Ipswich Unemployed Action.

Campaigning for Unemployed Rights.

Millions Face Income Cut with Welfare Reform.

with 121 comments

Tories Welfare ‘Reform’. 

I thought a lot about this yesterday.

First of all, let’s not forget that the Benefits Freeze means we are no longer able to keep up with every rising prices in the shops, utility charges and higher Community Charge.

Next, the report highlights the fact that many people on Local Housing Benefit,  are no longer getting their rents fully paid.

FInally you can guess the DWP’s response without even reading the article.

The Department for Work and Pensions said: “This report assumes that people won’t make any attempt to change and to improve their lives. But our welfare reforms incentivise work and, for the first time, universal credit helps working people progress and earn more, so they can eventually stop claiming benefits altogether.

“Under universal credit people are finding a job faster and staying in it longer than under the old system, and since the benefit cap was introduced, 34,000 households have moved off the cap and into work.”

In other words, ‘improve your lives” by getting out of the claws of the DWP and its so-called Universal Credit.

As Gauke would say, “I have made myself perfectly clear.”

Two million UK families face £50-a-week cut in income


Households with children make up more than 80% of those set to lose out as pressure grows for end to austerity

In a bleak assessment of the plight of the poorest families in Britain, the study commissioned by the Local Government Association found that more than 84% of those set to lose £50 a week or more are households with children, either lone parents or couples. Almost two-thirds of them are working households, despite claims from ministers that they wish to create a welfare system that encourages work.

The analysis, by the Policy in Practice consultancy, also undermines claims from ministers that moves to cut taxes and increase the wages of the poorest are compensating them for years of austerity and the rising cost of living.

While some of the seven million low-income households in Britain will be better off by 2020, the group as a whole faces an average loss of £40.62 a week by 2020 compared with the end of last year, once benefit and tax changes, wages, housing costs and inflation are all taken into account.


The study finds that the introduction of the government’s flagship policy of universal credit, which combines a series of benefits into a single payment, will lead to an average income loss of £11.18 per week. It coincides with new warnings from Citizens Advice that the rollout of the system should be halted, amid claims that some of those already receiving it have found themselves in serious debt.

With charities and councils warning of rising homelessness, increasing housing costs are identified as a main cause of falling income. More than 2 million low-paid private renters face an average real-terms loss of £38.49 a week by 2020.

For low-income private renters with three or more children, the average income loss that they face by 2020 in real terms is £67.21 a week. This compares with £30.67 for private renters without children.

The authors also say rents are rising faster in some areas than others, with housing benefit not rising to match it. The study found rents are set to rise by 20.7% in the south-west by 2020, but by just 3.5% in the north-east. The report warns that there is now a looming “affordability crisis” because cuts to housing benefit, known as local housing allowance (LHA) for private renters, mean it is no longer linked to real rents, pushing people into poverty or even homelessness.

This is the Report:

The Cumulative Impact of Welfare Reform: A National Picture


The combined effects of the major reforms implemented before 2017, namely the underoccupation charge (NOTE by Ipswich Unemployment Action, the Bedroom Tax) , the localisation of CTRS, the LHA shortfall and both benefit caps, result in an average nominal income loss of just over £23 per week for each working-age household.

The transition to Universal Credit will lead to a further average income loss of £11.18 per week.

This is largely due to cuts in work allowances which will hit households, often with children and previously in receipt of tax credits, particularly hard. The introduction of the National Living Wage and increases to the personal tax allowance will generate almost £3.2 billion for working, low-income households, reducing the average nominal income loss by 2020 to £7.62 per week.

However, these mitigating measures will only benefit 2.5 million of the 7.1 million affected working-age households, half of whom are not affected by welfare reform to begin with. Critically, the continued impact of reforms implemented before 2017 will increase the cumulative loss from welfare reform to an average of £40.62 per week by 2020. This is a consequence of expected inflation and private rent growth, combined with the freezing of benefits rates for working-age people through to 2020 and means that many households see
falls in real income. Private renters will be particularly hit because the link between the Local Housing Allowance rate and market prices has been broken.

The growing disconnect between rents and LHA rates means that the gap between housing support and housing costs will increase disproportionately for private sector renters. Nominally, private renters will be £2.75 per week better off by 2020, as they are more likely to be in work and so benefit from the increase in the National Living Wage and Personal Tax Allowance. However, once expected inflation and private rent growth is factored in, private renters will face average real terms losses of £38.49 per week, with higher losses for larger families.

Squeeze on living standards is down to welfare cuts, not the fall in the pound


..for millions of low- and middle-income Britons, living standards looked under threat even when Brexit was nothing more than a twinkle in Boris Johnson’s eye. The key moment came when, fresh from the Conservatives’ 2015 general election victory, the chancellor George Osborne delivered a budget that promised to “reward work and back aspiration”.

True to his word, he presented some very good news by introducing the national living wage – a sizeable and welcome supplement to the minimum wage for employees aged 25 and over. But the good news was eclipsed by the bad. The estimated £4bn boost from the national living wage was dwarfed by savings of £14bn from cuts to working-age welfare. What’s more, the welfare cuts are concentrated among poorer households. In the coming years, Britain faces the prospect of the first significant rise in inequality in three decades.

There is plenty to add: as people have already noted they’ve found the cash for the Police and the Prison Officers.

End the Benefit Freeze!


Written by Andrew Coates

September 11, 2017 at 10:36 am

121 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Reblogged this on sdbast.


    September 11, 2017 at 10:45 am

  2. Roll-out of Universal Credit benefits reform is ‘disaster waiting to happen’

    Universal Credit, the government’s flagship welfare reform, is “a disaster waiting to happen”, according to a charity that offers budgeting advice to benefits claimants.

