cannot make a decision unless you have exhausted our own complaints procedure. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at: The Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow Cheshire SK9 5AF
www.ico.org.uk/Global/contact_us or telephone 0303 123 1113 or 01625 545745

show quoted sections

Anita Bellows left an annotation ()

Did DWP tell you in writing that this kind of investigation is started after somebody complains?

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

Yes I have a letter from a correspondence manager dated 12th November which reads - "When you made the complaint we reviewed ****** ESA entitlement to ensure we were not either underpaying or overpaying, to check whether we had overlooked certain aspects of ****** award. This is a routine approach to ensuring we are paying someone correctly and there is no direct connection or coincidence as you suggest to ***** [previous] complaints or other matters".

Whilst they try to claim that there is no link between the checks and the complaints made the statement is clearly self defeating as they claim that they did the check because of the complaint being raised and that this is a routine process.

It is plain victimisation of someone making a complaint in an attempt to deter them from following up their complaint and discourage them from doing the same again. It is not the first time that I have witnessed this practice (complaint = claim review and series of checks out of no where) - which is why I was quick to challenge it this time.

Anita Bellows left an annotation ()

Thanks. I agree. It looks to me like intimidation and will discourage others to complain, if they know it might trigger an investigation. I have also noticed a wider use of 'compliance interviews' for ESA claimants, some in the Support Group, to check their details. Strangely enough, one person wrote to me to say it was just after winning her appeal and I am now wondering whether there is a link between challenging a DWP decision and a review of claimants details. It is worth following that up. Thank you for responding

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

Very interesting - the complaint referred to in my previous annotation was about an unjustified compliance interview which seemed to me to be simple harassment by the DWP - this definitely links up. The DWP have eventually supplied the supposed disclosure document that they claim prompted the compliance interview but they have redacted the actual allegation of supposed fraud and the date of the disclosure - which makes me think that this is not even dated at the relevant time and the compliance interview is again just simple intimidation.

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

I also have a case where immediately after winning an ESA appeal (from 0 points to 15 in ten minutes) a claimant was instructed to attend a series of work related interviews initial consultation meeting with ATOS and threatened with the termination of their benefit. The claimant had already done the full set of work related interviews during their wait for the appeal to be heard and when getting there refused to speak because ATOS would not allow them to record their own meeting. ATOS reissued a demand for attendance and refused to allow recording - I have this in writing. When the claimant would not attend JCP cancelled the claim and then mysteriously the JSA claim took almost six months to be processed (in spite my repeated protests) - leaving the family without benefits for nearly 6 months. On appeal the decision was overturned and the ESA reinstated and back payment made - however this took 18 months. The complaint about this whole affair was again never processed by JCP or ATOS.

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

1 Attachment

Please see the attached reply to your Freedom of Information request
 
Yours sincerely
 
DWP Strategy FoI team

show quoted sections

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

DWP Response for reference:

Dear Ian Howgate,
I am writing in response to your review request received on 23 November 2015. An internal review has been carried out by someone of a senior grade to the person who dealt with your original request. I am now in a position to respond to you. In your review request you said:
“[See Above]”.
After consideration of your request I can say that Freedom of Information is intentionally intent blind and it is beholding on us to provide only the information requested and nothing more. As that information was provided in our original response, I cannot uphold your complaint. However in the interests clarity I can say that regulation 24(5) and (5A) of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996, allows the Secretary of State to choose any period for checks of a claimant’s circumstances.
Your request for new information is currently being considered under FOI 4940. We will write to you separately as soon as our work to address this new request is completed.
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely,
DWP Strategy FoI Team

Dear DWP Strategy Freedom of Information,

In light of your response I am assuming that you have decided to treat my request for clarification of the first request as a separate request and all documents pertaining to the new annual checks will be forthcoming under that request. If this is not correct please respond immediately to correct whatever I have misunderstood.

I also note that you specify that Regs 5 and 24 under the 1996 JSA regulations allows the Secretary of State (SS) to specify the period at which he wants to have claimant's circumstances checked. As I would have thought this all fell under my initial request on this subject, will you please urgently advise a) where one would find this regulation? b) whether this regulation is limited to JSA claims and if so what the relevant legislation is that covers ESA, IS and NI Credits? c) deliver copies of the two latest copies of the statutory instruments/legal instruments used by the SS to define these periods, so that I can see the basis for the DWP carrying out these checks and how regularly - which was my original request!

