Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

John Bird and Emma Harrison Get It Together To Help Unemployed Health.

with 164 comments

From the Friend of the Dole Queue, the Daily Mail,

An initiative to improve the health of the long-term unemployed is to be launched by Emma Harrison, founder of the A4e welfare-to-work organisation, and John Bird, who set up the Big Issue.

The joint venture will establish ‘wellness centres’ staffed with GPs throughout the 250 A4e branches.

Harrison, who will star in the Channel 4 programme Who Knows Best: Getting A Job on Tuesday, said: ‘There is a correlation between poor health and people in the subsistence culture, the dispossessed and longterm unemployed.’

(From  Here.)

 Hat-Tip to Watching A4E.

For those who have forgotten who John – cut the benefits of the out-of-work – Bird is (From  Here.)

JOHN BIRD: FOUNDER OF THE BIG ISSUE

John Bird founded The Big Issue ltd London in the early 1990’s. Since then he has spread the business all over the world. The latest was a very successful launch of the
Big Issue in Osaka and Tokyo

John is one of the most inspiring speakers you will ever meet. “I have a lifetime of experience to draw upon. I was born into the underclass, made homeless at the age of seven, in prison by the time I was a teenager, slept rough on the streets of
London, and from there went on to buying and selling products and services, and building businesses“.

Bird has spoken at some of the following places:

The UN in New York, Nairobi and Istanbul
At Number ten Downing Street
Queen Elizabeth Conference Centre, Westminster.
Buckingham Palace,
The Society of Actuaries dinner
Countless after dinner speeches for charities, clubs etc

He has spoken in the presence of Prince Charles, Kofi Annan, the Late Princess Diana, Tony Blair, and the current cabinet.

And at meetings and conferences with BT, Business in the Community etc

Most of his businesses have been social businesses. That is they were set up to help people, with most of the profits going back into social support work.

But because the end has been social it does not mean that the businesses he has started do not need to be commercial. Bird has been very resolute in keeping costs down, inspiring staff, and giving leadership to many people wishing to enter business.

Bird’s major role now is coming up with new business ideas. He also speaks at business forums, in prisons, to police officers, corporate and professional bodies, from a small group to a large conference.

Now with fellow scamp Emma, Birdy has got a new money-spinner!

Advertisements

Written by Andrew Coates

August 8, 2010 at 9:32 am

164 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. This stuff gets scarier by the minute; Joseph Stalin would be proud. I’d assume “doctor” also encompasses some sort of “mental health professional”. This is going to be part of these sinister programmes: “voluntary” visits to the “doctor” for the participant and their family. The brake needs to be put on this crap, and now. What next detention under the Mental Health Act for “non-compliance”?

    Delphi

    August 8, 2010 at 10:05 am

    • Some connections Delphi on how this lot are linked. http://www.icg-uk.org/article757.html

      Philanthropic entrepreneurs warn Cameron to eliminate duplication from ‘Big Society’ 23rd Jul 2010

      A key adviser to David Cameron’s ‘Big Society’ project has warned that the key to its success is the elimination of waste and duplication of effort.

      John Bird,
      founder of The Big Issue and government Big Society Adviser said, “There is so much duplication, waste and holes to fill. The Big Society is about converging energies and recognising that a lot of common functions are duplicated.”

      “At the moment we have the voluntary sector, the national government and social businesses – and never the twain shall meet,” he said.

      Mr Bird and Emma Harrison, the chairman of employment providers A4e, were among the philanthropic entrepreneurs who were invited to Downing Street last week to discuss the launch of the Big Society.

      “The jury is out until we see some meat on the bones but the initial signs are encouraging,” said Mr Bird.

      BBC TV ‘Dragon’ James Caan, who is the chairman of the Big Issue Group, also expressed tentative support for the ‘Big Society’ idea: “By bridging the voluntary sector, social enterprises, the private sector, the community and the government, the Big Society enables the country to come together to work in sync; an initiative which is a step in the right direction,” he said.

      A4e (formally Action for Employment) is the prime contractor for government services like ‘Flexible New Deal’ and ‘Education for Offenders’ and have helped more than a million people in Britain back to work.

      “Let us all accept that people have been helping people for ever – and that it gives us all a wonderful sense of purpose and is a thing that we can all do. It would build communities, friendships, self esteem, confidence and help people get back to work,” said Emma Harrison, who is also the founder of the charity Foundation for Social Improvement (FSI)

      Andrew Coates

      August 8, 2010 at 10:39 am

      • Isn’t James Caan (the dragon, not the successful film star!) someone who I constantly see trying to sell books and seminars on internet advertisements?

        Surely this is the stage where the person becomes less successful? Kind of like how celebrities go on I’m a celebrity… etc. as last chance resort to boost their fame back up.

        If he was really good at being an investor then he wouldnt need to be selling seminars and books… Seminars in particular make a LOT of money… but to me its like, an additional revenue stream… that is other streams have dried up… “how can I use my own past experience to sell a product or service to get more money”. I am sure he will figure something out.

        Big Issue is a scam (we all know that).

        John Bird famous for Big Issue has tried new ventures but failed miserably… I couldnt tell you what they are but I did find out… I cant be bothered to go check tbh, some card scheme.

        That seriously sucks when you have made a name for yourself and run a multi million pound business whether its a scam or not.

        Emma Harrison… she is a bit of alright! Oooh… the unemployment witch… I thought you meant the model. Damn, A4e Emma Harrison is ugly as fuck! Excuse the language needs to be said.

        Anyway, A4e Emma Harrison built up a business constantly dealing with the same people on New Deal after keep sticking them into unsustainable zero hour contract jobs while giving them poor resources to find anything decent! They also leech results from people finding themselves their own jobs.

        Flexible New Deal

        August 9, 2010 at 8:58 am

      • Yeah, heard that that bitch Emma Harrison hire top photographers for her “photo shoots”, and no matter what camera angle, how many filters, distorting lenses, photo-shopping, touching-up, dimming the lights that they do, she still comes out as ugly as fuck. Emma Harrsion (A4e) you are one right UGLY CUNT!! Had to be said – again lol

        David Bailey

        August 9, 2010 at 10:17 am

      • touching-up? I hope not, too much drink? 😀 lol

        Flexible New Deal

        August 9, 2010 at 11:19 am

      • It’s “duplication” allright.

        The unemployed are allready getting proffesionaly stitched up by their A4e Advisers, what is left for the Doctors to stitch up after that?

        Lowestoft's Finest

        August 9, 2010 at 7:26 pm

    • Interesting article, Andrew. Did George Orwell write it? Words like “philanthropic” and “charity” should give cause for concern. And throw in “holistic approach” for good measure. This is all heading towards “Chinese-style” brain-washing camps. The spectre of compulsory detention and forced “medication” is upon us.

      Delphi

      August 8, 2010 at 10:53 am

  2. Does this mean that A4e are going to have access to clients medical records? I have suffered from depression and wouldn’t want them knowing.

    Karen

    August 8, 2010 at 10:38 am

    • It would be outrageous if they did this Karen.

      Really outrageous.

      Andrew Coates

      August 8, 2010 at 11:20 am

    • Yes it does. The purpose of this (a judgemental tone…) is to “help” unemployed people by discovering their “barriers” of getting “back into the workplace”.

      Any dumb idiot (think politicians, DWP etc.) would see this as a great idea… only reason A4e is doing this is to get one over… bullying someone when all you know is their contact details and the fact they are unemployed is very difficult. When you know much more specifics it just gets easier…

      Flexible New Deal

      August 8, 2010 at 6:31 pm

    • Karen: They cannot have access to your medical records UNLESS you give them permission.

      So under no circumstances should you sign any form giving them acccess to your personal data.

      Funny A4e Photos

      August 9, 2010 at 11:15 am

      • Trouble is with the system any form of non-compliance including “not actively participating” (thats not doing everything they demand from you) is a sanction… this has absolutely no basis on the JSA conditions.

        You must register for “training” fair enough… but these bolt on sanctions are unlawful, since when does sticking up for your rights and refusing to sign agreements you arent required to under law and not required to claim JSA lose your benefit money?

        So although Funny A4e photos is spot on… its very difficult to refuse them permission without loss of money and therefore loss of food etc.

        Flexible New Deal

        August 9, 2010 at 11:23 am

      • they don’t have access,but can request it by your authorisation,i did and i well remember the disability advisers shocked face,it does “put the record straight”,however if felt uncomfortable don’t as you do not have to. i certainly would not want to give it to a4e and i did refuse to attend one of their courses with the publicity surrounding some of their business practices and other adverse publicity/controversy.when on new deal i kept quite but they knew i was on medicines for depression and the new deal adviser was keen that medicines were played down or better stopped,i well remember also the snappy attitude of the provider “you wont be on those tablets forever” in the spirit of new deal.

        ken

        August 9, 2010 at 2:55 pm

      • It certainly doesn’t seem to stop them forcing people with other mental health issues onto the Flexible New Deal already.

        I have seen a few cases – one very serious concerning someone I know.

        I warned the advisers (and suggested it was not hard to check up on what I said).

        They ignored me.

