According to DWP research (Rightsnet News 24 Sept 04) claimant satisfaction with direct payments is currently very high, particularly among working age claimants.

It may well be that those claimants alrrady have conventional bank accounts, but such a high satisfaction rating even among those claiants could well evaporate if the banks continue the process of selling off their ATM's to copmpanies that charge a fee.

I have a number of clients who did not have bank accounts who have experienced all sorts of difficulties opening post office card accounts. diffuculties range from computer rejecions of application forms, post office staff loosing or miscompleting relvant documents, and non arrival of cards, sort codes or PINs.

All this on top ofthe recent fiasco when one of Citibank's associates in the US shut down the system leaving pensioners with no means of accessing their own money.

Two points on this.

Firstly - if its so popular and so easy why has it had to be imposed - whether or not the recipient wants it?

Secondly - the most interesting part of the report to me are the last two pages (34 & 35). This shows an awful lot of people were excluded from the statistics. Not being a statistician I am not sure how significant this is.

But is this surprising. I estimate that many of clients I have who have bitterly complained or been unable to manage direct payments would not like or feel able to take part in a telephone survey.

i e-mailed the DWP website to query the customer satisfaction survey on pension credit telephone claiming - the consultants conducting the survey for the DWP didn't show statistics for ethnic minority pensioners' satisfaction, but i didn't get a reply.

i think silence from the government to your first question is the most truthful answer you'll get.

jj

In addition to last weeks rightsnet new story Claimants’ experiences of Direct Payment, www.kablenet.com have also hightlighted the issue - see Pensioners question the benefit.

Like Stainsby a number of my claimants have had major difficulties opening Post Office card accounts. Without having any technical knowledge I had assumed that this was due to glitches with the computer system. A friend of mine who works for the DWP on the implementation of DP told me that his staff were under pressure to limit the number of such accounts because of the cost, so maybe there is a different reason.

Have an IS client, (female) pensioner aged 63 years...

Has mental health problems, (was 'signed off' by Dr for some twenty years prior to becoming of pensionable age, with 'mental health dificulties'). She has refused to sign up for direct payments... and has not (will not), respond to DWP letters.

I read some months ago that the DWP would allow a limited class of exceptions to Direct Payments... Does anyone know where I can find that 'list' of possible exemptions, and/or the qualifying conditions to allow that exemption and/or how I can go about petitioning the DWP to make an exception?

We asked the same question of our local customer services manager - given that we have a proportionally high number of elder people in our area, many of whom never use banks and don't trust them - they like the idea of plastic cards and pin numbers even less - his reply was to the effect that, irrespective of all the hot air emanating from DWP, they cannot refuse to pay a Benefit when it becomes due - and those clients will be sent giros -(he used the word cheque, but tis the same thing).
Therefore, at the top of the list of exceptions will be "Independent elderly person excercising their rights not to be intimadated".


"The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings.
The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery".

Winston Churchill

I have tried to request a copy of the question and answer brief for their own help line advisers but have been told it is for internal use only.

Similar position in Leeds, lots of home care service users and non home care service users who will not be able to benefit from Direct Payments. Apparently if they do not respond to the letters or phone calls they will automatically be sent weekly cheques. My fear is the chaos that may be created by these cheques not going out on time, lateness of postal deliveries and the fact that claimants may be left without money for days. It sounds like scaremongering but there appears to be little action so far on developing and implementing this cheque based service.

As I understood it cheques were more expensive to administer than order books. Therefore wouldn't it be a great idea and cost effective if they didn't send out a weekly cheque but 13 cheques bound together in one order book.

Many thanks

Shaun

"Therefore wouldn't it be a great idea and cost effective if they didn't send out a weekly cheque but 13 cheques bound together in one order book".


Now there's a novel idea - you could call it just that - an order book (or something similar, given the fashion for renaming everything that isn't nailed down) - make the cheques payable at your local post office and problem solved.....................

I asked the local DWP about exceptions to direct payments for a particularly vulnerable client who is likely to give a pin number to anyone who asked for it. First answer was a denial that any such exceptions will be allowed. The next answer, from a different person, was more like a threat - we can send cheques in some circumsatnces but we cannot guarantee that they will arrive on time, but if that is what you want....Is that the choice that is given to people?