    Citizens Advice said claimants transferred to Universal Credit are “more likely to struggle” with priority debts.



    September 11, 2017 at 3:48 pm

  3. Never rains but it pours,

    Andrew Coates

    September 11, 2017 at 3:58 pm

  4. Demand sees supplies run out at Aberdeen food banks

    Food insecurity is an issue that needs addressing on a national level.



    September 11, 2017 at 3:58 pm

  5. Basically what the DWP is saying is that cutting benefits forces people into work, and that if you suffer from caps and cuts it’s your own fault because EVERYBODY who wants a job could have a job if the wanted and if your BEHAVIOUR only changed you would be better off. I think everybody reading these words knows that nonsense is a dangerous lie. There are legions of people up and down the country trying to get a job and failing for a multitude of reasons – too old, too young, over-qualified, under-qualified, too isolated, under-skilled, over-skilled, can’t drive, got a conviction, not in good health, disabled, terminally ill (the dying now have to look for work, like everybody else, until six months from the grave), no transport, long-term jobless, caring responsibilities – you name it. So the idea that only feckless and lazy people shying away from work will get hit by the cuts is a lie – a big fat lie.

    Men, women and children who are completely innocent will suffer terribly from these measures.

    But at least, finally, people are becoming clued in and talking about it so perhaps there’s hope.

    Evil can only triumph when good men and women turn a blind eye and do nothing.


    September 11, 2017 at 5:37 pm

    • Employers being one and at the top.


      September 12, 2017 at 3:48 am

    • The government has been accused of forcing people on benefits to work in unstable zero-hours jobs after it emerged that sanctions could be handed out to those who refuse them.

      Unlike Jobseeker’s Allowance which it replaces, Universal Credit recipients “can be expected” to work a zero-hours contract job and be penalised if they don’t. In a response to a written parliamentary question at Westminster, Minister for Employment Damian Hinds said: “If there is no good reason that a Universal Credit claimant cannot take a zero-hours contract job they may be sanctioned for not doing so.”



      September 12, 2017 at 4:01 am

      • Employers where I live aren’t even offering a zero-hour contract but expecting employees to be self-employed, which is, if anything, EVEN WORSE than being a zero-hour worker. My bet would be that eventually the DWP will start trying to bully people into the gig economy and into self-employment, even though they won’t have the skills or expertise to earn a living like that.


        September 12, 2017 at 7:35 am

      • What’s to stop a business, say a supermarket taking everyone on universal credit on a zero-hours contract?

        Stock Replenishment Executive

        September 12, 2017 at 10:05 am

    • “the terminally ill (the dying now have to look for work, like everybody else, until six months from the grave)”

      At least the Jobcentre give you a whole six months to put your affairs in order, plan your funeral and say your last goodbyes which is really jolly decent of them.

      Grave Robber

      September 12, 2017 at 10:00 am

  6. All


    Doug Brown asked:

    Please provide me with any recorded information held by the DWP,
    which states it is a legal or mandatory requirement of Universal Credit that
    claimants use the online journal to provide evidence of work search.

    And can you also provide me with any recorded information held by the DWP,
    which states whether or not it is a legal or mandatory requirement of Universal
    Credit for claimants to provide evidence of their work search activities in a
    specific format or whether it is up to claimants how they provide evidence of
    their work search activities

    The DWP have not provide an answer/recorded information requested. They refer vaguely to creating and maintaining an online profile but do state whether or not they are referring to the online journal.
    And they have not stated whether or not claimants have to provide evidence of job search in a set format.


    jj joop

    September 11, 2017 at 7:15 pm

    • That looks like a “no” to me.


      September 11, 2017 at 7:26 pm

      • that does not say anything about the journal or any direction they can give you to open one or on line account.

        or anything about sanctions if you dont so it is not law and you dont need a journal to get uc in full service areas.

        as always it as all lies but what do you expect pmsl 😉


        September 11, 2017 at 7:39 pm

      • The bastards don’t actually say “no”, though, do they. As usual, they’re blowing smoke out of their arse!

        jj joop

        September 11, 2017 at 8:03 pm

      • Sorry everyone but what part of WRA 2012, 23 (3) a&b do you not get ?

        Provide evidence in a manner so specified;

        confirm compliance in a manner so specified.

        Its basically implying context, medium while deciding what they deem is compliant.

        I did say read this stuff ages ago which was quite some time ago as its not like legacy. Now the reach of this needs to be tested so your basically asking clarification for the term manner so specifiedbecause annex one simply says “Evidence A claimant has to provide information and / or evidence if requested in order to
        show they are able to comply with the rules relating to work-related requirements”.
        Now if they said they want you to write it on your backside and present it to the nearest council worker, apart from contravening certain laws, isn’t going to be supported by a court.

        Now i could go on regarding annex 2 for a few things but instead will leave you to read them carefully and process mentally.

        Lastly as usual it must be in the CC and like all things reasonably achievable and within the bounds of the law. Do not presume.


        September 11, 2017 at 10:36 pm

      • doug

        This clearly states there is no set format for claimants to provide evidence of their job search.


        jj joop

        September 12, 2017 at 5:43 am

      • doug

        And another thing. I can’t even get my work coach to say that it is a legal requirement for claimants to use their online journal to provide evidence of their job search. All he’ll say is: we expect claimants to use the online journal. And to use to provide evidence. “Expect the claimants to use the online journal” I mean, what the hell does that mean? Is it a legal requirement, or not?

        jj joop

        September 12, 2017 at 5:52 am

      • doug

        Just one more thing before I sign off and have my Weetabix.

