Appalling service from migration helpline

Just spoken to a client who rang the helpline a few weeks ago as had received a migration notice.
She had lots of questions about TP etc but also mentioned that her son is 19 and in FT education.
The advisor could not answer any of her questions. He used a ‘group chat’ and said that 6 of his colleagues also couldn’t answer. No one picked up on the relevance of her son’s age.
She rang again today and spoke to three different advisers.
She explained that the notice should be deferred as child 19.
They all said they didn’t know what she was taking about, it doesn’t matter how old your child is and insisted she had to claim by the deadline or she would lose her benefits and TP.
She finally got the last adviser to google 19 years old in FT education who found what she is talking about and deferred her migration notice.
He had been in the job two weeks and knew nothing about this policy but, to be fair, neither did his colleagues.
Frightening.

I’ll send that example to the UC engagement team - let me know if you have others

This certainly stands in stark contrast to the great confidence shown by DWP in its own ability to advise claimants.

In a recent meeting which I requested owing to the multiple support needs of the claimant, I was in effect asked why I was making such a fuss, the helpline would sort everything out. But first of all they have got be alert to all the problems inherent in the query, and to the best solutions -  which, as per the above, they probably aren’t.

I had something similar recently where we called UC migration line as a client who is terminally ill and who would need a home visit, had been sent a migration notice. We explained to the helpline advisor that this should be deferred and we were told that they were not grounds for having the migration deferred. Advisor even went off and spoke to a colleague and called me back and re-iterated the same thing. She advised that if we defer it, then when he does move, he would lose any transitional protection that he may have been entitled to, which spooked the client.

Spoke to our Partnership manager who managed to speak to somebody else who did defer it but it means that we have to continue to get a new deferral every few months which isn’t ideal.

It is worrying that there may be a lot of misinformation being passed on when people call the Migration line.

Client has tried to get an extension of their migration day deadline through the UC migration helpline. Deadline day is 20 July, 9 days away.  Cited the good reasons for why - because she needs help to claim (English as second language) and time to get her papers in order after starting new job. First call she made to helpline- interrogated as to why, not given an answer to whether she could have an extension, told she would get a call back at 3pm today with a decision. No call. Client called them again, no decision, told she will get a call back within 7 days of her migration deadline day, not to call again, it was logged for UC to call her.

Obvioulsy we can’t rely on that indeterminate call time - she’s in work 36 hpw so high risk she’ll miss the callback.

I’m a part-time worker, making it extra hard for me to fit in time to assist clients with their claims if they aren’t granted the extension.  By luck I can fit her in on her day off on Monday,  but by cancelling something else. 

Clients are going to have a struggle if they only have a week left to claim after the refusal of an extension. 

This is a single parent with 4 kids who worked two jobs through June, and the new job is ten hours more per week and better pay. She’d been trying for two years to get a job in the NHS as she’d eventually like to do nurse training. UC should be helping not obstructing here. Surely she’s the sort of person who should get an extension as she meets two of the suggested discretionary criteria.  Any tips for how to handle a joint call to the helpline to try and persuade them to give us a decision on Monday?  I’m going to quote the guidance of course. I understand it’s discretionary but I feel like if not a case like this, then who gets the extension, do you have to be in hospital or a similar dire situation?