It is pretty obvious from DLA and other forms that 'they' dont want people to use PO accounts. Now we know why.

Thank you all for your replies to my query...

I discussed this matter with the 'helpline' in the presence of the client last Friday... I was told that Giro's would start when the order book expired.

I asked how often the giro's would be sent (weekly, fortnightly), the person was unsure...

I asked how long the client should wait for a giro before reporting it as lost/stolen, (when will they be sent, will they be in arrears, what is the anticipated admin delay), the person I spoke to did not know, they spoke to their supervisor, who also did not know... I was told the client should wait a 'reasonable' time period... I could not get out of the helpline what 'reasonable' is....

Oh welfare reform, how simple it has made the process of claiming...

I became involved again in this case on 23rd December, after discovering that my client (the benefit claimant), had received no GPC payments since 22nd November, (the DWP changed its mind, and decided to issue a new order book, not giros), and I immediately requested an emergency payment, as this person would have no income over xmas... It turns out the new order book was ‘intercepted’ by/at the PO and fraudulently cashed from 28th November, to 2nd January.

Many phone calls later (by both me and the claimant,) and no payments have yet been made. She has received letters from the DWP stating an Emergency Payment giro will be sent, but their finance section has "forgotten" to process those giro’s.

The DWP have requested that form BF134 (lost/stolen giro form), be completed. This has been done by the claimant THREE times so far all at the JC+ office, and all apparently faxed to the Pensions Agency by JC+ to the Pensions Agency in Newcastle... The pensions agency state they received only one BF134, and it was not signed, and that it was the 'customers fault', (they refuse to accept that as the form was completed at a JC+ officer that the officer taking the form should have checked it before faxing it to the pensions agency and sending the claimant on her way), so they refuse to make a payment, (even though the claimant has attended the JC+ several times a week since the beginning of the month).

Anyway, the claimant has now taken in a letter to JC+ stating that she never received the order book, as she desperately needs the money, and definitely has cashed no GPC (IS) since her last giro expired. I submitted an appeal for an EP 2 weeks ago, but the DWP are refusing to process it as an appeal without form BF134, and refuse to accept the claimants written assertion that she never received the order book without form BF134 being completed, (being officious isn't the word, I spent an hour and a half on the phone to the Pensions Section in Newcastle who were rude and refused to accept what his own systems were telling him, (that no payments have been received by the claimant since November), and when I asked to speak to an EO was told they were in a meeting, when I asked for the HEO or higher, was told they don't have one.. interesting... Decision-makers in the DWP who don't have team managers or any managers of any kind...).

This claimant has had no IS entitlement since 28/11/04 and continues to go without payment... I am now very concerned... I want to bring an action to TAS bypassing the DWP altogether (sending the appeal letter directly to TAS requesting an urgent listing), but I have never done this for IS, and I also want to raise HRA Article 6/8/14 matters in the appeal as I suspect that once I file the appeal at TAS, the situation will be resolved by the appropriate decision maker... and I would like a TAS decision on HRA matters to use at the Parliamentary Ombudsman), as leaving a pensioner without funds for almost two months is (in my opinion), 'beyond the pale' and I would be grateful if anyone could point me in the direction of any relevant IS case law as to 'EP's and/or HRA stuff regarding EP's as my expertise lies in HB/CTB, so although I can do the HRA stuff, the 'Emergency Payment' and leaving people without any income at all (esp. over xmas and new year), is newer to me, (HB ‘payments on account’ don’t have the same level of ‘emergency’ as IS?), and I would not want to let this person down...

All/any comments gratefully received…

And it still goes on, as you'll see from my postings else where on the subject of these direct payments.

Has anyone had direct contact with the DWP 'Bank leasion Team/s?' do they exist?. What exactly is the proceedure when the client fails to use the right PIN number 3 times and the account is then blocked?

If payment of an uncombined benefit such as SDA goes into the wrong account because of the 'unclear hand writing of the customer?', yet the Pension Credit payments are going into the right account, when if ever will the missing payments be made up.