        I get where you’re coming from. But all Doug Brown and others are trying to do is get the DWP to state, clearly and unequivocally: (a) it is a legal requirement of Universal Credit for claimants to use the online journal to provide evidence of their work search; and (b) that this the only format they can use.

        They will not do this! They take refuge in legislation that is vague and non-specific. Ta ta for now.

        jj joop

        September 12, 2017 at 6:34 am

      • @doug

        Not everybody has access to a computer or a telephone, doug, so there would have to be flexibility in respect to submitting work search and such like for scrutiny. As superted points out: What happens if your PC breaks down and you can’t afford to get it repaired or your local library closes or similar? The dependency of UC on the digital platform might end up doing for it because many, many, many people will never be able to use or manage their accounts online and will have to do it in person, on the phone, by letter and otherwise and this kind of flexibility would absolutely have to be built in, even though the DWP isn’t discussing it publicly.


        September 12, 2017 at 7:48 am

      • JJ Joop, Jem

        I know what Doug Brown and the likes are doing as DWP through regulation are being vague through writing themselves effectively a blank cheque on this topic.
        Like i said but will explain another way, an act is made, regulations are then made to clarify said act, then operational guides are made to layman that.

        Everything has a lower and higher, max and min limit (boundaries) and it is this that you need to seek. While indeed the welfare act cannot discriminate (not entitle) a person who while making a claim may have never used a PC nor been ever compelled to prior, that’s not the same thing as say a claimant who can but prefers not to provide work search evidence via the mentioned journal. To do so would be conflating.

        Now whether you like it or not, the current future for welfare is to go online with near no public servants serving the front of shop (physically present) besides certain points needing clarification like personal evidence while establishing a claim (birth cert,passport,bank account details,etc), i gather one to one reviews,etc. The ultimate aim would be to eventually remove even this if possible.
        Now if the majority of claimants could present work search evidence in person and elect to, you can see how this plays contrary to the welfare ideology of signing on online which supplying work search evidence forms a part of. Im sorry but in principal there is nothing unreasonable for wanting to follow and achieve that goal irrespective of our views.
        The question comes though, how legally compliant is this with other existing laws and or even if done, what control can the data subject have over the processing of such data without it being used to effect their entitlement to benefit/s.

        So in the first instance when you make this claim for UC on the swap over, your effectively being told, such benefit is conditional to an agreement of welfare law so before you even get to the point of presenting evidence, your consenting to WRA 23 (3) a&b. This is why i say look for clarity at the operational guides level. What is that min and max for the question you ask and regardless how much leave way exist if at all between it.


        September 12, 2017 at 11:10 am

      • Doug

        If there are no Jobcentres how are we going to have a sit-down protest?

        Fly Fawkes

        September 12, 2017 at 11:18 am

      • JJ Joop, Jem

        “No set format”, precisely why DWP must be made to clarify as your have nothing to go on.

        Don,t assume because they don’t clarify that you can dictate/suggest by using their lack of as evidence to the fact. The blank cheque is for them, not you so don’t lose sight of that.

        Now remember when i said regarding the 35 hour rule, that despite being reasonable is impracticable (how long is a piece of string), the annex 2 clearly reflects this now where it states,

        “This should not be a numerical exercise in adding up the individual hours spent on each activity,
        as this will not provide an assessment of the quality of the activities undertaken or the capabilities
        of individual claimants.
        Where a claimant has done all that could reasonably be expected of them – for example they
        have applied for all suitable jobs and undertaken all the activities set out in their Claimant
        Commitment – this will be considered sufficient even if the time taken was less than their
        expected hours”.

        This is what clarification is.

        Now write regarding your questions towards work search evidence to HQ 9relevent department and not through an FOI. Write your concern at the vagueness of work search evidence, write to ask, do they intend to expand upon this to cover the system as a whole as only then will you have something to work with.


        September 12, 2017 at 11:29 am

      • Doug asked: “How long is a piece of string?” If you look back a few posts you will find that Professor Brian Cox (Cock by nature) has already kindly answered your question… 😉

        String Theory

        September 12, 2017 at 11:39 am

      • doug

        I understand what you’re saying. I really do, mate. But here’s the thing. As recently as last Thursday, I asked my work coach about the legal requirements we’ve discussed and he point blank refuse to confirm them – job search evidence and the online journal, or whether they would fall under the scope of an WRA. He just said we expect claimants to use the online journal and use it to provide evidence. When I asked him again whether it was a legal requirement, he just repeated the same statement. This is it, you see. No one at the DWP will commit themselves to making a definitive statement on the subject. So I guess we’ll just have to wait for the outcome of Doug Browns request for an internal review of his FoI.

        The DWP should respond within the next 20 days.


        jj joop

        September 12, 2017 at 11:46 am

      • Doug

        Well, in M-theory a string is roughly 10E-35 metres long

        Professor Brian Cox (Cock by Nature)

        September 12, 2017 at 11:50 am

      • Doug

        It seems that you now have a definitive answer to your FOI request: “How long is a piece of string?” 😀


        September 12, 2017 at 11:56 am

      • JJ Joop

        The information the work coach has is exactly the same as FOI so how can they tell you anything different unless you know of a document explaining it differently and concisely which you don’t as why ask in the first place.

        Many acts,regulations and even operation guides are put into force without knowing and or considering all the facts so can and do, be found wanting and needing correction,removal.clarification and so forth. Every aspect of our existence has been this path as had we taken the time to contemplate all the variables, we would in all likelihood, still be living in caves.