        Andrew Coates

        August 9, 2010 at 3:42 pm

    • For The Following;

      A4E TNG YMCA INGEUS
      RIP Etc

      Reed ORGANIZATION TODT

      Philip

      August 28, 2010 at 7:41 am

      • sorry that should be READ not REED but maybe the first time ?

        philip

        August 28, 2010 at 7:42 am

      • interesting philip… this is history repeating itself all over again. A4E TNG YMCA INGEUS
        RIP etc are just re-branded Nazis. my father and grandfather fought these, my brother was killed on the last day of the war. it is so sad to see fascism on the rise again. forced labour gangs are the hallmark of a nazi totalitarian state… much loved by hitler, stalin, mussolini and franco… we must be very watchful at all times. it is too easy to be fooled by propaganda and slip under the spell. once fascism takes hold it will be too late.

        very good blog this… very funny, entertaining and informative… it has saved me so much trouble. my father was chuckling reading the comments… he almost chocked on his spaghetti. tell me this…? do the unemployed write this or do you employ staff? it is a very professional production. i will recommend you to all ny friends and family. many, many thanks miko

        miko

        August 28, 2010 at 5:43 pm

  3. Foundation for Social Improvement – anyone on here made a “donation” yet? lol 🙂

    Barney

    August 8, 2010 at 11:52 am

    • i didn’t do new deal after that and think twice it was put off,i think now you have too,its no good keeping on and on at people it makes no difference and a lot of it went in one ear and out the other,i kept my thought to myself (well most of the time) and just looked on them as fools.

      they are not above the law even though sometimes someone would be forgiven for thinking so,nowhere in any law does it give the right to treat people badly which was frequent on programs like new deal,these charitable groups should do more to protect those that fall under their umbrella and not just walk away.

      ken

      August 9, 2010 at 4:49 pm

  4. What a lot of bollocks. Poverty is the root cause of ill-health. How the hell can someone feed themselves properly on £65.45 a week. But as being mentioned above this is sod all to do with PHYSICAL health, it’s about MENTAL health. It’s about labelling people as “mentally ill” and we are all “mentally ill” according to the latest shrink’ manual. Let’s cut to the chase: if you are a “problem”, you are going to be told to attend the “doctor” – failure to do so will result in no money. The “doctor” will then label you nuts. You will be forced into a “treatment programme”. Remember, that “doctors” can detain people under the Mental Health Act. Listen up people – you are all going to be sat in a padded cell – this is what this shit is all about.

    So Angry

    August 8, 2010 at 12:40 pm

    • Interesting point there.

      Latest news: explosion heard from (…) latest news is it came from A4e premises…

      Latest news: unemployment riots in (…)

      Is this the reality that the politicians wants to live in?

      Flexible New Deal

      August 9, 2010 at 11:27 am

  5. And maybe I mis-heard but didn’t that cunt Gideon Osborne say that he was going to SLASH unemployment benefits. How the hell is that going to make people healthy. According to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation is costs a minimum of £42 a week to feed oneself properly – 65.45 – 42 = 23.45!! If you guys and girls think for one minute that cunts like Emma Harrison and John Bird give a fuck about your “health” then you really are nuts and maybe *should” see the “doctor” lol

    So Angry

    August 8, 2010 at 12:46 pm

  6. “Looking after your health”

    From the same people that want:

    To cut/stop your benefit
    Turf you out of your council home
    Move you away from friends/family
    Stave you

    Are you folks for real? “Hey, Emma Harrison and John Bird want to help us”

    Wise up – ffs!

    So Angry

    August 8, 2010 at 12:54 pm

  7. Oops, just read your blog properly. Don’t think this is the sort of blog that buys into this shit in the first place – lol

    So Angry

    August 8, 2010 at 12:59 pm

  8. How long before someone gets sanctioned for not follwing their Advisers direction to see the A4e doctor? or sanctioned for not following the A4e doctors directions?…..Absolutely nobody in their right mind is going to go anywhere near these quacks.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    August 8, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    • It’s a Catch 22. If you go to see the A4e doctor you must be nuts. If you refuse to go see the A4e doctor you must be nuts.

      Reggie

      August 8, 2010 at 6:50 pm

    • And you can guess where A4e will get their doctors from, ATOS or some other private sector parasite on a taxpayer funded gravy train!

      Funny A4e Photos

      August 8, 2010 at 9:01 pm

  9. people can only be detained under extreme circumstances such as being a threat to themselves or someone else,its very true that poverty leads to health problems as so do the treatment of unemployed people by the system as whats happening today.what a4e think doesn’t matter one bit and i cannot see gps’ sitting in their offices’ they have no reason to it would be expensive,pointless exercise,i was told by a doctor that this consultation costs £30 why would gps sit in a cramped room with people what are they going to say?,if someone has problems they do it may be the case these are not employment related at cause but are greatly exacerbated by the situation they are in,this does not go down well at job interviews’ and is not what employers want to hear.

    mr bird would do better then going around stabbing benefit claimants in the back,the only reason he is being entertained is because he is telling those that already have the same ideas what they enjoy hearing,if he wants to play the socialite speaker let him,however the “why cant everyone be like me” and “screw” the unfortunate is not the way forward by one persons experiences,he is one person the figures on benefits are substantial,this trend has been continuing for a very long time despite attempts at countering scrutiny.the continuing focus on employment causes concern they are all to aware of this and its consequences on public fears.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/unemployment-and-employment-statistics

    ken

    August 8, 2010 at 8:20 pm

  10. Out of curiousity… it will sound a stupid question… are A4e getting MORE money for this under a new contract or is it just a bolt-on “service” in addition to the other crap they have?

    Also, are the GP’s fulltime employees? (raises the question where will these people will come from. My understanding is, Doctor Surgeries are businesses… between 1-3 GP’s who may then employ more GPs and general staff. Why would a GP go to A4e? Perhaps they are second-rate (dismissed for accusations), perhaps they have their license revoked (will perform in a lower capacity at A4e than some real GP surgery) or be imported from abroad with sketchy qualifications)

    Or will A4e do an arrangement with the local surgeries where one GP comes down one morning/afternoon/day a week? This raises concerns about their real need back at the surgery.

    What I will say, doctors dont always get things right… but I dont see a doctor who are to a good standard of education, perhaps its wrong to assume they are all intelligent but I personally would say they are, to then flip the coin from helping people who really need their help (deemed as “heads”) to the other of filling in paperwork for some private scam organisation just to force people into work or more to the point do an ATOS like assessment… (deemed as “tales” – not a spelling mistake)

    I have been to DWP tribunal (sorry I mean the tribunal services for Social Security and Child Support which of course is fully independent) and have heard account of real doctors against that of an ATOS/DWP doctor (some of which have never met the person before)

    A doctor has a high place in society, not all are good, but are well trusted hence how they can sign passport applications etc. They undergo strong trust expectations etc. and confidentiality… I dont see a proper doctor work their salt working at A4e.

    Flexible New Deal

    August 9, 2010 at 8:40 am

    • * I dont see a proper doctor worth their salt working at A4e.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 9, 2010 at 8:42 am

    • But there are doctors and doctors – as in Romania doctors 🙂

      I can’t see these being doctors who have progressed to General Practice. Or even Doctors who are registered with the General Medical Council.

      For instance, in the UK prospective doctors study towards the degree of Bachelor of Medicine and Surgery (MB ChB) commonly referred to as the “medical degree”. Medical School undergraduates who flunk their Final Professional Exam or who just can’t hack it graduate with a BSci(Med). You can’t register with the General Medical Council with this qualification. But you could still be lumbered with an horrendous debt that you are desperate to pay off. But, you will still find these people masquerading as “doctors” in various settings. Providers already mop up useless “psychology” graduates so why not failed “doctors”. Given a doctor’s career path and the amount of further study it is unlikely to be what we think of when we think “doctor”.

      Red Alert

      August 9, 2010 at 9:55 am

  11. unless they mean councilors’ i don’t know,a4e have no business with someones health problems’. they are a private company and that’s the end of it and people are entitled to keep their matters private or free from unhelpful/unwelcome scrutiny ,disclosure (health problems’/medications’/disability) is on an application form/interview only and is supposed to be completely confidential,and becomes a legal contract on employment failure to disclose an issue could be a defense against later claims’ of reasonable adjustments or worse and not to because people are bogged down in an a4e environment.

    ken

    August 9, 2010 at 9:32 am

  12. As funny A4e photos says it’s is more likely to an ATOS-like “medical professional” lol 🙂 As Flexible New Deal says no doctor worth their salt is going to lower themselves to working with these bastards. Outfits like these only employ sad, desperate, no-one else will employ them rejects.

    And “doctors” do ask a lot of “personal” questions.

    Red Alert

    August 9, 2010 at 10:03 am

  13. When you think about it it doesn’t make sense.

    If someone feels ill, they are going to arrange to see the doctor anyway.

    But of course, there is physical and mental health.

    I see this as being more of a “psychologist” doctor. It would provide really good cover for asking really personal/invasive question, to find out client’s barriers to work, you understand. They could answer anything that they liked under threat of sanction/dismissal for non-compliance. This “dossier” would then provide more ammo for the bullying PA. They must think people are stupid.

    Something Stink

    August 9, 2010 at 10:32 am

  14. When the Welfare Reform Bill went through the House of Lords, the section of the bill that allowed for an element of compulsion for an individual to take up medical treatments or direction or face benefit sanctions/removal, was rejected. It was rejected as the Lords considered this was tantamount to social control. As far as I know this section was removed from the bill.

    It’s a big worry that private sector companies such as a4e are gaining a foothold in health care provision to those who receive state benefits. The opportunities for further depriving individuals of effective, quality health care and state benefits are going to be enormous. I see the involvement of the private sector stripping away the rights of individuals to a private life.

    ATOS are already involved in provision of mental health services to individuals. They have several contracts as providers of Occupational Health to staff within the NHS.

    The Positive Step programme (run in partnership with Primary Care Trusts) is already up and running. It’s been designed to fast track individuals with mental health problems through to the great and cheap catch all treatment of CBT. With ATOS already the main tool in removing much needed benefits from those who are too unwell to work via the Work Capability Assessment, it looks to me as if the social control that the Lords rejected is not only being brought in via the back door, but extended.

    Id I werent’ an atheist, I’d say – God help us all.

    Lucy

    August 9, 2010 at 11:03 am

    • Lucy, isn’t there still pressure going on about Alcholics and Drug users going to be put under the system of surveillence?

