The ICE Criticize the DWP/JCP Managements Failure to Adequately Deal With Complaints Against Staff

More comments, following the publication of the report - Independent Case Examiner Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) complaints received between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016.

The Independent Case Examiner (ICE) report is also critical about how the JCP are handling complaints against staff. From our own experience, we know that JCP staff - on occasions - are involved in deliberate and flagrant abuse of claimants.

JCP staff actions are being covered-up or ignored by senior manager(s) and this report goes some way towards proving that fact..

Actions for example by JCP staff where they have deliberately withheld or delayed the refund of travel-to-interview expenses, or sanctioned a claimant and then accused them of fraud, without evidence. This was in retaliation to a Claimant making a justified compliant.

We hope that DWP management will seriously consider the points this report makes.

The ICE have been criticized themselves in recent years, by claimant’s for what appears to be frustrating or dismissing bona-fide complaints against the JCP. 

The ICE need to maintain the confidence of the public, lost in part in recent years and to demonstrate 'that they have teeth' and that they are willing to take action. This report is reassuring in that respect.

The ABC feels that 'sanctions' that are appealed should be frozen until a final judgement is reached, and that if this was done we suspect the long delays using Mandatory Considerations and ICE appeals would shorten dramatically. The accuser (the JCP) needs to prove their case 'beyond reasonable doubt' rather than the claimant should have to prove their innocence against an accuser who stands to gain financially, if benefits are stopped or withheld altogether. 

 We also feel that interest should be added to monies withheld [benefits] that are later paid, if the stoppage was found to be unjustified.

At the moment even if a claimant wins their appeal, the DWP have benefitted by holding onto the money without penalty. Whereas, the claimant has suffered considerably if their benefits have been stopped.

This is unfair and against the laws of natural justice.

If a surgeon makes a major mistake, not only can you sue the hospital, but you can take action against the surgeon too. We want to see a system where as - not only the DWP are liable for mistakes paying compensation and interest if money is withheld, but where a Claimant can take individual action against DWP/JCP members of staff, where it can be shown conclusively there were no reasonable grounds for taking the action they did. 

We need to stop the JCP from covering-up and protecting staff that take actions that are malicious and criminally orientated in nature; especially against claimants that have made a complaint or offended staff or branch managers.

We accept that all parties can get upset, however this does not give JCP staff the right to take the 'law into their own hands' and use their position of power over the claimant to take actions that are a clear abuse of their position - confident that senior JCP managers will cover-up such abuse or fail to take any action. 

We need to squeeze out the 'rottenness' in the system. 

The Independent Case Examiner (ICE) state in their report:

‘A theme that has continued with Jobcentre Plus is the way in which they deal with complaints about their own staff. DWP have clear guidance on how to manage complaints about staff. Unfortunately, we are still seeing cases in which the Department have only followed this process in part, and have either failed to document their investigation into the complaint, failed to consider all of the evidence available or failed to inform the claimant of the outcome. During this reporting period we have also seen a number of cases where DWP failed to take any action to investigate complaints.’