        Don’t waste your time talking to a work coach,its hard enough to find one who even knows legacy welfare procedure and rules or even civil service code let alone our opaque great reform. You or anyone must address the relevant body at HQ as that’s precisely where it extends from. If when located they say, thats what we have, then ask who had the authority to manufacture said material (i mean actually pen it, not print it). If upon speaking to them they say this is what i was given to write, ask them which ranking authority gave that to them and so and so on until you reach the person who has but a corner to be pinned into.

        “There can be no progress nor achievement without sacrifice, and a man’s worldly success will be by the measure that he sacrifices his confused animal thoughts, and fixes his mind on the development of his plans, and the strengthening of his resolution and self-reliance.” – James Allen


        September 12, 2017 at 12:40 pm

      • String Theory/Chucky

        I never asked DWP anything of the sort, i was stating a fact using pure logic as to the impracticability of such an application. Annex 2 along with other documents (none of which i personally gained myself, nor sought to) merely prove my prior point.
        It might help you to understand, just because a law exists, doesn’t mean its enforceable in entirety or in part. You see Its not enough to know the law, its only enough if you know how to apply a law in a sense that’s achievable in actuality (working practice). Ultimately only a judge/s relating to the matter of law in question truly can judge how and if it applies and whether or not to overrule it, not a work coach, not a decision maker who can only at best rescind or enforce a particular decision they applied based on a said law. There is a very clear difference between practice/procedure and law.

        Well that’s me done for the day as i cannot add any further at this juncture.


        September 12, 2017 at 1:10 pm

  7. they dont say yes tho do they as there is no legislation for it to be mandatory for you have to claim benefits online and thats it and no other way.

    creating and maintaining an online profile

    and what does that mean an online profile on what face book ujm or the journal ? it could mean anything but if you got no money and been sanctioned and get the internet cut off then what?

    or ur computers dies and cant get on line for a few months 20 mins down the library is not going to cut it even if you walk.

    the law does not state i need to be online and have a computer device to use the benefit service does it and if that is the case they can pay my internet bill and buy me a pc to use this service on.

    because at the end of the day there shutting down jcp offices and even now you try get to use one of there computers for 5hrs a day.

    last time i looked all i need to claim benefits is
    full name, that is on my birth cert that i never signed so i can call my self what i like tbh and why should i pay the council tax as i never signed that either so why should i pay it under common law.

    ni number and address.

    phone numbers cv and opening a ujm is all they can give you a direction for and that is only to show you have this and can use them or have them.

    they cant force you to hand over a cv or phone number to keep on record or force you to even use ujm let alone give them access to your account to snoop in.


    September 11, 2017 at 8:41 pm

    • Superted

      Doug Brown is requesting an internal review of his FoI request. Should be interesting. Not only are the DWP blowing smoke at of their arse, they’re trying to blow smoke up his arse, as well.

      jj joop

      September 12, 2017 at 5:39 am

    • Name one, just ONE public service whereby it is a mandatory requirement to be online and have a computer device to use it.

      The Questioner

      September 12, 2017 at 9:54 am

      • My point, exactly.

        jj joop

        September 12, 2017 at 11:47 am

      • If they cannot gain access to universal jobmatch then their unlikely to do the same with Universal Credit.Communications between people regarding confidential information is not somthing the DWP can dictate.Bully tactics have included agressive behaviour smashing computer monitors aside then demanding access to peoples private emails then marched to a computer.This was going on in full view of people at the Jobcentre.Clearly an attempt to take full control of someone.

        Its another case of Universal Credit as with Jobseekers Allowance following the law not the other way around.Of course it suits them becase its open to every snooper in the department.Their also likely to ignore any other legal requirement that should be complied with.


        September 12, 2017 at 4:01 pm

      • Do the cockroaches smash the computer monitors at your jobcentre too then, ken?

        Tini Tempa

        September 12, 2017 at 4:36 pm

      • I cannot see anything in the regulations regarding how evidence should be provided.

        Purposes of a work-focused interview


        Work search requirement – all reasonable action



        September 12, 2017 at 5:45 pm


    It had to happen. Sacked by App.

    Handy things, these Apps!



    September 12, 2017 at 10:46 am

    • From the above report in the Metro (Bear the following in mind when considering the 35 hour job search requirement):

      ■ A DESK job can almost double the risk of an early death, a study has found. Those who sat for long periods were up to twice as likely to die within four years. People who sat for less than 30 minutes at a time had the lowest risk. Keith Diaz, of Columbia University, New York, said: ‘If you have to sit for prolonged periods of time, we suggest taking a movement break every half hour.’


      September 12, 2017 at 10:49 am

    • Welfare journalism is dying it appears

      “Sacked by app”, wow, buzzwords.

      So by being sacked in person,letter or verbally over the phone is different. I just know someone will say is about dignity and respect. Well i can just imagine these people shaking the hand of the person sacking them while saying, “i appreciate and respect you for doing it in person and will recommend you to other claimants as a straight up decent employer”.

      The subject matter this article does a bad job of talking about is micromanagement, a topic that was doing the rounds long before the 2007/8 crash. Before this dubious practice, a man (or woman) was merited on attendance,ethics and a good days work. Micromanagement however quantifies this in math with little regard to the individualism humans display. The problem i have with having a debate about this is, its really the fault of unions as to why it exists. Now im not saying they wanted it, im saying they gave it grounds to be a fair practice because they themselves metered what and what an employee can do or should be expected to do. Basically one side cant use such a practice then claim the other side cant.

      ZHCs or more importantly insecure work/living is a different subject to micromanagement of workforce. Yes they coincide but none the less must be addressed separately.