      These Centres would be ideal to enforce this.

      Andrew Coates

      August 9, 2010 at 11:59 am

      • Hi Andrew, since posting above, I’ve been hunting through my links trying to find any updates on that issue. No luck so far, but will keep looking. If I remember rightly, the last I read about it, hinted that the proposal for those with dependency issues had been quietly shelved (but not dropped)

        Personally I cannot see the difference between forcing someone who has a physical/mental health condition into taking up treatment and forcing someone who has a dependency issue into doing the same on threat of benefit sanctions.

        Both actions are forms of social control.

        Lucy

        August 9, 2010 at 12:37 pm

      • June 2010 – looks like its been dropped: http://www.drinkanddrugsnews.com/ViewNews.aspx?id=590

        The original proposal: http://www.ssac.org.uk/press/press21.asp

        Lucy

        August 9, 2010 at 12:55 pm

    • What next? Home visits from that fat bitch, Hayley Taylor? Oops, it’s already happened. 🙂

      reggie

      August 9, 2010 at 12:10 pm

  15. Correction:

    The Positive Step programme (run by ATOS in partnership with Primary Care Trusts)

    Apologies for lack of clarity!

    Lucy

    August 9, 2010 at 11:04 am

  16. If getting both your mental health and physical wellbeing into place helps you get employment, also overcoming you ‘issues’. The I think you must listen to the proffesionals. After all they know what is best in the long run. After all they ARE EMPLOYED, you are not. By the way I would not mind betting my last Kruger Rand that ‘You’ will eventually turn once ‘You’ are in a job.

    Tarquin Fanshaw

    August 9, 2010 at 11:40 am

    • Too bloody right Tarquin. These bloody toe-rags deserve a good kick up the backside.

      Barnaby Weedlestock

      August 9, 2010 at 1:11 pm

  17. i have an application form here and to be truthful i don’t know where to start,the time i have been on benefits and have health problems and it was always the dwp that said go onto incapacity benefits at the time.

    when faced with a situation like this it quickly becomes apparent the real truth of the long term jobless with health problems’, the problems they face and the chances of finding work.those that have been out of work for some years are going to find it extremely difficult,and from experience.those that follow have no support only scarce short term with charities’ and it can be concluded that they are at a loss too with the economic situation, and are of no real benefit in reality is there is little they can do in real terms good times or bad.you have to get the idea from facial expressions they are sometimes a victim of unrealistic government expectations also.

    there faces a problem of long term sick being on jobseekers allowance for an indefinite period,repeatedly signing on and “swirling” around the job centre system pillar to post and being overlooked,this is not a good position to be in and is highly risky strategy put forward by the government and counter productive to the good of the individuals wellbeing. its not easy to be positive when there’s nothing to be positive about.

    it has to be said much of this is put people on jobseekers allowance and hope for the best,time will tell and from whats been seen it will not be kind in judgment.

    ken

    August 9, 2010 at 2:37 pm

  18. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/7935823/Bounty-hunters-to-cut-benefit-fraud-by-1bn.html

    Bounty hunters to cut benefit fraud by £1bn

    Private agencies are to be paid by the Government to reduce benefit fraud by £1billion, David Cameron is to announce.

    Finance experts will identify welfare cheats by trawling through their records, household bills and credit card applications.

    The agencies will get a “bounty” payment for each fraudster they identify under government plans to cut the £5.2billion annual fraud bill.

    By having access to the Government’s database of incapacity and housing benefit claimants, the companies believe they can shave at least £1billion from the welfare bill, earning as much as £50million.

    The Prime Minister will say today that the level of fraud is “absolutely outrageous” and an “uncompromising” strategy is needed.

    Mr Cameron will also call on members of the public to report suspected cheats and promise tougher punishments for offenders.

    The Daily Telegraph understands that Experian, the credit reference agency, will begin working with the Department for Work and Pensions within weeks.

    Full credit checks will be carried out on all new benefits applicants as well as on existing claimants who are suspected of fraud.

    Despite concerns by civil liberties groups, all of the checks are legal and covered by the Data Protection Act.

    As an estimated one in three claimants is suspected at some point, either through being reported by a whistle-blower or after suspicions are raised by staff, the financial records of millions of people could be vetted.

    The credit company will be able to cross-check information about private household spending, such as utility bills, mobile phone payment details and satellite television subscriptions, against benefit records to identify potential fraudsters.

    People with “lifestyles that are inconsistent with those claiming incapacity benefit” will also be highlighted.

    Claimants spending large sums on gardening, DIY and foreign holidays may come under scrutiny.

    Financial experts will also be looking for people who apply for benefits while claiming to be living alone but in fact have an undeclared partner with a job.

    The use of private credit reference firms is the centrepiece of the crackdown on benefit fraud.

    Mr Cameron says in a newspaper article: “At a time when we’re having to take such difficult decisions about how to cut back without damaging the things that matter the most, we should strain every sinew to cut error, waste and fraud in our welfare system.”

    Mr Cameron discloses that £5.2billion of the £87billion welfare budget is lost to fraudulent claims for tax credit and welfare, while administrative error wastes £1.6billion.

    “That’s the cost of more than 200 secondary schools or over 150,000 nurses,” Mr Cameron says. “It’s absolutely outrageous and we cannot stand for it. It’s quite wrong that there are people in our society who will behave like this. But we will not shrug our shoulders and let them get away with it any longer.”

    It is understood that the proposals being discussed involve the credit reference agencies being “paid by results”.

    They would receive a percentage, likely to be less than five per cent, of fraudulent claims recovered.

    For example, they would receive less than £5million for every £100million of fraudulent claims identified.

    In June, Experian calculated that its techniques could dramatically reduce incapacity benefit, social housing and council tax fraud.

    The company set out in a report how £1billion could be saved, including £600million on housing fraud and £300million on incapacity benefit fraud.

    The tough approach is similar to that now taken with incapacity benefit claimants who are being forced to submit to “fit to work” medical tests. Three out of four have been turned down or dropped their claim since the system was introduced in 2008.

    Experian has already conducted tests on reducing housing benefit fraud in a pilot scheme covering nine areas, which it said saved the taxpayer up to £17million.

    The crackdown comes after the Coalition announced plans to cut the welfare budget by £11billion within four years in the June emergency Budget.

    The Torygraph

    August 10, 2010 at 12:37 am

    • The problem is any serial big-time benefit fraudster worth his or hers salt isn’t going to get credit etc. in his or hers name… they are going to steal identities and avoid paper trails linking them to the illegal acts…

      This is how certain people (where the Government is very lucky) get caught with HUGE amounts of fraud starting around £50k and going past 6 figure values.

      All fraud needs to be counted but its these frauds which need to be tackled, not the thousands of people claiming JSA who fail to report trivial changes of circumstances (i.e. change of address) where they receive no overpayments or payment they aren’t entitled to than if they had reported it?

      My opinion on this matter is people shouldnt keep a change of address secret… however, its not making a false representation to claim benefit or hiding particulars that affect their rates of payment. By withholding a change of address you will not be any better off with the claim.

      It is not clear the full extent of change of circumstances. Perhaps this should be a priority before these fraud campaigns take off. I feel that fraud levels are inflated because of this. Fraud website will state what needs to be reported but via Jobcentre Plus the details are sketchy… no person at JCP mentions them to you neither. Why would a genuine claimant that isn’t reporting anyone else be viewing a benefit fraud website?

      Its a fucking joke.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 10, 2010 at 10:49 am

      • Spot on Flexi, I also think unemployed people are at higher risk of ID theft than other people as we give out vast quanities of our private info to complete strangers via job applications and often live in houses of mulitiple occupation with a very high shoot through rate.

        So not only can we now get our ID stolen and all the credit problems that often entails but can also now get hauled in for suspected dole fraud based on the sudden OTT spending patterns that often go with ID theft as well.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        August 10, 2010 at 1:22 pm

      • As far as I understand it is rare for unemployed people (longterm especially) to have credit cards because they are either denied or have pointless limits.

        Mobile phone contracts are easier to get and I have heard can be a problem when you are unemployed with Jobcentre Plus even if you are contractually tied from getting it before being unemployed. Whether you use it for personal calls or mainly for finding work – contract deals can work out better value than PAYG.

        Checks on catalogues can be an issue too if you share a house with someone else who has one, if someone previously had a catalogue and moved without cancelling or if you have a catalogue yet dont buy from it.

        Same with broadband, utlity, entertainment etc.

        At the end of the day, if you are unemployed, are a genuine claimant and seek employment, it doesnt matter if you live on very little food but decide you just spend the majority of your benefit income on luxuries such as top satellite TV packages, top broadband speed and an expensive phone contract… its your choice what you spend the money on. Taxpayers will get jealous – likewise if you saved up and got a huge plasma telly…

        They need power to prosecute but they are heavy handed in their approach yet the justice system seems to lack proper punishment for real offenders. They (DWP not police) will demand entry to premises without the legal right to do so. They will tap your phone. They will spy on you.

        This is all because someone who hates you have reported you or a spiteful JCP staff member reported you.

        Most of the time they will find nothing on the people… but its against the rights of the people to be treated like that because of some confidential slanderous conversation on the phone.

        For the purpose of a JSA fraud investigation the use of phone taps is irrelevant. Likewise, mobile phone location records is probably a good idea. The allegation of disability benefit claimant playing football is best proved with video footage.

        As for ID theft… even myself I am unaware of my credit rating score and I do not wish to pay for one or sign up to some “free” subscription which requires credit card details and prior notice before you can cancel.

        Sometimes I wish I was rogue! lol, Jobcentre Plus and Jobseekers are a too easy target… being one myself worries me.

