Prior to 2008, Mr P made various claims to the DWP (Department of Works and Pensions). For disability living allowance at the highest rate and incapacity benefit after assessment based on ATOS medical assessment for and on behalf of DWP and NHS best medical evidence.
March 2013 ATOS for and on behalf of the DWP assessed Mr P again before and after further specialist medical evidence showed a marked deterioration in health.
An application was made on DATE for income support using a claim form issued by the DWP Mr P. He was given advice, assistance and advised what to write in support of his application for Income Support from a Claims Officer within the DWP.
The Claims Officer was given full financial disclosure, correct at the time of writing. Examples of DWP consent included putting benefit in a non-interest account. Disregarded DLA and Incapacity Benefit are Disregarded Income; a flexible benefit to meet disability needs regardless of income. Those components can be set aside to purchase things like specialist, prescribed equipment, which attract substantial cost for the purposes of income support.
Mr P sought correct advice and assistance from various offices within the DWP including his nearest Job Center Plus Office in Belton in Yorkshire. Mr P was keen not to be in breach of his benefits application to which he relies on completely, to do so would be fraud and theft, which never crossed his mind. Mr P requested on many occasion to record correctly any information relevant to any of his benefits.
Mr P was contacted by JCP Belton Compliance Officer Mr. Mark Dross, interviewed Mr P on 29th June 2012 at his home. With the intention of making sure Mr P was claiming the correct benefits in addition to the ones he had already claimed for.
JCP Belton Compliance Officer Mr. Mark Dross did attend the home of Mr P unannounced. At the time Mr P was bleeding in his urine bag, he was unwell, flushed and under the influence of a large dose of prescribed morphine. In pain Mr P requested Mr Dross to rearrange for him to come back another time as Mr P had left a message for Mr Dross at his place of work. Mr Dross said he never received the message left by Mr P. Later on during the interview Mr Dross admitted to receiving the message left previously by the Claimant. Mr P did not really understand questions posed to him by Mr Dross or their importance at the time for good reason. He found Mr Dross biased with them and us attitude.
Mr P was never interviewed under cautioned for allegation of fraud and theft, but felt very compelled to answer his questions for fear it would mean Mr P losing his much needed benefits and said so. Mr Dross made Mr P very upset and oppressed in his dismissal of his disability and complex care needs.
Unjustly raising his voice during the interview, constantly interrupting Mr P during his line of thought. Mr Dross kept repeating his questions over and over again to get the answer he wanted. Mr P takes a very dim view of those who allege such wrongs and feels it is plainly wrong to accuse him of fraud, theft or even breaking the rules and to make him guilty for wrongs he has simply not committed.
Mr Mark Dross was shown around the family home of Mr P circumstances surrounding his issues and housing problems for better housing. Examples included a prescribed bed amounting £7,000. Disability Scooter amounting to £3,000 then you have other specialist equipment. Traveling to a local store is about 55p each direction in an average car, round trip of £10 for Mr P. Mr P explained to Mr Dross there is a substantial cost with being disabled. During the interview Mr Dross showed Mr P his evidence as set out in the form of Claim form dated XXXXXX and the bank statements of Mr P. It was clear that Mr Dross had attended the home of Mr P as set out earlier in this document.
Under the pretext of helping and assisting Mr P with existing and future claims under some dark ulterior motive with a hidden agenda. Mr P felt that Mr Dross rescinded his allegations of Fraud and Theft of the public purse. To one of simply failing to notify Belton Job Center Plus of a change in circumstances promptly, he then went on to say this might change some benefits but not all benefits. Mr Dross stated all changes of circumstances are to be reported to your designated JCP Belton.
Mr P replied Belton JCP is my designated office; advice and assistance can be and is sought from the DWP Help line. Mr Dross informed Mr P of pending sanctions that are enforceable. Then this would be a mutual agreeable claim form that can be enforceable by either party, is that right? No comment replied Mr Dross. Does that make the DWP liable and you liable personally for all costs, losses and damages? No comment replied Mr Dross. Is it true that the DWP have not performed on the Claim form, wrong advice, and failure to act in anyway? No comment, replied Mr Dross.
Is it fair to say Mr Dross that it is incumbent of all personnel within the DWP departments to take precise notes, record and pass any information on to the relevant department? No comment replied Mr Dross. Is it also true to say that having furnished the DWP with such information on this particular matter and any other matter relating to benefits discharge any liability and duty? No comment, replied Mr Dross. Are you aware of the Human Right Act? Mr Dross Replied YES.
Are you fully aware of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and Equality Act 2010? Mr Dross Replied, Yes. Therefore, you will know it is unlawful for a person with a disability cannot be shown a loss or detriment financial or otherwise. Those reasonable adjustments are to be made, would that be right? Mr Dross Replied, Yes. Mr P asked if I was not disabled would you think it fair and just that I should be accused of fraud, broke the rules, loss of benefit entitlement for the error of others? Mr Dross replied, No. Is Disability living allowance disregarded benefit for the purpose of claiming other benefits? Mr Dross Replied YES.
Can I spend my Disability Living Allowance how I want to meet my disability needs? No! Mr Dross you admitted to apologizing for not recording my personal data and updating your records promptly didn’t you? Mr Dross replied, No. Mr P thought it odd Mr Dross should say such a thing especially when Mr Dross had; you left his apology on the answer phone of Mr P. Mr Dross had acknowledged Mr P reminding him on 3 separate occasions to update the Social Security Records of Mr P records, something Mr Dross failed to do.