Yours sincerely,

Ian Howgate

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

1 Attachment

Please see the attached reply to your Freedom of Information request

Yours sincerely

DWP Strategy FoI team

show quoted sections

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

DWP response for reference
21st Dec 2015
Dear Sir,
Thank you for your Freedom of Information request of 23 November 2015. You asked:
Thank you for the attached, in order to complete my request I believe it is beholden upon the DWP to send me the guidance upon the application of the Annual Verification check they claim to have instigated from April 2015, in particular, what information will be sought, whether it will be a simple - nothing has changed return - as the tax credits Office do - and in particular when each individual will be expected to make a return of updated information Regulations 24 of The Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulation 1996 seems to apply only to JSA cases and only to instances of applications for benefit. Regulations 17 and 18 of The Social Security and Child Support (Decision and Appeals) Regulations 1999: does relate to a series of circumstances in which information can be sought during the process of a claim but none of these include a) annually from every claimant whether inside or outside of the list whose circumstances are of any nature whether inside or outside of the list in Reg 17 and b) when someone makes a complaint about the DWP (indeed the DWP have now written to me explaining that such intrusive investigations are automatically started when someone makes a complaint about the JCP or DWP. Hence please supply information on the Annual Verification Check, how it works and who it applies to and when along with information which justifies applying the AVC to all claimants arbitrarily once a year as well as to claimants who raise complaints against the DWP whether those complaints are direct or through a third party. I have to say here that the latter case sounds like classic victimisation and therefore if the legislation does state that this is a justifiable reason to investigate a claimant then I really need to know so that I can get the law makers to review this law which sounds very suspect to me.
In light of your response I am assuming that you have decided to treat my request for clarification of the first request as a separate request and all documents pertaining to the new annual checks will be forthcoming under that request. If this is not correct please respond immediately to correct whatever I have misunderstood. I also note that you specify that Regs 5 and 24 under the 1996 JSA regulations allows the Secretary of State (SS) to specify the period at which he wants to have claimant's circumstances checked. As I would have thought this all fell under my initial request on this subject, will you please urgently advise a) where one would find this regulation? b) whether this regulation is limited to JSA claims and if so what the relevant legislation is that covers ESA, IS and NI Credits? c) deliver copies of the two latest copies of the statutory instruments/legal instruments used by the SS to define these periods, so that I can see the basis for the DWP carrying out these checks and how regularly - which was my original request!
The introduction of an Annual Verification Check was first announced by the then Coalition Government in its Spending Review Plans 2013. The conditionality measures package it introduced aimed to strengthen the responsibility of claimants in exchange for benefits, and strengthen how the Department monitors compliance. The introduction of Annual Verification would ensure that DWP maintained regularly updated information in support of income based JSA claims. Additionally, annually verifying the claimants circumstances would enable unreported changes of circumstances to be identified and actioned. The Check was introduced in April 2015.
Turning to the legislation which allows for such verification, the primary power is section 5(1)(i) of the Social Security Administration Act 1992:
Regulations may provide…
(i) for the person to whom, time when and manner in which a benefit to which this section applies is to be paid and for the information and evidence to be furnished in connection with the payment of such a benefit;
For JSA, the (relevant) regulations made under this power are:
Regulation 24(5) & (9A) of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996 SI 207:
(5) A claimant shall furnish such certificates, documents and other evidence affecting his continuing entitlement to a jobseeker’s allowance, whether that allowance is payable to him and, if so, in what amount as the Secretary of State may require.
(9A) Where, pursuant to paragraph (5) or (5A), a claimant is required to provide certificates, documents or other evidence, he shall do so within the period applicable
under regulation 17(4) of the Social Security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999.
and
Regulation 17(2)(ca) of the Social security and Child Support (Decisions and Appeals) Regulations 1999 SI991:
Provision of information or evidence 17.—(1) This regulation applies where the Secretary of State requires information or evidence for a determination whether a decision awarding a relevant benefit should be– … (2) For the purposes of paragraph (1), the following persons must satisfy the requirements of paragraph (4)– …. (ca) a person from whom the Secretary of State requires documents, certificates or other evidence under regulation 24(5) or (5A) of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations; (4) A person to whom paragraph (2) refers must either– (a) supply the information or evidence within– (i) a period of 14 days beginning with the date on which the notification under paragraph (3) was sent to him or such longer period as the Secretary of State allows in that notification; or (ii) such longer period as he satisfies the Secretary of State is necessary in order to enable him to comply with the requirement;
(5) The Secretary of State may suspend the payment of a relevant benefit, in whole or in part, to any person to whom paragraph (2)(b) to (f) applies who fails to satisfy the requirements of paragraph (4).
An example of the type of letter that is sent is below:
L6700 AV
It should be noted that the timing of the check itself is not in regulations. This is discretionary. The Secretary of State has decided that a year into a claim is a proportionate period to introduce a check.
ESA and Income Support are both also covered s5 of the 1992 Act. However, where the Secretary of State requires information from these claimants in order to verify their circumstances, he uses regulation 32 (1) & (1A) of the Social Security (Claims and Payments) Regulations 1987 SI 1968:
Information to be given and changes to be notified 32.—(1) Except in the case of a jobseeker’s allowance, every beneficiary and every person by whom, or on whose behalf, sums by way of benefit are receivable shall furnish in such manner and as the Secretary of State may determine and within the period applicable under regulation 17(4) of the Decisions and Appeals Regulations such information or evidence as the Secretary of State may require for determining whether a decision on the award of benefit should be revised under section 9 of the Social Security Act 1998 or superseded under section 10 of that Act.
(1A) Every beneficiary and every person by whom, or on whose behalf, sums by way of
benefit are receivable shall furnish in such manner and at such times as the Secretary of State may determine such information or evidence as the Secretary of State may require in connection with payment of the benefit claimed or awarded.
If the claimant does not respond then the same suspension provision that applies to JSA applies equally to these benefits.
Unlike JSA, there is no Annual Verification check of these benefits.
National Insurance credits are not a benefit and so none of the above legislation applies to them. But if the credit is linked to conditionality eg the provision of medical evidence, a claimant must continue to meet that condition for the crediting to continue.
All the above legislation can be found in the link below:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ Go to Browse legislation and use the year of the Regulation and SI numbers to find the full Regulations.
If anyone should complain about being asked to provide the information then that would be considered under standard departmental processes. Of course, should they fail to reply and benefit is suspended and possibly ended, then the normal dispute and appeal rights arise.
If you have any queries about this letter please contact me quoting the reference number above.
Yours sincerely,
DWP Strategy FoI Team