        Flexible New Deal

        August 10, 2010 at 2:13 pm

  19. Hope you watch tonight at 9pm

    Channel 4

    August 10, 2010 at 8:15 am

  20. Seems Mr. Cameron just like the MP’s have forgotten about MP’s expenxes allready….How come they arn’t under the same scrutiny and penalties?

    As no penalties under this new system exist for falsly reporting someone for dole fraud and you will benefit from 5% of the money saved if convicted, why not report everybody on the dole? 99% of them will be inocent but thats of no concern to you after all if Cameron didn’t wan’t those innocent people to be wrongly persecuted he would have put in safeguards to stop it happening wouldn’t he?

    The foreign holidays bit is ridiculous (not just becouse of the inability to afford one on the dole ), If you are unemployed you only class as looking for work as long as you remain within the UK, so if you go on a foreign holliday your claim will stop as you will be classed as no longer available for work.

    Likewise despite Britain being in the EU and knee deep in Poles when I got a job interview in the Czech Republic (everything paid by the company) I was told by the DWP that if I attended it I would be classed as unavailable for work in the UK and have my money stopped when I left our country to attend a job interview.

    I thought the whole point of the EU is you can work where you wan’t, but if you are British unemployed you can’t leave the country to attend a job interview (paid by the company. Yet workers from the rest of the EU seem to have no problems getting here to work.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    August 10, 2010 at 8:36 am

    • Someone read my mind I think.

      Hundreds of people report people they dislike for trivial things to benefit fraud hotline and online reporting service… without any basis.

      Some benefits you can be outside the country for a set period of time, with JSA you cant even for 1 second… and I agree if we are to be part of this EU shit which we surely are, why can we not have a grace period of a day or two to allow for interviews etc?

      Technically thats punishing as you lose the money for those days… but isn’t it meant to be encouraged by having people looking for employment in many different member states?

      I thought we hold an obligation that becomes the reason why you can look for European jobs on Labour Market System.

      Could be a judical review etc.?

      Flexible New Deal

      August 10, 2010 at 10:29 am

  21. Snitch on someone on Norwich’s Larkman and your’l Come Home to a Real Fire.

    Baron Von Larkman

    August 10, 2010 at 8:52 am

  22. This is no different to the way Convicted Criminals are treated by the Courts with a requirement to submit to background reports, probation service reports, psychological evaluations, community service assessments. With harsh penalties for “non-compliance”.

    Old Lag

    August 12, 2010 at 2:50 pm

  23. I think they would like to think they can get you for non compliance. Depends on what constitutes non compliance?

    I don’t buy the ‘anything they tell you’ line.
    Maybe that’s what they want you to believe? And few probably question such due to needing a roof over their head, food in their bellies etc.

    Just my tuppence. Hang on, I might need that tuppence!

    Oh dear

    August 18, 2010 at 7:40 pm

    • Oh dear: You might want to listen to the Sean Yung recordings. He recorded his New Deal Accrington Jobcentre interviews.

      He attened the induction at TWL,the provider, but refused to sign the information disclosure form, which gives TWL the right to share his personal information with third-parties.

      The upshot was his Jobseekers Allowance was suspended. Accrington jobcentre claimed he had not done enough to find work.

      Here’s the link if you wish to listen to the recordings:
      http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=12801

      Funny A4e Photos

      August 18, 2010 at 8:41 pm

      • Thanks for the link.

        That guy is trying to avoid participating in the new deal completely.

        What I actually meant by non compliance is what you can and cannot do (according to them!) within the programme once you have started on it. Hmmm?

        Oh dear

        August 19, 2010 at 8:04 pm

  24. Oh Dear: Your welcome. Well, from my own experience of FND with Ingeus I can tell you that you don’t have to sign the disclosure document giving the provider permission to contact your employer -should you get a job whilst on FND.

    My Ingeus advisor said I could visit their office instead to sign a document confirming I had found a job.

    I can’t imagine anything more embarrassing than the provider phoning your new employer asking if you worked there, especially if you didn’t want them to know you had been on FND.

    There is also a question of data protection. Your new employer could not give any details about you to the provider UNLESS you give them permission to do so.

    I’m afraid I don’t know anything about non-compliance because I haven’t been given anything about the Terma and Conditions.

    I don’t know who your provider is but if you don’t believe something you’ve been told contact your Jobcentre PA for confirmation.

    Funny A4e Photos

    August 19, 2010 at 9:59 pm

    • “My Ingeus advisor said I could visit their office instead to sign a document confirming I had found a job.” … and that’s the way it should be.

      So, what’s with those cunts RiP and those bastards TWL in Sean Young’s excellent video and their dodgy Data Protection Act waivers

      Bobby Dazzler

      August 19, 2010 at 10:11 pm

  25. “My Ingeus advisor said I could visit their office instead to sign a document confirming I had found a job.” … and that’s the way it should be.

    So, what’s with those cunts RiP and those bastards TWL in Sean Young’s excellent video and their dodgy Data Protection Act waivers

    Bobby Dazzler

    August 19, 2010 at 10:10 pm

    • What?! You are under no legal obligation to sign a waiver or to visit their office (assumingly when you have signed off anyway) to sign a document saying you have found a job, just so they can get their job outcome that morally they aren’t entitled to.

      The Job Outcome bonuses are designed in theory as a way of rewarding providers who have helped secure people employment.

      If they actually did this instead of leeching jobs people (ex-clients) have found themselves, they would know about such people getting a job.

      It is immoral theft of taxpayers’ money for providers to be claiming outcomes solely because an unemployed person had previously been “assigned” to them and now that they had signed off after securing employment without their help.

      I know this sounds anti towards Welfare to Work providers but their policies of bullying the unemployed to sign agreements of unfair terms (in this case, if you refuse to… get sanctioned and lose benefits – same as an agreement isn’t legit if someone holds a gun to your head and you sign to prevent you losing your life) so a couple of employees can then periodically check up to see who has got jobs and who hasn’t.

      The absence of them naturally being able to find out this information raises concerns – if say 90% (for example) of Job Outcomes were obtained from information relayed back from Jobcentre Plus (i.e. information people give when they sign off) etc. it clearly shows they aren’t doing the job they are paid to do.

      As for the agreements: What I have seen so far is pointless. If you consent for them to contact potential future employers… that is all fine, but you have not give consent for that employer to relay information back.

      This is not to mention the “Double Wammys” (thats in respect to taxpayers) of taxpayers’ money being spent on 25 hours per week work for 6 months (?) under Future Jobs Fund for unsustainable jobs… (I work that out just under £4,000 @ NMW) where providers like TNG, A4e etc. can then gain an outcome (because its deemed “sustainable” – 26 weeks and is over 16 hours)… Assuming sustainable job outcomes on Flexible New Deal is around £2k this means to get someone this job, taxpayers aren’t paying just £4,000 anymore but are paying around half that amount EXTRA just for the likes of TNG to host the job interviews and leech outcomes for all participants.

      Future Jobs Fund comes in bands for x amount of jobs… If the employer has 50 jobs (I know DWP discourages small amount of jobs so bidders have to create large numbers) taxpayers will fork out approx £200,000 however thats the start. Enter TNG (or A4e etc.) who agrees to host the interviews for a few days… they get a HUGE £100,000! At the end of the day in regards to these shit NMW FJF jobs in FND areas… taxpayers are effectively paying 50% tax towards the private welfare to work providers for their hosting of job interviews in an otherwise unused room.

      I am fully prepared to be arrested for breaching the peace if anyone manages to kill scum like Emma Harrison (not the model): I would be partying. I don’t however recommend anyone to risk doing time in prison for such a low life waste of space.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 20, 2010 at 10:02 am

    • lol That needs re-phrased, I was drunk at the time your Lordshit, !”£$%^& Abbotts Ale 🙂 No-one needs to attend these cunts office to sign a form saying that they have a job to allow these cunts to cash in any more than they have to sign a dodgy data protection act waiver. DON’T DO IT!! The point that I was making is that these dodgy data protection waivers should not form part of the “programme”; no-one should be getting hassled/sanctioned for refusing to sign them. Just to repeat: DO NOT SIGN!! Hope this is clearer 🙂

      Bobby Dazzler

      August 20, 2010 at 10:38 am

      • I would also add to Bobby Dazzler’s comment that if your going to make a stand by refusing to sign any of the provider’s info disclosurer forms make sure your your job search record will stand up to scrutiny. As we’ve seen in the case of Sean Young, once you refuse to sign the forms the jobcentre will try to suspend your benefit on the pretext that you haven’t done ebough to comply with your Jobseekers Agreement.

        Breakdown of sanctions made against Sean Young by Jobcentreplus

        Monday March 22 2010

        Attended Induction at TWL-Intraining

        Was informed I had not fully signed into the new deal, and during induction refused to sign power of attorney over my data to TWL-Intraining under Data Protection Act.

        24 March 2010

        Interview with new deal advisor Kelly Lethard and Blackburn manger Keith Fairclough after I refused to sign power of attorney over my data to a private corporation.

        Sanction 1. Raised on March 25th 2010 relating to week : 18 March to 24 March.

        Sanction made over doubts to my contract with Jobseekers Agreement, and being out of the area over the weekend.

        What I did :

        This particular week I opened dialogue with British Telecom to create a trade space website.

        I was in London (out of area) to pitch to landlords for maintenance contracts.

        I visited Jobcentre three times and looked through two papers as my Jobcentre Agreement contracted.

        London and trade space were two extra steps taken to seek work.

        I was again directed to attend TWL-Induction on Monday 29 March 2010

        Note : I had not signed into the new deal yet was directed under new deal powers.

        29 March 2010

        Attended for the second time induction at TWL-Intraining and was interviewed by Susan Banks. I was asked to leave after I again made clear I would not sign power of attorney over my data to TWL-Intraining. I recorded the interview.

