Post by nickd on Mar 24, 2012 19:44:49 GMT 1
Mandatory consideration of revision before appeal consultation
The DWP is not openly promoting this consultation, but anyone likely to be affected by the welfare reforms or poor decision making by the DWP, HMRC, Local Authorities and other departments needs to be very aware of the potential implications.
Here's how the DWP phrase the consultation process...
"This consultation concerns issues relevant to the implementation and operation of the appeals reform provisions in the Welfare Reform Bill and invites comments on the draft regulations.
Clause 100 of the Welfare Reform Bill as introduced enables regulations to be made to require claimants and other persons who disagree with a decision to request consideration of revision before they may appeal against a decision.
Subject to Parliamentary approval, the Department for Work and Pensions has planned how the powers provided for in the Bill may be implemented and has drafted regulations that would support these plans.
This consultation paper sets out the Department’s plan to implement the measure for existing benefits and invites comments on issues relevant to the implementation plans and comments on the draft regulations.
The new benefits provided for in the Bill, Universal Credit (UC) and Personal Independent Payment (PIP), will include the measure from outset. The measure will be applied to these benefits (UC and PIP) following the same principles as existing benefits, as described in this document."
Who this consultation is aimed at
We would like to hear from all who are interested and in particular we would welcome contributions from:
[1] claimants of DWP benefits
[2] clients of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission
[3] claimant representative organisations
[4] voluntary organisations
[5] employees of DWP, Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service and members of the judiciary.
[6] Comments from workers and the general public are also welcome.
here are the links, both to the DWP page & the consultation document.
www.dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2012/mandatory-consideration.shtml
www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/mandatory-consideration-consultation.pdf
It is very important this is contested, you really should consider how this may affect you
Last year I wrote an article entitled the 'welfare reform car crash', it wasn't something written for fun and nor did I think I would get so drawn into identifying the potential complexities which I believe will be created by this untried and untested programme of welfare reform. I have an enquiring and analytical mind and thus the more I probed, the more I could see how absolutely disastrous this 'radical' programme of refom could be.
I speak from experience, I've conducted thousands of welfare benefit cases as a specialist for the organisation I work for; this includes all manner or cases up to highly complex appeals in our upper tribunals. I work with a team of similarly minded professionals. To be honest it surprised me that the article got so much interest, with over 51,000 views to date it was by far the most looked at on this forum. Upon reflection I could see why people were interested; - there are many people out there who simply live in fear of government's welfare reforms. Nothing of this magnitude in welfare reform has ever been undertaken before and it concerns me greatly that it will go badly wrong. In truth, the reason I know it won't work is because it's been put together by people who are simply out of touch with the people it will affect. The fact that government in so far as the Ministry of Justice is concerned tells us that welfare benefits advice only requires generalist advice speaks volumes of the way they misconstrue the enormous complexity of the benefits system. To those of you who think the 'Universal Credit' is the key to unlocking the complexity, I hate to tell you but I genuinely believe you are wrong. It's a step in the right direction, but there's one almighty staircase to climb before we reach a stage where we are anywhere near simplifying the system. Let me make something clear, I am not a prophet of doom who wants this to fail; - I very much hope I am proved wrong and it will work, but let's just reserve judgement for a good few years before we reach a point where anyone can say they were right or wrong.
At the heart of the dispute process, the DWP has for umpteen years issued a leaflet which tells you what to do if you think their decision is 'wrong'. The GL24 appeal form & leaflet is mentioned in every single statutory decision notice issued by the DWP. The process has always given a claimant a right to ask the DWP to look at the decision again, or you can exercise your right to go straight for an appeal; - it's an independent process where you can elect to go to a Tribunal and tell them why you think the authority you are disputing is wrong.
But now government wants to change the entire process, it wants to introduce a mandatory process of asking the authorities to look at your decision before you can lodge an appeal with the Tribunal.
The problem is the government is not being straight with people, not with claimants, nor advisers, nor decision-makers, nor Tribunals and certainly not with the general public who are drip fed story after story by the media over how so many people are wrongly claiming benefits. The general public are not being told about the epidemic of appeals which is breaking out as more and more people successfully overturn decisions by exercising their right to have their case decided by a Tribunal. The people who go to Tribunal have little faith in the decisions being reversed by the authorities prior to their appeals; - in truth usually months have elapsed in which the authorities could have changed the decision if they felt so inclined. Let's be real here, these authorities are being targeted to get people off benefit; - no matter how they may deny this is the case.
The government knows all to well that the senior president of the Tribunals has stated in a report issued only last month.
The well informed report looks at the rise of appeals and makes predictions as to how they will go on increasing.