Why is it that the DWP/JCplus and Post office accounts believe that they can not 'take to each other to resolve a problem over an individuals payments'?

It must be nearly Friday!

Trying to find out information on the Exceptions Service - does it really exist and is there a published list or guidance over who will escape direct payments.

Can anyone help

I have also this week been trying and failing to find such written guidance and have also resorted to phoning the DP 'helpline'.

The person I spoke to knew nothing of the 'exceptions service' as it was called in earlier DWP publicity, and say that GIRO cheques are only issued to those who 'refuse' to open accounts - they said they are listed on the computer system as 'refusals' even if they have reported they are unable to use an account. Therefore there is no guarantee that they will not continue to receive communications to 'persuade' them to open an account!

The problem reported to me by one of my social services colleagues in the local secure hospital unit is for detained patients whose order books were formerly cashed by the patients bank, and are now having to rely on GIRO payments - which are often delayed, go missing etc. We cant see any way round this as the other options are appointeeship (only appropriate if someone unable to manage own money) or use of PO accounts with pin numbers (not appropriate for other agencies for pin security reasons).

Is anyone collecting evidence of problems in order to raise the issue nationally?

Have just spoken to the Direct Payments team in Swansea who informed me that the DWP cannot force someone to have their benefit paid into a bank/building society account or open up a Post Office card account. Therefore if the person doesn't provide the information needed they will continue to have their benefit paid in the form of a giro cheque initially and then a normal cheque there after.

They also informed me that there is no lists of groups of who come under 'exceptions service'each case is looked at individually but if no suitable method of payment can be establised them weekly/fortnightly cheques will continue.

Therefore claimants could have resisted the implementation of Direct Payments by refusing to provide details.

My company is working with the DWP on the Direct Payment project. We aim to inform those still being paid by girocheque of the options open to them and help them to overcome any difficulties they might have setting up direct payment (helping to open a post office or bank account is desired) if that is what they choose to do.

How can you advise someone with mental health difficulties of the 'benefits' of using direct payments, when they are unsure of what day in the week it is… Some people (especially the elderly, where the partner has died, or left, and so too have the children), just manage to ‘get by’ with the coping mechanisms they have developed over the years, and have trouble with the system that was….

How can you reassure people, who still queue in the post-office, cashing their weekly giro's, that the people at the front of the queue, who are unable to withdraw funds, because they have forgotten their Pin, where the cash isn't in the account, (DWP computer failure(s)), or where the Pin terminal is not working, that it is safe to move to Direct Payments....

I have spoken to people regarding all of the above... It appears, (to me at least), that these more vulnerable people have been forgotten in the 'lust' that is, direct payments....

Perhaps, in light of your involvement to convince people reluctant to 'sign up', that maybe the process could be 'two-way' - the citizen communicating with government (the DWP)?. I think the government really needs to consider what the long-term solution is going to be, for those unable and/or perhaps even unwilling to cope with the change... Sending weekly giro's to a person for the next twenty or more years, appears nonsense!!!

& Sorry... Missed a point.... Espically, as when, and as far as I am aware, as teh DWP has not published any further information... These 'Basic' bank accounts are not the 'cure all' they are supposed to be... It is my understanding that they still can't accept direct payment of Housing Benefit....

Apparently, some 'burle' at the DWP dreamt up the idea of directv payments, but forgot about the £12,000,000,000 of public money that is paid by way of HB....

So private tenant HB claimant's have to make trips to the post office anyway... Whilst a smaller amount of that £12 billion might currently be cashed by 'bnenefit claimant's' in post offices at the moment, 'Direct Payment' and the LHA in HB will change all that....

It is not our aim to "convince" people, only to make sure that they are aware of all the options open to them. While we are all aware of the options open to people there are many people who are not. Should not these people be given the oppertunity to choose?

As for the assumption that everybody needs help, that is not true either. However some people do need some help, and some people need more help than others, to do as they choose to do. It would be unfair if that help was not made avaiable.

Thanks for the comments by the way, the forum is an excellent source of information about the issues people are facing.