        31 March 2010

        Attended new deal interview at Jobcentreplus with Kelly Lethard and manger Tom Root.

        Sanction 2. Raised 31 March 2010

        Sanction made for refusing / failing a Jobseeker direction. NDPA directed Jobseeker to attend / participate new deal gateway provision, 22 March 2010. Customer attended, but didn’t sign Learners Agreement.

        What I did :

        I attended but refused to give power of attorney to a private corporation over my data, under Data Protection Act.

        So they are claiming that my Jobseeker Agreement mandated me to waver my right to privacy, yet cannot provide the lawful criteria which by law forces me to do so, nor can they present the date at which such a law gained royal ascent.

        I requested this information under FOI, not forthcoming.

        Note : They have shifted from new deal rules and shifted to my Jobseeker Agreement, they seem to be a little scatter brained, one minute it is new deal mandating me and then it is Jobseeker Agreement.

        Sanction 3. Raised April 1 2010

        Customer submitted to a job deemed suitable by the NDPA. Customer did not apply for the vacancy.

        This vacancy was in Blackpool, I explained it was outside my agreed travel distance under my Jobseeker Agreement which is one hour thirty minutes.

        Looking at the train timetable, the journey from my home to the place of the vacancy by the lowest measure was one hour fifty five minutes, twenty five minutes over my contracted travel time.

        Thus, this was not a viable reason for sanction, important you remember this sanction for later.

        April 5 2010

        Attended interview at Jobcentreplus with Madjed Iqbal

        Sanction 4. Raised April 19 2010

        Advisor had doubts over customers availability for work whilst out in the area of Scotland.

        What I did :

        I was invited to Scotland to meet with publishers for the chance to pitch three books I wrote some years ago. This attempt to gain what has to be classed as ‘work’, took place over the weekend 26 to 28 March.

        Very interestingly in this sanction, from the letter dated May 13 2010, they now claim the sanction for the period 25 to31 March 2010, in which this weekend step to seek work took place, was made due to my placing restrictions on the number of hours I was prepared to work.

        In the Jobcentreplus interview with Madjid Iqbal Wednesday19 May, we both checked and could clearly see, there had been no change to the hours I would work since the start of my Jobseeker Allowance claim, 18 months ago

        Clearly we can see the reason for sanction being changed by either the Accrington Jobcentreplus staff or the adjudicators, either way the system by which the adjudicators decisions are made is floored. They are making it up as this case goes along.

        Sanction 5. Raised 21 April 2010

        Advisor had doubts as to whether customer had provided sufficient evidence to show effective Jobsearch in the period : April 8 to April 21 2010.

        What I did :

        From April 9 to 14 April 2010, I continued the London pitch to gain maintenance contracts from landlords. I fully repaired and decorated one floor of a rented accommodation to present proof of my craftsmanship.

        While in London, given I had missed the Friday days work time to inform the Jobcentre I was to travel to London, I rang them on the following Monday morning to let them know I was in London, the earliest possible time I could have achieved this.

        I also asked the Jobcentreplus to present the lawful criteria under which I was obliged to inform the Jobcentre of my moves to seek work before I carry them out, it was not forthcoming. The Jobseeker Agreement contracts me to present what I have done when I sign each fortnight.

        During this period under which sanction was made I also :

        Visited the Jobcentre : 5 times to check their websites for vacancies

        Looked through the papers I am contracted to browse : once, this is the only option for this period.

        So in this period under which sanction was made for failing to provide sufficient evidence of Jobsearch, I fulfilled my Jobseeker Agreement and on top I went to London.

        There were 9 sanctions in total. To read the rest visit:
        http://www.lifeinthemixtalk.com/?p=14004

        Funny A4e Photos

        August 22, 2010 at 5:41 pm

      • Funny A4e,
        Is there any chance of getting a sympathetic soliciter to have a look through Sean Young’s case as things can’t carry on like this its ridiculous?

        From what I can see he seems to already have nine sanctions (which speaking as someone who struggled with the paperwork on one appeal at a time) him having nine appeals on the go and the money problems that go with each sanction at the same point must make life and job seeking near impossible, and I am worried that all this leaves him an easy target for yet more sanctions.

        On top of things don’t sanctions increase in severity after your first one, and the new government is meant to be anouncing harsher sanctions soon as well as part of welfare reform?

        Lowestoft's Finest

        August 24, 2010 at 10:25 am

  26. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11033139

    Drug addict benefit withdrawal considered

    People dependant on drugs and alcohol who refuse treatment could have their welfare benefits withdrawn under plans being considered by the Home Office.

    The idea is in a consultation paper on the government’s drug strategy for England, Wales and Scotland.

    The proposals also suggest that addicts on benefits should not be required to seek work while receiving treatment.

    Some experts have suggested that withdrawing benefits could lead addicts into crime and prostitution.

    The Labour government intended to carry out pilot schemes this year to get drug users into work.

    Under the plans, addicts who failed to attend a treatment awareness programme would lose welfare benefits.

    However, in May the Social Security Advisory Committee – an independent statutory body – said withdrawing benefits from drug users would lead them into crime and prostitution.

    The coalition government scrapped the pilot programme – but the Home Office has now revived the idea.

    It asks for views on whether there should be some form of “financial benefit sanction” for claimants who do not take action to address their drug or alcohol dependency.

    The Home Office has also confirmed plans to give ministers the power to ban new substance for a year until they have been properly assessed in a bid to combat so-called “legal highs”.

    Minister for Crime Prevention James Brokenshire said: “The drugs market is changing and we need to adapt current laws to allow us to act more quickly.

    “The temporary ban allows us to act straight away to stop new substances gaining a foothold in the market and help us tackle unscrupulous drug dealers trying to get round the law by peddling dangerous chemicals to young people.”

    BBC News

    August 20, 2010 at 12:15 am

    • Just posted this…

      Thanks Auntie…

      Andrew Coates

      August 20, 2010 at 8:40 am

      • Are full on long term Alcos etc. allowed to claim the dole anyway? (as I thought they were on something else like Incapacity)? As full on long term Alchos need to spend at least what we get a week on booze just to function let alone get p*ssed,. You never see the real thing buying Tesco Value Cider (it would have no effect on them) they start at far harder stuff.

        In answer to my query Just heard on the radio the hooha is not about people on the dole its about registerd Alco’s and Druggies who arn’t on the dole at present but other benefits but in theory could be moved onto JSA with all its restraints in an attempt to force them to keep their acts together.And reduce incapacity spending.

        Still its not going to do jobseekers any favours ounce they end up on FND etc. After your provider has sent a few Alcos and Junkies to interviews with an employer expect all jobseekers with that provider to be tarred with the same brush and swerved by now suspicious employers.Having the YMCA postmark on your envelope is going to be an even bigger bar to employment.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        August 20, 2010 at 12:17 pm

      • Could you spare me some change for a cup ‘o tea, Guv 🙂

        Ally Alco

        August 20, 2010 at 12:35 pm

      • Alcoholics (those leading on to liver damage etc.) aren’t able to claim JSA because their circumstances/disability make them unable to work.

        Binge drinkers at the weekend etc. can work and although unhealthy they can have a job whilst going without or with little alcohol during the week… (not at work obviously lol) so those who fall under this category would be claiming JSA.

        So you are right they claim Incapacity Benefit (hence the higher payment rate and the illogic method of paying them more to get drunk) which is now ESA (?)

        As for YMCA Training and TNG… they do not have a franking system active for jobseekers… (for Ipswich anyway) I guess their logic is, once seeing the letters they will be thrown away and claimed not to have received them (of course theres nothing stopping someone doing that once opening them). For other businesses custom franking branding on envelopes add that nice professional touch… I long for the day when more Welfare to Work providers become proud to show their logo… makes you think, are staff actually shamed to send letters franked?

        It is like Caller ID for letters!

        I agree with the statement regarding problems with jobseekers getting a worse reputation with employers however I generally feel that all unemployed people whether they claim benefits or not is seen exactly like that. I have never ever personally claimed any other benefit than JSA… and I haven’t had a non-stop claim including periods I have had a job and worked… but it becomes “one of them” (unemployed) and “us” (all taxpayers). Because you claim, you are one of those who get their own house, get £1000 per week and never contributed back… dont want to work, lazy, work shy, scum without morals etc.

        Bunch of crap. Some people are really stupid.

        Flexible New Deal

        August 20, 2010 at 5:17 pm

  27. Ally Alco You light weight Spare Some Change for a cup of Tea? pah!!! Its “Spare some large denomination folding money for a cup of Tea”.

    Mr. B. Yeltsin, Ru$$ia

    August 20, 2010 at 2:23 pm

  28. I hear that A4e has sponsored “Homeless Football”. What next?

    Flexible New Deal

    August 21, 2010 at 8:48 am

  29. What’s it with the all the upper-crust toffy nose posters on here with the double-barrelled names?

    Bertie Weedlestock-Ramsbottom

    August 21, 2010 at 9:17 am

  30. Nice to read it 🙂

    Richard Alltf

    August 21, 2010 at 5:56 pm

  31. To Whom It May Concern

    We are now looking into this website and the affiliations. Please be advised that other actions can and will follow

    Avanta Group {TNG}

    August 22, 2010 at 12:36 pm

    • Don’t forget that local housing allowance can and does go down as well as up

      Benefits

      August 22, 2010 at 12:55 pm

    • It obviously concerns no one. TNG were at the same state of progress around a year ago. Of course, you are not TNG.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 22, 2010 at 1:11 pm

    • Don’t forget that local housing allowance can and does go down as well as up … yeah, emma harrison’s knickers lol

      TNG Busters

      August 22, 2010 at 1:32 pm

    • Anyone spot the significance in this phone number A4e – 0800 345 666?! Kind of like the “linking rings” in the Working Links logo – anyone realise what they represent?