Annual Intake of Social Security & Child Support Appeals
2008-09 --- 242,800
2009-10 --- 339,200
2010-11 --- 418,500
(forecast)
2011-12 --- 421,600
2012-13 --- 483,400
2013-14 --- 576,700
2014-15 --- 644,000
These figures are the highest we have ever seen. So far the government has reacted by drafting in more Tribunal judges, staff & increasing the numbers of hearings; - even sitting on Saturdays.
The Ministry of Justice is bending the statistics in a pretence that there isn't a problem, it helps them in their argument that legal aid is not needed to help fund advice agencies so that they can guide people through the appeals process, it is also helpful to DWP & the media led perception that huge numbers of claimants are claiming benefits to which they do not have an entitlement; - even though all of the statistics show this to be massively overstated.
The government has promised in its consultations that reconsideration will make things better, in an ideal world of course it would. However, the situation we have is far from ideal, there is no getting away from the fact that welfare reform requires extensive integration of departments which are currently not interconnected. Computer systems are not tested in a real 'live' fully loaded environment and officials who I speak to 'off the record' are scathing over successful implementation of the Universal Credit.
The 'mandatory revision before appeal' consultation exercise is only of value if it is acted upon. Amongst the key concerns I would bring the following to the fore:
(1) It is said that the new process will involve a second look at the decision by another decision-maker - the authorities are currently not coping; - with staffing cuts, where will suitably trained decision-makers be found to deal with literally millions of claims?
(2) How will claimants appealing against the loss or reduction of benefits cope financially? - the reconsideration process could considerably extend the time it takes before a claimant eventually is able to reach the point where they can go before a Tribunal. How will they afford to live, pay their rent, Council Tax or mortgage until their appeal is heard?
(3) Why does it require new legislation to improve standards of decision - making? - In the current process, the authorities can and should already carry out a reconsideration as a pre-requisite to an appeal. How will making the process mandatory improve better standards of adjudication?
(4) The consultation document places an emphasis on more telephone contact & explanations. With so many claims being reconsidered, what safeguards will be in place to ensure all calls are properly acted upon and documented/logged on to IT systems?
(5) The lack of written records of decisions is subject to a high probability that information of a statutory nature will simply get lost or never produced to a point where the claimant has no evidence to show when they requested their claim be looked at again. What realistic safeguards will be in place to ensure the claimant has the evidence they need to show what action they have taken?
(6) A reliance on telephone interventions will subject claimants to the frustration at being unable to get through to a named individual, many will not have the means to make endless calls to the authorities, it will lead to significant breakdown in communications. How will the authorities guarantee that some people who are correctly entitled won't just give up because of the stress and anxiety associated with their disputes and a distinct lack of a proper audit trail?
(7) Telephone interventions are difficult to police, some claimants may not like the idea of being recorded and in any event it is often impossible to link a recording to when a claimant calls the relevant department. The DWP has talked of using fraud analysts to detect 'voice patterns' when speaking with claimants. How can claimants not feel intruded upon and assured of 100% accuracy?
(8) The lack of written documentation will make it inordinately difficult for claimants to relay what was said in a telephone explanation to an advisor who they may later rely upon to assist them in a dispute. How can accurate records be assured?
(9) The consultation mentions the process of revision in its heading. This could lead to situations where a claimant only has the right to benefit from the date when a request for a revision is made. What safeguards will be in place to provide for retrospective supersession so that awards can be paid from a previous date?
(10) Claimants facing disability may go months without their entitlement and thus go without resources intended to meet their costs in living with the added costs associated with living with disability. Likewise, some claimants will go months without any access in to work programmes intended to provide them transition from welfare to work. What safeguards will be in place to provide for support at the earliest opportunity?
The above points are by no means exhaustive and I am sure many others can be applied. My strongest advice is to respond to the consultation, if necessary seeking help with its completion. Keep a copy of it and discuss it with your MP, preferably at a face to face meeting at a constituency office; perhaps with the help of a welfare or disability advocacy group or representative organisation.
Personalise your response to reflect your concerns, this helps them stand out. It is best to use the consultation response format, but please consider drafting in additional remarks to cover points not raised by the consultation.
Whatever you do, please make sure you act upon this. The consequences of this part of the reforms passing through into legislation could create chaos in the system such that we have never seen before.
The links to the consultation are repeated here
www.dwp.gov.uk/consultations/2012/mandatory-consideration.shtml
www.dwp.gov.uk/docs/mandatory-consideration-consultation.pdf
Link to more Tribunal information
mylegal.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=frontline&action=display&thread=558
mylegal.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=frontline&action=display&thread=591
You have up to the 4th May 2012 to act, but don't leave it until then, respond to this now!