      On a funny note, the respective unions fighting for a public sector wage rise, notice how politicians only quote supporting a rise yet fail to mention what if the employer states ,” ok but we will be dropping the hours of work to cover it” or “ok but we will be changing the pay scale so it takes a person longer to achieve the rate per hour there after”.


      September 12, 2017 at 12:11 pm

  9. UK inflation rate rises to 2.9%

    The UK’s inflation rate climbed to its joint highest in more than five years in August as the price of petrol and clothing rose.



    September 12, 2017 at 1:16 pm

  10. Tories slammed over plans to sanction jobseekers for refusing zero-hour contracts

    Work and Pensions ­Secretary Damian Hinds said people on the new Universal Credit benefit “can be expected to apply” for the roles.

    Financial penalties could then be enforced if claimants refuse to apply for the job, or if they quit voluntarily.



    September 12, 2017 at 1:19 pm

    • well if that is the case get ur job coach to change ur cc to zero hrs work, should help with the job search as they only expect you to do the hrs on ur cc. 😉


      September 12, 2017 at 1:41 pm

      • Superted

        Ive just got to say, that witty quick off the mark reply was really funny and i laughed hard. I laughed even harder when i thought of you launching that after confirming you have to look for and apply to ZHCs on UC on an unsuspecting work coach. Imagine the stumped caught off guard face followed by their uncomfortable silence as you smile and wink, talk about a youtube moment.


        September 12, 2017 at 4:41 pm

      • well they cant have it both ways now can they pmsl. well tribunal is tomorrow but in case i do lose what needs to be done to take it to a higher tribunal/court because if i loose they will be ignoring the law if siding with the dwp.


        September 12, 2017 at 5:27 pm

      • Superted

        I thought you were confident of victory, that’s a change of tune.
        Ive never lost be it early in the sanction process or tribunal but there is an upper tribunal you can appeal to.
        Firstly it will be explained to you at this tribunal the logic behind the final decision. Now assuming there are grounds (ie, relevant higher tier previous ruling, ignorance to interpretation,etc,etc), you have to in the first ask that tribunal for permission to appeal. Then fill out another appeal form but for upper tribunal.

        Heres a link explaining the process and time restrictions but do seek the attention of CAB to explain and advise (do not print any documentation from todays tribunal online).


        Rather than adopt this what do i do next, take it all step at a time if you haven’t been heard yet. Cross this bridge first with all you effort and like i said, stay calm (neutral in emotion), focused and pay attention to whats being said by all parties (write notes) even if DWP do not send a representative (appeal by documentation).

        Im sure i speak for others but none the less place my thoughts with you on this important day, good luck.


        September 13, 2017 at 11:37 am

      • i won see bottom pic 😉


        September 13, 2017 at 11:38 am

  11. Andrew Coates

    September 12, 2017 at 3:21 pm

    • they have been trying this with me for years and as i spent like 10 years at providers sending of 10.000s of job apps there is not one employer that i have not tried.

      what are they going to do sanction the employers for not giving me a job even on zero hrs pmsl.


      September 12, 2017 at 3:29 pm

    • My jumped-up-little-Hitler of a work coach tried that on with me when I was on the Work Programme with Ingeus. He got in such a huff when I refused that he made a complete and utter hash of the sanction form. Even the JC adviser who read it back to me agreed it was gibberish.

      To cap it all, the lazy sod had lifted the job straight from another site and had hoped to claim credit for it.

      I would have loved to have been there when he found out the sanction against me had failed!

      bob a job

      September 13, 2017 at 11:31 pm

  12. Public sector pay cap.“

    We will continue to ensure that the overall package for public sector workers recognises the vital contribution they make and ensures they can deliver world class public services, while also being affordable within the public finances and fair to taxpayers as a whole,” the spokesman said.

    You know what that means.



    September 12, 2017 at 5:09 pm

  13. Autumn Budget 2017 date revealed by Chancellor Philip Hammond as November 22

    More of the same.

    Mr Hammond said the Autumn Budget was an opportunity for the Government to “set out our thinking on how to keep the economy strong and resilient and fair – an economy that works for everyone.”


    September 12, 2017 at 5:39 pm

    • November 22, Autumn!? That’s more like the middle of Winter, innit?


      September 12, 2017 at 5:45 pm

    • Could be the start of moving the fiscal new year [april] to november / december. ???

      Mr P

      September 13, 2017 at 1:13 pm

  14. DWP tells chronically ill man to apply for job-seeker’s allowance

    A PATIENT with a degenerative brain illness who requires at home care has been supported by his MP after being told to apply for job-seekers allowance.

    Westmorland and Lonsdale MP Tim Farron has hit out at the “shameful” department of work and pensions claiming they have broken promises to chronically ill people.



    September 12, 2017 at 5:55 pm

  15. Homelessness rise ‘likely to have been driven by welfare reforms’

    The number of homeless families in the UK has risen by more than 60% and is “likely to have been driven” by the government’s welfare reforms, the public spending watchdog has said.

    Homelessness of all kinds has increased “significantly” over the last six years, said the National Audit Office.



    September 13, 2017 at 12:36 am

  16. Universal Credit: Increasing Numbers Of Tenants Falling Behind With Rent
    Residential Landlords Association suggests residents aren’t budgeting.

    Increasing numbers of tenants on Universal Credit are falling behind with rent payments, landlords have said, just weeks before the benefit is rolled out to thousands more.



    September 13, 2017 at 12:39 am

    • ken

      sorry mate – didn’t spot you’d already posted about this.