Dear DWP Strategy Freedom of Information,

Thank you for this helpful response. I have not had a chance to review the information by reference back to the regulation, however it appears helpful and, at first sight, to be thorough.

As initial comments I note in particular, the statement in the response that there is no Annual Verification Check for ESA or IS. Should I take this to mean that in the case of ESA and IS claims that there is no requirement upon the DWP to check income and savings of claimants REGULARLY? Obviously I understand that in some circumstances a risk-based check my be justified but that a regular non-risk-based check is not a duty on the DWP in regard to ESA and IS claims even following the instigation of the AVC for JSA claims?

Secondly I note your comment :

"If anyone should complain about being asked to provide the information then that would be considered under standard departmental processes. Of course, should they fail to reply and benefit is suspended and possibly ended, then the normal dispute and appeal rights arise. "

Can I just confirm that when you say 'the normal dispute and appeal rights arise' that you are saying that in these circumstances a claimant is entitled to a right of appeal? If so why do I hold in hand two letters in these circumstances which clearly state that there is no right of appeal? Either the letters are incorrect or the response is misleading - please urgently clarify which?

Yours sincerely,

Ian Howgate

Nicola H left an annotation ()

Why do I get a feeling that the stipulation of time to provide evidence for ESA, etc., actually was intended to mean just that - the DWP is acting on a change of circumstance, someone has grassed up a claimant on disability benefits, that kind of thing, and it refers to the 28 days a claimant has to respond to the notification letter?
My gut feeling is that this part of the regulation has been twisted and is now being abused for the purpose of harassing disabled people during the course of an award (as I am experiencing myself, right now). I'd be surprised if 'planned interventions' and the like, made for no justifiable reason that I can see, other than planned harassment, where part of the original plan back when this regulation was written up.