Regrettably, DWP have missed the point - in addition to the various other groups within the community who will have problems with card accounts, there are a number of people, particularly in rural areas, who have never had a bank account, never trusted banks and have no intention of opening one. It's not that they have difficulties with the idea - just that they don't want and will not have one.

I do find the train of thought that persists that all those who do not have bank accounts must need help because they don't understand the system, need help and guidance, etc etc quite condescending, as do a number of my more elderly clients. As one of them put it, "If I want one of them ther bank accounts, I'll ask for one". Actually, the way he put it was somewhat more colourful, as is the way amongst our country cousins......

I should have expressed my self more clearly here. For "my company" please read "the company I work for".

we were approached by a different company working with the DWP, providing free training workshops "to provide the necessary support that your clients will need in the move to direct payments."

i couldn't face it myself, but have acquired the 'training material' and handouts - most of which has both the company logo and the DWP logo on it. It bullet points the rationale and advantages of direct payments and it has something headed "Direct Payment Informed Choice Discussion Wording'. It turned out to be aimed primarily at DWP advisers, and it isn't at all clear why an organisation like ours was approached. A FAQ sheet has a box containing the strange text - " Suggest a faint background picture of people going to advice centres - the same for all of the FAQ pages." ?????

Although the word 'convince' is not used at all, the whole of the material is aimed at convincing or manipulating people into making what is called "informed choice". The 'choice', as Mike Shermer says, is no choice at all. They are near enough compelled to select one of two options - payment into a bank or a PO card account- the option to take your chances with indefinite giro payments is not part of the 'Informed Choice Discussion Wording', and is not regarded as an option. The word which _is_ used is CONVERT, and the objective is CONVERSION to direct payments.

There's a handy circular flow-chart (with 'Rapport' in the centre)on 'structuring the conversation' with 5 steps, the last one being "Ask closed questions."

the 'workshop' didn't give any practical information about when things go wrong - like missing payments etc, and was purely an exercise in what might be called propaganda. or evangelism. or spin. or brain-washing...

has public 'service' really come to this - call centres and double-glazing sales techniques?

jan

If the training really does set out options, one would expect it to include:

1. The legal position of Direct Payments (ie DWP has no statutory power to force people to have an account)

2. How to complain up the DWP hierarchy when banks are reluctant to open accounts for particular individuals (eg those without an address, people with a learning disability, people with a criminal record for fraud, those they don't like the look of and people who won't buy their "products")

3. The DWP's common law duty to replace missing cheques or when payments are made by them into the wrong account.

It will be interesting to learn more...

neil,
i'll be happy to send you the original material - i'll send it to the address on your website, if that's ok?

regarding 1 - it has FAQ sheets which equip advisers to deal with people's 'concerns'. It appears to be adviser- line training. One question asks if it will be compulsory for people to have benefit paid into bank accounts.

Down in the answers, it clearly states that the DWP cannot force people to open bank accounts - (it makes no reference to statutory powers or lack of, and the language is conversational not official-sounding.) BUT the _immediate_ and first answer on the sheet, to the question of compulsion, is like a politician's answer, stating that order book and giro payments will FINISH, therefore another way of making payments must be found - ie it doesn't say no - it doesn't say yes, which of course would be untruthful...
imo, compulsion is _implied_ whilst avoiding explicit misrepresentation.

the briefing ENDS with the advice to refer people who do not wish to, or cannot open either a bank account or a PO card account to their benefit provider - no contact details are offered. it is not PRESENTED as an option in the 'informed choice discussion'.

with regard to 3 - this was the only reason i asked a colleague to attend - just in case - but there was nothing. - as i suspected, the training was non-technical, it was promotional ...but please judge for yourself from the material.

i'll restrain myself from saying more now, but i would love to hear your analysis and opinion as a professional trainer, and feel that both the training and the context in which it occurs is an important subject for debate on rightsnet. i had the interesting experience this week of a close encounter with a double-glazing sales rep, and may be over- sensitive. i've ordered french doors with a cat-flap, btw. : )

also, to Stephen_M - welcome to the forum! : )

jan

Jan - yes I'd be interested in seeing the material. Sounds like the subject is approached in a different way from how a welfare rights trainer would approach it.

Thanks

Neil