      September 13, 2017 at 3:53 am

  17. Truth Will Out: “Homelessness rise ‘likely to have been driven by welfare reforms'”

    ME: Elephant in Room is seen for what it is

    “Homelessness rise ‘likely to have been driven by welfare reforms'”

    The number of homeless families in the UK has risen by more than 60% and is “likely to have been driven” by the government’s welfare reforms, the public spending watchdog has said.
    There has been a 60% rise in households living in temporary accommodation – which includes 120,540 children – since 2010/11, the NAO said.

    A snapshot overnight count last autumn found there were 4,134 rough sleepers – an increase of 134% since the Conservatives came into government, it added.
    Auditor General Sir Amyas Morse said the Department for Work and Pensions had failed to evaluate the impact of the benefit changes on homelessness.

    “It is difficult to understand why the department persisted with its light touch approach in the face of such a visibly growing problem.

    “Its recent performance in reducing homelessness therefore cannot be considered value for money.”
    ‘National scandal’

    The ending of private sector tenancies – rather than a change in personal circumstances – has become the main cause of homelessness in England, with numbers tripling since 2010/11, said the NAO.

    Its analysis found private sector rents in England have gone up by three times as much as wages since 2010 – apart from in the north and East Midlands.

    While in London, costs have risen by 24% – eight times the average wage increase.
    The Local Government Association – which represents councils – said local authorities were having to house “the equivalent of an extra secondary school’s worth of homeless children in temporary accommodation every month.”

    “The net cost to councils of doing this has tripled in the last three years, as they plug the gap between rising rents and frozen housing benefit.”

    “Number of families made homeless rises by 17%”
    22 June 2017

    Families forced into homelessness
    31 March 2017

    No DSS: Most flat shares refuse benefit claimants – [Prefer Pets instead]
    9 March 2017

    ME: Oh what a surprise, the sun slowly rises on the mess this is….


    September 13, 2017 at 3:52 am

    • This is what so many of us predicted and which is now coming true. If the roll out of Universal Credit continues as the government says these horrors will multiply. Sadly, unless the general public turns against the Tories because of this awfulness and their vote share looks like to suffer, the bastards will ramp up the catestrophe and carry on with it if they think they can get away with it without paying a political price.


      September 13, 2017 at 12:54 pm

    • Thanks, more on this:

      Andrew Coates

      September 13, 2017 at 4:16 pm

  18. You’ll know what this means to us all too.

    Government passes controversial ‘power grab’ motion allowing it to pass laws without Parliament.

    It means the Conservatives, despite not winning a majority at the general election, will take control of a powerful Commons committee, and grant themselves the power to replace some aspects of EU legislation without it being voted on or debated in parliament.

    Jeremy Corbyn accused the government of “rigging” the parliamentary system in its favour. The Labour leader said: “The Tories are now rigging votes in parliament that they couldn’t win at the election. Not content with grabbing powers through the EU Bill, they are fixing majorities that the public wouldn’t give them



    September 13, 2017 at 9:03 am

  19. DSC_0006_01

    i came they saw i kicked there ass 😉


    September 13, 2017 at 11:32 am

    • Congratulations! Well done! 🙂

      Old Edith

      September 13, 2017 at 11:53 am

    • Fantastic news, ted 😀

      Flying Visitor

      September 13, 2017 at 11:56 am

      • Well done Superted.Their willingness to pursue people with total disregard for any law and order,rights or justice is totally obcene.


        September 13, 2017 at 4:25 pm

    • Superted

      Sorry, didn’t see this earlier as i was sourcing a link for you regarding upper tribunals.

      Anyway, nice one, top one, if i was where you were, i would by you a drink.

      So i have to ask, how did the verdict go your way specifically as DWP often chose their battles carefully, so often can mask their true intention of why they sat back (didn’t go beyond the original documented grounds they lodged as to why its justified to the court). Now im not saying they have however its important we establish the facts of why exactly it is that DWP lost, even in cases where they elect to appeal a verdict.

      Your day in the sun is important and i may be able to explain further based on what you say.

      Once again, well done.


      September 13, 2017 at 12:02 pm

      • superted

        Well done, mate. Well done!

        jj joop

        September 13, 2017 at 4:36 pm

    • And what has this endeavour achieved exactly? Surely a sit-down protest in the Jobcentre would have been more effective?

      Fly Fawkes

      September 13, 2017 at 2:56 pm

      • g4s would just throw you out the building and or phone the police as well you have to follow the rules and regs, they just never bothered so i won and get my 300 quid back. 😉


        September 13, 2017 at 2:59 pm

      • Direct action might not get you your money back but it is the only thing the DWP listen to.

        Molotov Cocktali

        September 13, 2017 at 3:08 pm

    • Congratulations! I’m kind of sad though that the DWP put people through the wringer like this when they’ve done nothing wrong. If you cross or question the buggers these days they shoot first and ask questions later. It’s all one sided. When they get it wrong there is no penalty on them; if they had some penalty when they get it wrong, or are incompetent, they wouldn’t be sanctioning people left, right and centre.


      September 13, 2017 at 4:45 pm

  20. o and the dwp presenting officer never showed up so was me the judge and the clerk and the letter from the provider was the nail in there coffin 😉

    was done in ten minutes the foi was the main firepower tho because you dont have to sign provider paper work and they would share my data with 3rd party’s.


    September 13, 2017 at 12:08 pm

    • Superted

      Your missing a part of that tribunal letter (i take its on the other side) explaining point 2 at the end of it or more points if there are some. I ask as i would like to establish the full extent of the ruling among also deciphering if at all so, why DWP made no attempt to protect their interests assuming they do not intend to appeal. I would also like to see how and if any of this can translate over to UC.