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

I agree with you. There seems to be a number of very worrying processes going on here on the down low. The DWP look like they are using their alleged rights of investigation for a number of purposes, victimising people who challenge them - through a complaints process or an appeal (for instance an appeal against the well documented defective Limited Capacity for Work Assessments), for harassing people on behalf of third parties (anyone who feels like making an allegation - substantiated or not) and for harassing people who the government have targeted but are struggling to get at through welfare reforms like those in the ESA Support Group and those in the Work Related Group who have mental health issues.
That said let's wait and see what the DWP come back with - perhaps they do have a completely legitimate reason for doing these things (none of which would - from what I can currently see - normally be considered acceptable in any other organisation).
One thing is for sure - if they are allowed to do these things then they need to make it clear to the public, why they are allowed and in what circumstances - so that everyone knows before they do anything which would spark such an 'investigation or interrogation' that such might be the consequence.
I certainly would not have raised a complaint had I believed that the claimant would, as a direct result, have been routinely singled out for a painful and pointless interrogation as a consequence.

Nicola H left an annotation ()

I am waiting for my own FoI response to this issue. I'm coming at it from a slightly different angle to you, but it amounts to the same: getting to the root of ongoing harassment of the disabled and sick by the DWP, and DWP staff members abusing their powers.
I think this subject needs a Judicial Review, and I intend to take it that far, if needs be. Those regulations need clarifying and amending to prevent the DWP using them for a purpose that was not the original intent. If we don't get this sorted, the DWP will use it to harass more and more vulnerable people to death.

Ian Howgate left an annotation ()

I do agree.

I was working with a man who, before meeting me, had failed an assessment and was forced to sign on JSA, as he could not face trying to battle against the DWP. He had the most horrific list of illnesses which were attested to by his doctor and his local council who had issued him with a bus pass because of his enduring incapacity. However the DWP and the local council harassed him over the next three months so badly that he ended up in hospital where he died a month later. People have died from this and will continue to die unless the DWP stop harassing people. I know the DWP were forced to reveal that many people who failed assessments subsequently died within a few months, which goes to show that, at best, the assessment process wrongly assesses people who dearly need ESA, however the matter is actually worse because the statistics cannot demonstrate what this case shows that the miss-diagnosis and the subsequent distress and harassment shortens people's lives.

It is a pretty callous way to cut the benefits bill, to kill off the weakest people claiming benefits and thereby not have to pay them any longer.

One tip for you is to look at the Equality Act 2010 and to realise that any person who is off work because of an illness for a year or more or a period likely to be at least a year will be defined as DISABLED under that Act (there are many other qualification criteria but this one is fairly solid for all people on ESA) and hence is entitled to a reasonable adjustment for that illness and not to be treated less favourably by the DWP, than would a person who is not technically disabled. As a result the DWP are not allowed to target people who are disabled and are not allowed to do things to them that they would not do to an able-bodied or able-minded person in the same circumstances and they are particularly entitled not to be harassed and that if they point out that some unwanted treatment by the DWP is detrimental to their health or their ability to access benefits, that the DWP are obliged to make a reasonable adjustment to accommodate that person's disability.

If a person is treated less fairly having raised the point of disability discrimination, then that less favourable treatment is considered victimisation and the courts take a very dim view of organisations who victimise people for trying to enforce their disability rights.

The fact is that most people on benefits do not have access to lawyers who can spell this out - so the DWP feel that they can harass, discriminate and victimise disabled people on benefits and think they will get away with it. They should not - because if they do then you are right it will happen more and more.

Best of luck with your campaign and may God be with you.

Nicola H left an annotation ()

Thank you Ian. I wish you the best of luck getting your answers.

The Equality Act 2010 is a piece of legislation I use often with the DWP, as it seems to have forgotten its obligations under that law... however, I'm looking into this as an equality issue (among other things) and it may be difficult to build a case, as the DWP treats most claimants like crap. That said, sick and disabled people are vulnerable when compared to, say, your average jobseeker, and should be treated more carefully - hence the protective legislation (that the DWP largely ignores).

DWP Strategy Freedom of Information, Department for Work and Pensions

  Please find attached clarification requested

 

1. The Secretary of State does, as with JSA, have the authority to request
information from IS and ESA claimants at any time. However, equally these
claimants are legally bound to report changes in their circumstances which
they understand will affect their entitlement to the existing award –
income and savings clearly fall into this category.  The former is applied
taking a risk-based approach; the latter is an ongoing requirement.

   

 

2. The dispute and appeal rights attach to the termination of an award and
not to suspension.

 

Yours

 

DWP Strategy FoI Team

    

 

 

 

show quoted sections