      Satan

      August 22, 2010 at 3:22 pm

      • And what do the initials of Reed in Partnership spell… it’s all falling in to place…

        Beelzebub

        August 23, 2010 at 9:04 pm

  32. Flexible new hell!

    I would lol, but it’s not funny.

    Oh dear

    August 23, 2010 at 1:35 pm

  33. Hello;
    Here we go again. Having ago at Haley and the training providers. At least they have got something you have not, no make that two things. BRAINS and a JOB

    Benefits

    August 23, 2010 at 2:56 pm

    • Hey Benefits, bigmouth. If you wanna come around this manor you betta learn some manners and show some respect.

      Scarface

      August 23, 2010 at 3:00 pm

      • Oi Ugly.

        Don’t you ever get tired of the same phrase ?

        Benefits

        August 23, 2010 at 3:03 pm

      • Hey bigmouth. You can sure talk the talk. You wanna walk the walk?

        Scarface

        August 23, 2010 at 3:25 pm

    • And you have something we haven’t got as well a Swastika for your Avatar.

      Seems the random avatar generater moves in mysterious ways indeed.

      Lowestoft's Finest

      August 23, 2010 at 3:02 pm

  34. Yes,
    It’s a pity we don’t know who these people really are, I can think of a couple of things to say to them; SANCTIONS SANCTIONS

    A Friend

    August 23, 2010 at 2:59 pm

    • Hey A Friend, bigmouth. You got a problem, buddy?

      Scarface

      August 23, 2010 at 3:02 pm

      • Hey buddy. You aint welcome around this manor. Beat it!

        Scarface

        August 23, 2010 at 5:49 pm

  35. It also looks as though apart from being extremly ugly you can’t read.
    A Friend has said and I am saying.
    The only problem with us is idiots like you

    Benefits

    August 23, 2010 at 4:07 pm

    • Hey buddy. You aint welcome around this manor. Beat it!

      Scarface

      August 23, 2010 at 5:50 pm

  36. good news everyone… just heard that my ex nazi adviser has DIED of CANCER lol i hope that fucker was rolling in agony… ha ha ha wot goes around comes around lol burn in hell you bastard lol i am soooooooooooooooo HAPPY!!!!

    Bad Karma

    August 23, 2010 at 4:56 pm

  37. “They come and go, they come and go”….

    Karma Chameleon

    August 23, 2010 at 6:20 pm

  38. Bad Karma.

    It is complete arse holes like you and scarface, that give ordinary decent job seekers a bad name. What if somebody said that of a relative of yours. Or what if it were a relative of yours.
    I hope they find who and where you are and provide you with a longterm sanction with the money saved going to his family.

    Mr Nice Guy

    August 24, 2010 at 8:53 am

    • So fucking what… no different from when you provider cunts *celebrate* when a client is *awarded* a sanction. This cunt is getting what they deserve. What goes around does come around. Now, get back to licking Emma’s arse. Fuck off!!

      Fanny Pad

      August 24, 2010 at 9:28 am

      • Apart from being extremley obnoxious and very unpleasent. It seems that you have no thought for any fellow human being. But then a ‘Fanny Pad’ IS a useless inanimate object. Have you looked in the mirror latley

        Mr Nice Guy

        August 24, 2010 at 10:59 am

    • Hey Mr Nice Guy, bigmouth. You got a problem, buddy?

      Scarface

      August 24, 2010 at 10:06 am

  39. Yes Scarface.
    I do have a problem YOU. I refer you to my reply to ‘Fanny Pad’. What is it with you that you wish death and destruction on those that are trying their hardest to help you. You seem to delight in the fact that some providers are in difficulty. You seem to want also to try and aviod FND or the Work Programme or what ever it will be called. Yes I have walked the walk and talked the talk. Yes I do know that I am ON your manner. Yes I do have respect for everybody except for the likes of YOU and ‘FANNY PAD’. I look forward to the day the DWP/Benefits Agency and or your provider finds you. I will then laugh myself silly when you get a 3 year sanction

    Mr Nice Guy

    August 24, 2010 at 11:06 am

    • Hey buddy, you threatening me? Wanna step outside?

      Scarface

      August 24, 2010 at 11:35 am

  40. NO. just stating facts

    Mr Nice Guy

    August 24, 2010 at 12:30 pm

    • 1. Scarface is ANDREW COATES
      2. ANDREW COATES is Lowestoft’s Finest.
      3.Lowestoft’s Finest is Flexible New Deal and Funny A4E.

      Just Google it like I did.

      iunemployed@live.co.uk
      and fuckoffnutters@hotmail.com are Andrew Coates Email Addresses

      Mr Nice Guy

      August 24, 2010 at 3:39 pm

      • Hey buddy. Low-lifes aint welcome around this manor. Beat it!

        Scarface

        August 24, 2010 at 3:58 pm

  41. Hmmm… interesting 🙂 No organs – no benefit 🙂

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-10786211

    ‘Sell organs to save lives’

    The demand for organ donors far outstrips the supply.

    In this week’s Scrubbing Up, Martin Wilkinson, a visiting professor at Keele University and former chairman of the New Zealand Bioethics Council, argues that selling organs is the way forward.

    When people’s organs fail, their best hope – sometimes their only hope – is a transplant.

    Transplants are not only effective treatment, they are worth the money too. But there are not enough organs.

    Tinkering with the rules for consent, using less-than-pristine organs, and more donations by living people have still left a big gap between supply and demand.

    Should the law be changed so that people could sell their organs? I think it should.

    Permitting sale would mean more people could get the organs they need. People should not be stopped from selling their organs because they have a right to do what they want with their bodies when they would not be harming others.

    And would allowing sale make more organs available?

    The most basic economics lesson says that supply increases with price.

    Organs currently have a price of £0. Give people money for their organs and you will get more of them.

    Basic economics is a bit too basic though. Perhaps few people would want to sell; perhaps people who would have donated now would not because, for instance, they are offended by the idea of money changing hands. In theory, the supply of organs could even fall if sales were allowed.

    However, when Iran gave generous compensation to live kidney `donors’, it not only met demand but cleared the backlog on its waiting list.

    Of course, people in the UK may not behave like people in Iran, so it would be sensible to do some research into people’s willingness to take money for their organs. Still, if the aim is to increase the supply of organs, it would be worth giving sale a try.

    What about the ethical objections? Many take pride in the system of altruistic donation.

    They do not want to replace altruism with commerce and they think society would find commerce repulsive. But the extent to which we have altruistic donation is greatly overrated.

    Many people die without giving any serious thought to donation. It is their families who agree and, when they agree, they are not donating their organs.

    In any case, if organ sales would increase supply, it would not be altruistic to say: `we like altruism so much we will not allow sale even though more people will die as a result.’

    As for society finding sale repulsive, there is no serious evidence that it would. Even if it did, people do all sorts of things with their own bodies that other people do not like.

    Punishing people for trying to sell their organs – which has happened in the UK – infringes on a right to decide what to do with one’s own body.

    People should be able to choose for themselves whether to sell their organs. But surely, the argument goes, it is the poor who would sell, and what choice would they have?

    Well, the poor do have bad options, but it is a pretty strange policy that takes away the one option they may think the best, and punishes them for trying to use it. And that is what criminalising organ sales does.

    The critics have a point, though. People who are desperate lay themselves open to exploitation and deceit, and organ sellers are exploited and deceived in black markets now.

    But the answer is to regulate the market, not to drive it underground. Selling an organ should no longer be a criminal offence.

    Joseph Mengele

    August 27, 2010 at 10:34 am

    • I would never ever do that…

      Sell a kidney…

      Mess yours up… need a transplant… can’t get one.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 27, 2010 at 2:21 pm

    • You cannot have the sale of organs…

      I have not researched it but I assume that there is restrictions on to the condition, the blood type and size etc. …

      Your young daughter is lying in hospital requiring a heart transplant.. in a very bad way.

      One comes up… price…. £200,000

      What do you do? You cannot afford to buy it but your daughter would die. You can fundraise but you will find it difficult to get past £50k in realistic timescales.

      The person who claims the right to the organ isn’t going to accept an IOU.

      And… oh yeah… the organ isn’t going to last very long.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 27, 2010 at 2:27 pm

  42. “People should be able to choose for themselves whether to sell their organs :-). But surely, the argument goes, it is the poor who would sell, and what choice would they have? 🙂

    Well, the poor do have bad options :-), but it is a pretty strange policy that takes away the one option they may think the best :-), and punishes them for trying to use it. 🙂 And that is what criminalising organ sales does.

    Joseph Mengele

    August 27, 2010 at 10:37 am

  43. I’ll step outside with you scarface….just drop me an e mail…no problem…

    abu

    August 27, 2010 at 3:16 pm

    • Hey abu, bigmouth. You threatening me?

      Scarface

      August 27, 2010 at 3:52 pm

      • For Gods Sake don’t step outside with Abu its a trap, you won’t know if he wants to fight you or fuck you.

        Blue Coat Boy

        August 28, 2010 at 10:10 am

  44. yep

    abu

    August 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    • Hey abu, yellow-belly. What’s up, buddy? You sound nervous.

      Scarface

      August 28, 2010 at 10:28 am

  45. Scarface.
    Once you start showing respect to other people and let the express their views. Then the will respect you. Until then SHUT THE F++K UP. But then all we can expect from you is threats and rudeness. It seems that you can’t bear to hear the truth. And as Mr Abu is ALLEGEDLY IMPLYING. A smack in the teeth hurts as mjuch as the truth. Look at the comments you made to Mr Nice Guy over his comments about ‘Bad Karma’. Oh yes. and I agree with him. As Benefits says, Don’t you ever get tired of using the same phrases. You seem to be like a demented parrot always repeating yourself. Give us all a break and as they say DO ONE

    stavros

    August 28, 2010 at 8:01 am

    • Hey stavros, bigmouth. You and your views aint welcome around this manor. Beat it!