      September 13, 2017 at 1:31 pm

      • DSC_0007_01


        September 13, 2017 at 1:37 pm

      • I have to go out right about now so until later, let me leave you with this.


        September 13, 2017 at 1:55 pm

      • It’s not over yet, doug.


        September 13, 2017 at 3:05 pm

      • the dwp can appeal but it has to be to the higher tribunal and can only be done on a point of law and as they broke there own rules and regs they got no hope in hell as far as i can see otherwise they would have sent there presenting officer.

        or if you mean the adviser will gun it for me now well been trying and failing for years now i even look forward to it im so use to it. 😉

        and i dare them to send me to another provider as i will do the same again and have proof i can beat them ill be so toxic to a provider ill not be wanted there.


        September 13, 2017 at 5:29 pm

      • Superted

        All im going to say at this juncture is that DWP have 28 days to make an appeal. So if they pay out or appeal (which ever comes sooner), Give us a shout and we will speak further. Now if they do pay out, do press upon them as to whether or not they still intend to appeal and recoup monies in the event of an overturn. Get this in writing.

        Until then lets move on as the trolls aren’t happy.


        September 14, 2017 at 12:30 am

    • superted

      Having read about other tribunals, it’s my understanding that when the DWP know they’re on a hiding to nothing, they don’t bother turning up. Anyway, well done my son!

      jj joop

      September 13, 2017 at 4:39 pm

    • Thing is not many people would have the balls to stand up to them superted. There must have been hundreds of thousands of people who have been sanctioned incorrectly and lost weeks, or even months worth of benefit they were entitled to, because they didn’t know how to assert themselves or just went along with a bad decision believing there was nothing they could do about it. If the “reformed” benefit system has sanctioned many more people than it has “helped” into jobs something is obviously wrong. Anyway you saw the bastards off. The fact nobody from the DWP turned up at the tribunal shows that they knew darn well that they were in the wrong. Christ knows what will happen post-brexit when the government starts to dismantle human rights, worker’s rights and data protection rights.


      September 13, 2017 at 4:54 pm

      • Superted stood his ground.People don’t know their rights and take the word Mandatory as that it is.The legality can be measured in the terms of abuse received.

        Surprising it went to a tribunal given the costs to the taxpayer.The DWP’s willingness to pursue a case they had no chance of winning has backfired badly.It shows the power of the internet to inform.No wonder governments’ are keen to monitor and control its content.


        September 13, 2017 at 6:27 pm

      • i have been doing it since 2010 no work programme for me even beat cait reilly to it i just said im not signing anything and in the skip i went 😉

        i just wanted to show you you can beat them at there own game if you bother to try and stand up to them.

        i even told the judge i knew what they was doing and covered the sanction with a budgeting loan of 300 quid still got to pay 8 quid a week back tho so i even stopped them doing that ie no money for a month 😉


        September 13, 2017 at 6:42 pm

      • You keep hearing “the Jobcentre sanction me every chance they get”. The bastards are just picking on the same easy-target claimants over and over again to sanction because they know they will just roll over, they won’t challenge the DWP and fight back. Thing is the DWP position is pure bluff and if you call their bluff the bastards just snap fold. The DWP are all bluster, bluff and bullshit. And as s superted has demonstrated you can take these bastards on and WIN, it is just a pity more claimants don’t do so. Well done, superted 🙂

        Royal Flush

        September 13, 2017 at 6:56 pm



        September 13, 2017 at 7:17 pm

      • that would be called the law and the dwp are not above it they broke there own rules and regulations the DM should be sacked for gross miss conduct.


        September 13, 2017 at 7:21 pm

      • Is that what they call themselves, joke of the day.


        September 13, 2017 at 7:29 pm

      • The DWP IS the Law! And woe betide anyone who fucks with the Law!

        Lawman IDS

        September 13, 2017 at 8:06 pm

      • Hear! Hear! Hang ’em high!

        Sheriff Sanction

        September 13, 2017 at 8:11 pm

      • I was sanctioned a few years back for failing to attend MWA. I took it to tribunal after the DWP lied on my mandatory consideration.

        The court overturned the decision in my favour before the hearing had even taken place after I sent them the evidence exposing their lies.

        The person who dealt with the mandatory consideration should have been sacked for deliberately issuing false information on behalf of a government department.

        bob a job

        September 13, 2017 at 9:52 pm

      • The DWP DO LIE. And the third-party ‘providers’ and the ’employers’ they deal with also lie. But like the police they lie in a hard to prove that they are lying kind of way. Even something as simple as saying you never attended an appointment when you did. And even if they are nailed to the wall and PROVEN to be lying just like the police there is absolutely no repercussions on their part. They are bad, bad bastards the lot of them who will push you under the bus given half a chance. Always cover your back when dealing with these low-life scum.


        September 14, 2017 at 7:14 am



        September 14, 2017 at 7:34 am

      • @Spanner

        They lie and they are devious. My adviser once presented me with a sanction letter and tried to get me to fill out the appeal part then and there. LOL! They must think I was born yesterday. I’ve no doubt it would have ended up in the confidential waste “on accident” and I would have missed the deadline.

        The only thing you can do is anticipate their dishonesty and act accordingly to order to mitigate its effects.

        bob a job

        September 14, 2017 at 3:43 pm

      • Yeah that old trick, get you to fill in your reasons for the ‘doubt’ on the spot when you had something like seven days to complete it: “Just put down that you fell asleep and missed your appointment” or something else that guaranteed a sanction. “No, I will just take the form away with me 😉 ”

        And then there is the slamming a Jobseeker’s Agreement/Claimant Commitment down on the desk with it turn over and their hand holding it down so that only the signature box was visible and telling you to sign it.