Is it fair to say Mr Dross as investigating officer in the position of compliance, within a fraud department of the DWP cannot get it right nobody then no one else can unless it is a deliberate failure, unless it is aimed to set-up people like me to fail. Replied with No Comment. Mr P asked Mr Dross why was this matter never brought sooner; after all I made the claim for Income Support in 2008? He replied he did not know. Therefore, Mr Dross admitted to breaches of Mr P’s data, his duty to disclose all his evidence that the DWP wish to rely on, so Mr P can make a timely appeal.
Mr Dross stated Mr P would need to make a subject access request under the Data Protection Act 1998. It was put to Mr Dross that he was to furnish Mr P all the information certified by the DWP Legal Department they wished to rely on. It was put to Mr Dross that he had to discontinue with his investigation and show Mr P in favor if he knew or ought to know of any breach in policy, duty and law that would cause Mr P any form of injury, loss and or detriment with the intent of causing great financial hardship.
Is compliance part of the DWP Fraud Department? Mr Dross stated it was not, he claimed he was interviewing Mr P on behalf of the Fraud Department. As Customer Compliance officer he carries out the role to contribute to the delivery of the Jobcentre plus in Belton. “Pay customers the correct benefit at the right time and protect the benefit system from fraud, error and abuse”. A position introduced to address incorrectness in benefit cases where a robust and challenging face-to-face interview is deemed more appropriate than a criminal fraud investigation. You cannot prove fraud and or theft to the criminal standard because it did not happen with your express consent. So you are judge and jury? Is not one innocent until proved guilty in a court of law? No Comment.
Mr Dross did not know the meaning of good housekeeping in relation to making your DLA work. The precise meaning of (Finance)"Good House Keeping" In financial terms good housekeeping is spending public money effectively. The European Commission’s Guide to Financial Issues states that this means that the principles of economy, efficiency and effectiveness apply. Economy can be understood as minimizing the costs of resources used for an activity (input), having regard to the appropriate quality and can be linked to efficiency, which is the relationship between the outputs and the resources used to produce them. Effectiveness is concerned with measuring the extent to which the objectives have been achieved and the relationship between the intended impact and the actual impact of an activity.
Mr Dross did not know the meaning of (Finance)"Best value for money". NAO define good value for money as “the optimal use of resources to achieve the intended outcomes”.
Mr Dross stated Mr P could not spend his DLA, as he would want to meet his disability needs. “Disability Living Allowance (DLA) was designed to contribute towards the extra costs faced by disabled people. DLA is a flexible benefit. Therefore, it can be spent in any way in which the recipient feels best meets their needs”.
Mr Dross was oblivious when asked “Does everyone claiming DLA and Income support and Incapacity benefit have a right to try and get back to work, even if medically written-off? Except to say we encourage it.
Mr Dross, is it fair to say that, those who claim DLA, Income Support and Incapacity benefit should not be discriminated, suffer a loss or detriment for exercising their right to look for work, retrain, update skills, start a business with the view to employment part-time or full-time employment? Mr Ross replied its part of the welfare reform.
The Government tells us “Disability Living Allowance (DLA) supports the Government’s welfare reform agenda to make work the best form of welfare – it is paid to people with care and/or mobility needs irrespective of whether they are working. DLA can help those with care and/or mobility needs to start or return to work. The Government’s overriding goal for welfare reform is to give people independence, with more financial help for the most severely disabled who are unable to work, and an obligation on the rest to prepare for work, aided by a range of back-to-work support measures. Our welfare reforms have already put in place the framework to allow more people to undertake reasonable amounts of beneficial part-time work whilst still being entitled to benefits”.
Mr Dross is fully aware of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and Equality Act 2010 and complies with it. “The DWP states it is committed to providing services which fully meet our legal obligations under the Equality Act 2010. As an employer we are also committed to equality and valuing diversity within our workforce. We have in place policies, processes and practices, including making reasonable adjustments for claimants and staff, which help us to make sure we are compliant with Equality legislation. We also carry out equality analysis on new policies and services and publish information in accordance with the Public Sector Equality Duty part of the Equality Act.
Mr Dross states he is complying with the Human Rights Act, but does he?” DWP ensures that its policies and processes comply with Human Rights Act requirements”.
Mr Dross states he has full knowledge of Mr P’s disability, risks and financial position. Yet he has no knowledge of ‘The Vulnerable Groups Act 2006’ Safe Guarding, preventing injury and harm to those Vulnerable.
Mr Dross stated that Mr P had been monitored, he had Mr P’s bank accounts, knew of his business plan through business link. Mr P then asked if he cannot spend his DLA and Incapacity as described by the DWP, do you encourage Mr P go into debt? Mr Dross replied NO! So who is going to pay for it, you Mr Dross.
Mr Dross stated that Mr P is not entitled to DLA, Incapacity and Income Support because he does not spend it each week. Mr P reminded Mr Dross he was not medically qualified to make such an offensive statement. NHS specialists, his GP, Social Services, Community Nurses, Spinal Rehab, Neurologists and complex care support his medical position. DWP Medical Department ATOS support that very same position based on best medical evidence.
Mr Dross stated Mr P could not have his investigation report sent to Decision Maker. He advised Mr P could make a subject access report under the Data Protection Act 1998. Mr P stated it was now much more than that and seeks to prosecute and claim against the DWP, it’s Civil Servants and personally.