      Scarface

      August 28, 2010 at 10:30 am

      • Dear Mr Scarface,
        With all due respect to you sir, but this proves my point[from my previous post(s)] and your replies to Mr Abu. It just goes to prove beyond all reasonable doubt you are an idiot. That is spelt
        I-D-I-O-T. You as I have said before are either a stuck gramaphone record [I do presume you are both old enough and ugly enough to know what these are] or a parrot. If you have nothing nice to say or any sensible posts, apart from threats etc. put up or for F*** sake shut up. I am getting fed up of telling you and I am sure others are too. Learn to respect others and they will in time learn to respect you.

        Stavros

        August 28, 2010 at 11:16 am

  46. Dear Mr Scarface,
    I forgot to add that some of your posts could constitute threating behaviour, and could therefore get you banned from this site {unless of course if I am right and you are ‘one of the owners’ of this site. Therefore you are getting passed the moderators

    Stavros

    August 28, 2010 at 11:21 am

    • You mean getting past? P-A-S-T?

      This blog doesn’t have moderators… people post and they appear pending removal from admin if the case should be.

      Flexible New Deal

      August 28, 2010 at 12:43 pm

      • Flexy: exactly as you said before this is a Forum: not a message board.

        In extreme cases we have barred people.

        All are welcome.

        Though some less than others…

        Andrew Coates

        August 28, 2010 at 1:33 pm

  47. Sorry Fnd I stand corrected.

    Stavros

    August 28, 2010 at 12:49 pm

  48. Sorry fnd I stand corrected

    stavros

    August 28, 2010 at 12:51 pm

  49. proves a point

    1 and the same: Flexible New Deal
    Scarface
    Andrew Coates
    Lowestoft’s Finest

    +

    August 28, 2010 at 12:57 pm

    • Yeah sure we hang out in Lowestoft Wetherspoon’s where we write this.

      Er.

      Is there a Lowestoft Wetherspoon’s?

      Andrew Coates

      August 28, 2010 at 1:36 pm

  50. Not to my knoledge,

    But if we had one it probably got trashed in a drink sodden riot soon after opening

    ….Lowestoft being Lowestoft.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    August 28, 2010 at 2:40 pm

  51. You wouldn’t have “Booze” in this country if it wasn’t for the Gypsies.

    “Booze” is a Gypsy word.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    August 28, 2010 at 2:44 pm

  52. COLCHESTER ZOO HAS JUST HAD TWO ELEPHANTS DONATED TO THEM. THEIR KEEPER IS ON A WORKTRIAL/WORKPROGRAMME. IN THEIR HONOUR OF THIS ILLUSTRIOUS SCHEME
    THE ZOO HAS NAMED THE ELEPHANTS
    HALEY AND EMMA

    NEELIX

    September 2, 2010 at 8:22 am

  53. Hello,
    This is a further update of the situation of not hearing from A4E/RIP about the re-refferal. I spoke to the Jobcentre in Ipswich this morning. Apparently I am not the only person this has happend too. Phone calls and emails both from me and the Jobcentre going unanswered. I understand that somebody from Ipswich Jobcentre physically went to Reed at Cfrown House. They tried to find out what was going on and they were told to put their {Jobcentre} concerns in writing. It appears that the providers are getting away with running rings around the Jobcentre/DWP and getting away with it. I also put my concerns in writing to Jobcentre Plus. I was told they have too wait like me, and I was not to get too worried about not hearing. Just check next time you sign I was told.

    Philip

    September 2, 2010 at 12:07 pm

    • Totally a sad situation. I would actually be considering involving the police if I was the Jobcentre.

      Not only is Party B not keeping a contract that Party A is paying them, they are doing this to defraud (which becomes the crime – failing to deliver a contract otherwise is just a civil matter)

      What’s more… it isn’t some person’s money or a company’s money but taxpayers’ money!

      After all let me remind you… that DWP had been paying the provider a top heavy fee (on the assumption that it was a long-term contract). Them refusing to deliver the contract and accepting such monies (I have to assume about payment as its top secret and neither DWP or providers are willing to disclose specifics) is criminal in nature.

      Flexible New Deal

      September 2, 2010 at 1:03 pm

      • Dear Mr Flexible New Deal,
        I could not agree with you more.
        Could it just be me I don’t know, but I have a gut feeling that JCP are somewhat ‘afraid’ to confront the providers on this matter face on. It’s as though ‘providers’ have more powers than JCP. Please correct me if I am wrong though. Even so perhaps somehow information could be obtained under the freedom of information act. But of course there would be commercial [Not in the public interest to reveal]

        Philip

        September 3, 2010 at 8:28 am

      • Emma Harrison – she who must be obeyed 🙂

        The Ghpst of Thornbridge Hall

        September 3, 2010 at 10:04 am

      • Pleased to meet you, old spook.

        The Headless Horseman

        September 3, 2010 at 10:16 am

    • I wouldn’t be surprised if there isn’t a cartel amongst the Welfare to Work industry.

      Flexible New Deal

      September 2, 2010 at 1:26 pm

      • Too Right Flexi, The last government brought in these scemes by going over the heads of the DWP and calling in a few of their private sector pals instead. I bet they got completly stitched and gave them all Fred Goodwin style contracts that in reality let them get away with murder.

        The DWP should get legal with them but I doubt if they will as they won’t wan’t to draw attention to the mess the program is in or the total farce it was from start to finish.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        September 2, 2010 at 2:06 pm

  54. PHONEY BEGGAR EARNS £23K A YEAR PLUS BENEFITS

    A court heard yesterday how Daniel Terry, 31, dressed up as a tramp and raked in £50 on a weekday and up to £100 on weekends in Lincoln, whilst claiming £80 a week of incapacity benefits.

    With his £4,000-a-year benefits, the fake beggar made a total income of £27,000 – more than the average nurse, teacher or soldier.

    The former estate agent, who convinced passers-by he was homeless, was actually living at his girlfriend’s council flat or on friends’ sofas for most of the time.

    http://uk.news.yahoo.com/38/20100902/tuk-phoney-beggar-earned-23-000-a-year-p-107bc4a.html

    Funny A4e Photos

    September 2, 2010 at 5:44 pm

  55. I wonder how many PA’s from the providers will now turn up on our side of the queue at jcp now that fnd is in demise. Will hthey remember us and will the jcp staff treat them like they have treated us or will there be ‘special measures’ for them.

    • We will indeed have “special measures” in place. I am looking forward to welcoming ex-PAs to the Todt Organisation.

      Fritz Todt

      September 4, 2010 at 10:14 am

    • Hopefully not for their own well-being. If they were next to me then damn they would be stabbed – verbally of course!

      Well actually, I doubt I would do that… probably just a stare, followed by that look of disappointment and pointing whilst executing an over-extended almost never ending laugh!

      Hopefully the person would get the hint, go away… then come back later once I gone and be sanctioned for being late.

      Or… I might just play along with it… “Hello. Why are you waiting here? Just walk up to security and tell them you are from Reed in Partnership (example) and have came to start someone on Flexible New Deal… right? *pause* Its not like you are unemployed or anything right? … [their body language confirms they are] haha, you are! Tragic.”

      Probably make up bullshit to rub it in further…

      “What happened? You were clearly the most hard working person working there. Don’t you think it is ironic how an organisation that is intended to get people off the dole queue actively sticks people on it? ”

      Followed by..

      “I look forward to seeing you again each time I come to sign on. The thing you will notice is, the same faces everytime, the only difference is the additional new people you meet. So you better be prepared. If you think you wont be here in 6 months time you can think again. You will. It was nice meeting you again. Same time in 2 weeks? See you around.”

      Flexible New Deal

      September 4, 2010 at 10:43 am

    • true mate, heard things are tough for psychology graduates with six months sales experience at the mo, and it is going to get even tougher for them.

      Abu's Magic Friend

      September 4, 2010 at 10:46 am

      • Yea I bet these ‘graduates’ are from RIP. I know of one who was a Charity Collector and dressed as SUPERMAN. There is a photo of him on his desk at a certain provider. I think a lot of us know who HE is.

        Abu's other friend

        September 4, 2010 at 12:18 pm

    • Of course not for their own well being. I can assure of my my evil intent.

      Fritz Todt

      September 4, 2010 at 10:54 am

  56. LF – do your friends call you Pinnochio?

    abu

    September 4, 2010 at 8:15 am

    • Hey abu, bigmouth. How many times do you need to be told. If you wanna come around this manor you betta learn some manners and show some respect.

      Scarface

      September 4, 2010 at 10:03 am

      • Italian? I think Abu’s Confusing his Roma.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        September 4, 2010 at 3:13 pm

    • Abu, you mean Pinocchio? As in the popular Disney film inspired by some story by an Italian?

      Flexible New Deal

      September 4, 2010 at 10:31 am

    • ABU.

      Do you work for DWP?

      Philip

      September 4, 2010 at 12:29 pm

  57. Abu – do your friends?

    Lowestoft's Finest

    September 4, 2010 at 9:46 am

  58. Abu – do you have friends?

    Lowestoft's Finest

    September 4, 2010 at 9:47 am

  59. Yea! Abu he have friend. Him look in mirror everyday. He see friend there and one in his pants too

    J Edgar Hoover

    September 4, 2010 at 9:57 am

  60. Everybody knows that Abu is a friend of mine.

    Dorothy

    September 4, 2010 at 10:10 am

  61. Abu imagine if we had checked in then found it was a bunk bed.

    Love

    Little Willie H.