        Though now with the electronic signature you “sign” without even knowing what you have “agreed” to.

        JCP R SCUM

        September 14, 2017 at 4:05 pm

  21. this is the sanction i got just so everyone knows what is was for in the first place.


    September 13, 2017 at 2:29 pm

  22. Been trying to make an online universal credit application all day but the connection keeps dropping. EVERY. FUCKING. TIME. How can we be expected to claim online when the UK broadband network is shit fucking awful. UK broadband is TOTAL SHIT! You get a better connection in the jungle, places like Zambia ffs, even base camp at Mount Everest has a better connection. UK Broadband – biggest spy network on the planet with the shittiest connections on the planet.


    September 13, 2017 at 3:46 pm

    • Is there not like an office or someplace you can go into to make a claim and fill in a form like?


      September 13, 2017 at 3:56 pm

  23. The system of local authority-run welfare safety net schemes set up to provide support for vulnerable low-income families hit by unexpected financial crises and domestic emergencies is on the brink of collapse, according to new research published today.

    Local welfare assistance is supposed to help the poorest residents to weather the short-term costs of setbacks such as fires, floods, injury, illness and benefit delay, as well as the breakdown of vital household equipment such as cookers and fridges. The idea is to nip problems in the bud before they spiral into intractable and costly problems such as destitution, problem debt, child safeguarding and homelessness.



    September 13, 2017 at 4:23 pm

    • Ministers have lost their grip on rising homelessness, says damning report

      A sharp rise in homelessness over the past five years, fuelled by increasing private sector rents and cuts in housing benefit, is costing the public purse more than £1bn a year, according to a report by the government’s spending watchdog.



      September 13, 2017 at 4:25 pm

      • They couldn’t give a shit you mean, lousy bastards!


        September 13, 2017 at 4:37 pm

      • All of us saw this coming years ago and now it’s finally arrived.


        September 13, 2017 at 4:56 pm

    • The discretionary funds administered by local authorities was NEVER supposed to provide on-going long-term support to the needy, only short term help to the most desperate.


      September 14, 2017 at 6:44 am

  24. MPs to hear evidence on ‘troubled’ universal credit roll-out

    MPs will today (Wednesday, 13th September 2017) hear evidence from food banks, housing groups, and others, on how the roll-out of Universal Credit is progressing and which elements of the new benefits system still require improvement.

    The DWP’s preparedness for the scheduled acceleration of the rollout of full service Universal Credit from October 2017, including progress since April 2017
    The accuracy and registration of payments
    Waits for payments
    Advance payments
    Impact on and communication with local authorities and landlords
    Alternative Payment Arrangements
    The effect of a single monthly direct payment on rent arrears
    The proposed flexible arrangements in Scotland
    The effects of planned Jobcentre closures
    The effect of UC on claimants day-to-day lives and financial situations; and
    Whether, based on the above, the accelerated roll-out from October 2017 should go ahead as planned.



    September 13, 2017 at 4:28 pm

    • Not that the Tories will listen but important to follow what’s said.

      The waiting for payments is something I already keep hearing about from people.

      Andrew Coates

      September 13, 2017 at 4:46 pm

    • I bet the Tories wish they could get a refund on some of the one billion quid bung they used to bribe the DUP with.


      September 13, 2017 at 4:59 pm

  25. Police Federation brands Theresa May a liar for claiming some officers have enjoyed a huge pay boost.


    September 13, 2017 at 4:44 pm

  26. Universal Credit delays leave claimants to ‘drop off a cliff’ in rent arrears, hear MPs

    Claimants “drop off a cliff” and “remain in freefall” in rent arrears due to delays in receiving payments under the new Universal Credit regime, MPs have heard.



    September 13, 2017 at 5:21 pm

  27. Message for doug:


    The Lincolnshire Poacher

    September 13, 2017 at 8:27 pm

  28. Message for doug:


    The Numbers Station

    September 13, 2017 at 8:33 pm

  29. Third party deductions – the DWP policy that’s pushing people into hardship and debt

    An automated system is leeching cash away from essentials like clothes and food to cover costs elsewhere

    StepChange Debt Charity said the use of direct deductions from people’s benefits, by utility companies, housing providers, councils and others, to cover arrears payments is making it harder for families to pay for essentials forcing many to use credit to keep on top of bills.



    September 14, 2017 at 12:32 am

    • Ken

      See what i mean about putting claimants on an incline financially from day one ?

      In business if you receive goods on credit, you get a bill and one month to pay it. If say you didn’t pay the bill for whatever by the second month, that supply of credit is frozen. Funny don’t you think how delays from standard practice (waiting period) to largest waiting period (upto 8 weeks) for benefits just coincidentally mimics this pattern.


      September 14, 2017 at 2:01 am

  30. Cash cuts force Devon food bank charity to fold despite ‘overwhelming levels of deprivation’

    ‘We are immensely proud of the difference we have made to thousands of people’s lives’



    September 14, 2017 at 12:35 am

  31. Doug

    The fat lady has sung.

    Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

    September 14, 2017 at 6:57 am

  32. whoknew

    September 14, 2017 at 8:45 am

  33. Newcastle tenants on Universal Credit rack up £1.1 million in rent arrears

    Housing managers say a new benefits system is leading people into debt and forcing some to use food banks



    September 14, 2017 at 9:13 am

  34. UK proposes exemptions to Data Protection Bill


    What did i say they would have to do in order to get round existing DPA.


    September 14, 2017 at 10:31 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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: