A 5 week wait for a benefit to be paid is ridiculous for in this age of computers it should be much quicker.
This is completely wrong for New Claimants of benefits as in many instances the benefit will be needed urgently.
Then for claimant having to move from one benefit to another, this 5 week wait is also wrong, especially as their old benefits stop when the claim is received.
Why, in this day with all the computer systems could not the old benefit be continued to be paid until the new benefit is ready for payment, a seamless transfer, or can they (DWP) not be bothered. This is especially so, as some also suffer a benefit reduction when all the old benefits are converted into one.
This is not a welfare system, but a punishment system, but being on benefits is not a crime, but the way the Government, the Press and some misguided individuals in the UK population appear to believe that it is.
UC claimants suffering deductions to pay back loans, some including the advance payments due to the length of UC starting from the closure of the old benefits.
Please advise me, that in this age of new technology, can not an existing benefit payment be continued to be paid until UC is ready to commence.
If this were so then there would be no lack of payment as the transfer from a persons old benefits to UC would be seamless.
However, this would need common sense and a desire to be a responsible organisation, unfortunately, something, it appears, sadly lacking within the DWP.
I thought I had heard about some diabolical benefit assessments and assessors and that nothing could be worse thanthose I had aready heard about.
This just proves how wrong you can be. This particular assessor would appear to have some serious problems relating to his behaviour and I would question whether he is capabable and competent not only to do benefit assessments, but to do his sunstancial job in the NHS.
In this persons behaviour I would go on to say, that during this assessment some elements of criminal behaviour to place and this does question his ability to have conducted proper assessments with other benefit claimants.
The process is stressful enough for the benefit claimants and their families and they can do well not having to put up with the conduct of this particular assessor.
It also beggars the question of how many more like him are also conducting such assessments in the manner similar to him.
He appears to be assuming a position of power over the benefit assessees, which should not be so.
The DWP is supposed to be a Government department with a host of Civil Servants behind it, so why is it making so many mistakes and causing so many problems for those who it is supposed to be helping.
Did the civil servants, in this instantice not realise that there are 52.143 weeks in a year and not just 52 and by doing so the problems it would create.
Landlords require their rent, not just part of it.
Are these Civil Servants not competent?
This one problem is bad enough, but problems continue to be coming forth and it is not the DWP and its Civil Servants who pay the price but the benefit claimants who are relying on the DWP for income to live.
It is time for the DWP and its Civil Servants to come into the real world and not live in isolation.
If the DWP was a competent Government department none of these problems would be occurring, but competence is the main word in all this.
For this department has shown over many years how incompetent they are.
Where an appeal is in process or there is the probability of an appeal this letter to GPs should not be sent and a competent and responsible organisation would comply with this.
But we have to look at the agenda and this appears to be to cause as many problems as they can do to people claiming benefits.
Any reasonable, competent and responsible organisation should not have to have it pointed out to them that these letters should not be issued and that GPs still need to send the ‘fit note’.
But that is the point the DWP are not a reasonable, competent and responsible organisation. and wish to cause as much harm as they can to benefit claimants, even to the point of the death of the claimant.
The Benefits and Work website have reported that a number of their members in recent weeks have been been made to go through a second Personal Independent Payment (PIP) assessment before a decision is made on their award, because there was a problem with the first assessment report.
One member faced a two hour assessment on Christmas Eve. In January they were contacted by Capita and told that the assessment was “incomplete” and that someone was to be “sent round to finish it.”
Capita have refused to say what information was missing and would not provide a copy of the report until it was complete.
Source: Disabled people forced to go through two disability benefit assessments : Welfare Weekly
There are so many stories showing the problems with assessors in every one of the welfare benefits assessment processes. In most of these instances there is an abundance of medical reports to prove what the assessors are trying to disprove, when the assessors are not experts in these medical fields.
Why are they doing this, yes there is some benefit fraud taking place, but not to the extent that requires, in many instances, inhumane treatment of benefit claimants.
It is as though every benefit claimant is believed to be committing benefit fraud, or is it the assessors receive extra payments should they reduce or or with-hold benefits completely.
From these stories it is the benefit assessors that are flawed not the benefit claimants.
It is said that the benefit system is being changed to ensure benefits are received by those you really need the benefits, but in these reported instances it would appear that the assessors are abusing benefit claimants, which should not be the intention of the process.
The whole process need to be held to scrutiny by all parties, which should include the benefit claimants.
The benefit process should not be feared by claimants unless they are committing fraud and these will be the minority not the majority.
If assessors are being abusive, then criminal actions should be taken against.
Appeals appear to have a substantial success rate, if this is so, after all this time, the assessment process should be being changed to minimise wrong initial assessment being conducted.
‘Lessons need to be learnt.
Yet another atrocity, why can’t the Welfare process be flexible as people do not fit into boxes, they are human beings, not objects and it is unlikely that 2 human being will be identical in their requirements, therefore it is extremely difficult to have set guidelines.
PIP procedures need to be flexible so that they can be able to cater for all claimants.
The whole process is geared to find claimants are not entitled to the benefits, as in many instances the assessors do not listen to the claimants, already have preconceived ideas about a claimants condition, the majority if not all of theses preconceived ideas being wrong and also blatant lying by some assessors.
The whole process is weighted against claimants.
Where incorrect decisions have been made, these should be investigated by an independent body to see if any illegal or dishonest actions have been undertaken by any assessors and where found these assessors should be prosecuted.