    William Haig

    September 4, 2010 at 10:17 am

  62. Good point Godfrey R.W., After witnessing on many occasions the large ammonts of flack that the inocent front of house Jobcentre staff have had to cop from disgruntled clients of the private sector parasites, combined with the fact these people effectivly nicked JCP jobs I should imagine they will get an even worse reception than the reception they can expect from our side of the desk.

    God help anybody unfortunate enough to have to sign on immediatly after one of them.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    September 4, 2010 at 10:43 am

    • I am not sure… Firstly, from the DWP survey… most of the staff hate working there and never intend staying more than 6 months.

      I see a few new staff (mostly because they are taken on to cope with the huge numbers / “demand”) but I recognise faces of people been working there for years from previous claims before I found work. So they are stuck there really.

      Secondly, they aren’t the brightest bulbs out there or the sharpest knives in the draw. Until Jobcentre Plus is privatised there are only going to see these private employees (sorry I mean ex-employees haha) as complimenting their work and not replacing.

      Jobcentre Plus likes the welfare to work industry in general as (especially for NDPA’s) they are sorting out their workload for them. If someone is on New Deal then that person is no longer “signing on” with frontline staff. As for the other stages of New Deal and Flexible New Deal these people disappear from the support of a job search etc. with an adviser of up to an hour slot… to a few minutes signing on appointment for FND participants and 13 weeks without an attendance for New Deal.

      If there is a relationship between members of staff (such as prior provider employees who do ref2 appointments etc. at JCP) then they are going to get better treatment – it is only natural. Also, even though they might not have done any JCP work before there is the common interest of “helping people back into the workplace” plus also assumption that the turd in front of the frontline JCP staff member who might also fall in the category as being a turd, is not ever going to be looked down as a benefit fraudster.

      Damn taxpayers have a bad deal. The efficiency of a Jobcentre is one of the poorest of all organisations in the country. Efficiency of such an organisation is never going to be above “very good” due to a few factors such as less jobcentres, less staff, and trends of unemployment (Expand to cope with demand now and be efficient then in a few years down the road, such offices will need to be shut and jobs lost as the demand isn’t there to make it value for money).

      Of course at current – I do not have a job so how can I talk? But if they gave me a job of this then I would make sure it is working up to full capacity.

      My local Jobcentre alone… I do not understand how it could be so poorly run. Taking into account the vast level structure of managers and supervisors; and the fact security staff who are too numerous, bored out of their heads actually are made to take the initiative of helping claimants sign on by collecting the ES40 booklets, becomes a very worrying ordeal for taxpayers. I think too much money is invested in managers who are never available and less in frontline staff who are needed to cope with demand (3 people signing people on where 20+ desks exists, while seating area at the front and bottom is full with people standing around the job points, in the way of flow of people…. is disgusting.)

      We all know that back-in-the-day dole queues were common… but today there is absolutely no reason why the flow of people coming into the Jobcentre cannot be better dealt with. Anyone in Ipswich who goes to the local Jobcentre will know there are typically 2 people “on the desk” who wonders up and down…. one actually is the manager (customer service I think) the fat lesbian looking one, who basically is responsible for everything frontline.

      Her time would be better spent sitting down in a room for half a day thinking of a plan to sort this out rather than relaying the stinking attitude of being unemployed in YOUR fault and YOUR problem, we are the state thus nothing will be perfect…

      Actually, in all honesty her job is redundant – with all the security that exists there is no need for assumingly such a high paid person to be swanning up and down doing a job already done by security. The frontline staff has an easy enough job as it is… without requiring a manager. The Jobcente Manager himself should be who the frontline staff is responsible to, and perhaps that is even the case. The other person whoever it is never seems to stay still neither on front desk… after dealing with a “customer”, the person wonders off for a break.

      In this day and age, I am surprised why they haven’t replaced front desk with extended ability on the job points… After all most of their queries are “use the phones over there, press #” or “Sorry, you have to contact HMRC”. A personal touch in nice (when you are treated properly) but even that isn’t required. Software with a flow chart or multiple question system would be fine.

      They could have a proper queue management system (some Jobcentre Plus offices do) where everyone is assigned a number, and people are called over to a specific desk. This prevents the need for someone to get up and walk over calling people’s names out which is a big waste of time really in all honesty.

      It is a mini rant… but you get the idea…

      Flexible New Deal

      September 4, 2010 at 11:27 am

      • Flexi, There seems to be a marked difference between atitudes of Ipswich and Lowestoft JCP staff the majority of ours are decent people, and there is certainly no love lost between them and the private providers.

        I think that the difference in attitude and the fact our jobcentre has little difficulty retaining them is probably down to the fact that unemployment is endemic here, and it is looked on as an enevitability everyone here will experiance it at some point so it has more or less lost its stigma, once everybody had at least one family member conected with the fishing industry now everybody here seems to have at least one family member who’s unemployed.

        I think a lot of ill feeling has built up amoungst our Jobcentre staff over the way they have been treated like canon fodder by sucessive governments , as they were regulaly on strike against cuts that saw a lot of their work hived off to Bury St Edmunds and private service providers brought in to hive off part of the remainder all of which provided an inferior service. I think they are also fed up like teachers of clueless ministers dumping crack pot scemes on them with no prior consultation and just expect them to wave a magic wand to sort it out.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        September 4, 2010 at 12:35 pm

      • I would agree Lowestoft.

        Despite other comments, most of them are the same as us.

        The standard has gone down of course, but most are okay.

        We should support them.

        However, there was a woman, we used to call her the ‘dragon lady’, that used to really annoy people when they signed-on in Ipswich.

        One day she asked me why I thought I was unemployed.

        I said, “I blame global warming.”

        Andrew Coates

        September 4, 2010 at 12:49 pm

      • I would have replied…

        “I think I am unemployed because I do not have a job. ”

        Worries me when someone working at the JOBcentre do not know the basics.

        Flexible New Deal

        September 4, 2010 at 12:55 pm

      • I can’t say the place is permanently a totaly twat free zone, but fortunatly people thus inclined rarely seem to last long there especialy after experiancing the “season of peace and good will” in which everything comes to a head and regulaly causes things to kick off in Lowestoft Jobcentre and the place get trashed I remember on one occasion twice in one day.

        On the other hand the staff here are famous for a black sense of humour such as the time they told one of my mates when he quarried the amount he got per week, “no thats it all your getting from us, if you wan’t any more your’l have to go off and get sombody pregnant”,

        Or the time my mate the terminaly depressed “Sad John” unsucessfully tried to make a claim for JSA and noticed out of the corner of his eye the member of staff dealing with it drawing a hangman on his forms as he reeled off his answers.

        Lowestoft's Finest

        September 4, 2010 at 1:46 pm

      • Pregnant? See this is what I mean about staff not being the brightest…

        As for Jobseekers Allowance…

        You wont get more money as a “couple” (I think it works out slightly less than two single rates) and you do not get more for being a lone parent.

        As to get over type of benefits… it would rely on the woman leaving without the child which is extremely rare.

        Likewise, if she is a single mum with the kid alone, you aren’t going to see any additional money.

        I am aware its supposed to be a joke but cmon … there has to be some truth for it to be funny.

        Flexible New Deal

        September 4, 2010 at 2:43 pm

  63. The JCP would like to point out to Comrade Coates that with the termination of the private service provider contracts clients will no longer have access to their inhouse Doctor and medical facilities.

    Bearing this in mind should Comrade Coates find himself unfortunate enough to be the person signing on immediatly after an ex member of A4e/RIP/TNG/or YMCA staff, he would be ill advised to attempt to try to engage any member of JCP front desk staff with what he considers to be a light hearted commedy routine.

    JCP Ipswich

    September 4, 2010 at 11:08 am

    • It should also be rememberd that some of the staff at J.C.P are on short term contracts. Some of them if they live in the Ipswich or Stowmarket and Felixtowe catchment, could find themselves being in the queue and having too face their former colleuges when sigining and then being asked the questions we get asked. IE what have you done in the last two weeks etc. As a second thought I wonder if any of the PA/Tutorial staff from RIP TNG YMCA etc will have applied for a job at DWP/BA. We shall but wait and see.

      Philip

      September 4, 2010 at 12:26 pm

    • My son you mean like this:

      Andrew Coates

      September 4, 2010 at 12:56 pm

  64. I don’t think that we would employ psycophants

    Job Centre Plus

    September 4, 2010 at 12:32 pm

  65. Duncan Contracts Ltd provide a full property repair service following a flood, fire or storm. They are experienced in dealing with insurance companies and their systematized approach to claims ensures a quick and responsive service. One call and they will ensure a fully projected managed service from start to completion.
    **CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFO**

    Duncan Contracts

    September 10, 2010 at 8:22 pm

  66. Moving swiftly on from the spam…

    My JCP staff are ok. Mostly.
    It’s the providers that appear to have recruited many script following machines that seems the biggest problem. And the crazy provision!

    Common sense never computes.

    In best dalek voice…
    You-will-obey. YOU-WILL-OBEY!!!

    Oh well.

    Some witty and intelligent folks here. Mostly.

    Nice to read.

    Oh dear

    September 16, 2010 at 8:52 am

  67. Provider Staff = Killbots and Blandoinds.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    September 16, 2010 at 9:27 am

  68. Provider Staff = Killbots and Blandoids.

    Lowestoft's Finest

    September 16, 2010 at 9:28 am

  69. Hi from sleepless in Lowestoft with mentle health problems and dreading a medical due soon with atos or dontgiveATOS! I sure would like to comunicate with Lowestofts finest if he would be so kind coz im lost about the whole benifits change thing and have no one to help me help myself if you could please spare the time please kindly email me? Thank you kindly.

    SUZANNE JUST SUZANNE

    December 30, 2010 at 4:57 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: