Add this to page 11
My response: On this date, the work coach mentioned that Autumn Leaf House were conducting interviews in the building and asked if I’d like to see if she could get an appointment for me. I said yes, and she did, I went immediately upstairs and sat the interview. The vacancy was for a support worker, caring for mentally handicapped adults who, it was explained to me, were often volatile and violent, and would punch, kick and bite. During the interview I discussed with the interviewer how I had been a long-term carer, and how it had led to my history of depression, both I and the interviewer agreed that I wouldn’t be a suitable candidate for the vacancy. After the interview I went back to my work coach (Karen D), discussed the interview and how I would not be suitable for such a position. The work coach took exception to this and become agitated, and stated in an abrupt manner “You Should Apply for ALL jobs and Accept any”. My work coach is fully aware of my history of depression. I to become agitated, feeling that I was being told to accept a job that I would NOT be suitable for. I informed the work coach that I was unsuitable for care work and would not be seeking work as a carer. My work coach ignored me, and proceeded to print off a handful of CARE related jobs, including one for the Autumn Leaf House vacancy that I had just sat an interview for. The work coach gave me a blank work sheet to complete. However, I had already handed her my worksheets covering the dates on the work sheet. I left the blank work sheet.
S01: Claimant Commitment
S02/03/04: Examples of the Work Sheets (please take these into consideration to prove/show regular pattern)
S05: Appointment card showing new UJ ID
S06: A screen shot showing the UJ in use
S07: Show pg 35 from other papers, add response regarding Autumn Leaf.
S08: Magazine and other printed material
S09: Autumn Leaf?
Based on assumptions on false evidence supplied by Karen D (Work Coach) to represent my work search sheets.
I was not handed a NEW Claimant Commitment. Please produce a copy of this, and my wet ink signature indicating that I had accepted it.
My response: The evidence the work coach submitted as ‘my evidence of y job search was in actual fact not my work search at all, rather pages I showed my work coach to explain how I create my work sheet sheets.
I take extensive notes during my job search, recording snippets of notes to remind myself of said activity, and then, corralate that information into the completed job search work sheets. What my work coach submitted as my evidence of job search for that period, were merely my work in progress notes.
My work coach is fully aware of the standard of my usual work sheet submissions over the past year, and would have been aware that the page she submitted as my jo search sheet was in no way that.
Conversation from 3/1/17 and CC updated + and should be focussing on his job role as a carer: It would appear from this comment that the work coach updated the CC to indicate that I should focus my job search role as a carer.
I AM NOT A CARER: I am not suitable for a job in the caring sector. I did not agree to this being added to my CC, and never would I. I suffered from severe depression which came about from being a long-term carer. I even attempted suicide because I couldn’t cope with the guilt that followed years of watching the person under y care suffering.
Please note that prior to the sanctions, my work coach had NEVER used my Universal Job-match to communicate with me on any level. Failing to get any information regarding the sanctions from either my work coach or the job centre manager, I revoked access to my Universal Job-match to discourage tampering. Please also be aware that access to my Universal Job-match isn’t mandatory.
Page 6/7: Note 5 (from original draft)
Mr Cardall agreed on his Claimant Commitment dated 18/01/2017 that he would spend 35 hours each week looking and preparing for work. During the period form 26/01/2017 to 01/02/2017 he researched the idea of becoming a day worker, applied for two jobs from JobSearch.Direct.Gov and saved two for later, search for jobs related to marketing for small businesses and created February Great News community magazine with Valentines Day promotional leaflets. Mr Cardall did not provide any timings for his activities. He has not supplied details of the jobs applied for and the number of jobs applied for is low. I submit that Mr Cardall was aware that he needed to look for employed work but he has not. In his mandatory reconsideration request he stated that he had been on the New Enterprise Scheme but started looking for paid work in early 2017. He agreed to look into work as a carer but has a history of depression starting from his time as a carer. He stated that he attended an interview for work as a carer and realised that he could not do this type of work. He stated that seeking marketing work is his best chance of finding gainful employment. He he did not apply for any jobs despite being required to look for employed vacancies as he is no longer on the New Enterprise scheme. I note that his job goals are care/support worker, factory labourer and retail assistant, not marketing.
There is no evidence of Mr Cardall looking for work and applying for work as a factory labourer or retail assistant. Mr Cardall states that he has only had one claimant commitment which was agreed at the start of his claim. However, he agreed his new claimant commitment on 18/01/2017. His daily activities include continuing to explore setting up his own business but also to search for and apply for paid work daily. I am satisfied that he was aware of his work search requirements. I submit that the work search carried out by Mr Cardall would not give him the best chance of finding work or more paid work. It would have given him the best opportunity if he had complied with his claimant commitment and applied for paid work as a factory labourer or retail assistant.
Spoke to Jane-EA and she said to send Paul upstairs for Autumn Leaf interview. Support Worker.
On the 18th Jan 2017, I attended the appointment with my work coach. We touched upon expanding my job search into the caring sector as I had previously cared for an elderly relative in the past (the result of which had led to severe depression and a failed suicide attempt after years of watching my elderly relative suffer before passing.)
Autumn Leaf were in the building, and we agreed I should at least sit an interview. This was quickly arranged, and within minutes I was sitting with a representative for Autumn Leaf discussing the caring vacancy in question.
The interviewer highlighted the fact that this was a job caring for mentally ill adults who were violet by nature and would punch, kick and bite. As someone who has suffered from depression, has a reactionary temper and would instinctively retaliate should I be attacked, the interviewer agreed with me that I would not be a suitable candidate for the role. On informing my work coach of this, and that I would not be seeking such jobs, she become agitated, proceeded to print off a handful of ‘Care’ related jobs including another for Autumn Leaf. This, and my work coaches tone from this point on sent my social anxiety through the roof.
Claimant Commitment accepted face-face and pack issued to Paul: Updated job goals.
If my work coach updated my job goals to search for jobs in the care sector, she was irresponsible to do so. My work coach knows about the causes of my previous depression and after the interview above (with Autumn Leaf) I made it clear to my work coach that I was not suitable for such jobs (not just my opinion, but echoed by the Autumn Leaf representative.
Mr Paul Cardall’s job goals were updated and agreed upon as follows:
Care/Support Worker, £7.20 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35
Factory Labourer, £6.20 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35
Retail Assistant, £6.70 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35
Warehouse, £6.70 Per Hour Minimum Hours Per Week 35
As preivously stated (18/01/2017-Autumn Leaf) I informed my work coach that I would not be suitable for Care work, and gave valid reasons why. With that being the case, why would I then agree to add Care/Support Worker to my list of job searches.
I assert that the evidence submitted as my evidence for job search was in fact a page from my notes and not my actual work search sheets. The evidence submitted is being used out of context. My work coach is fully aware of the standard of job sheets I bring her every appointment, and I can not understand why she would submit my notes in place of my typically detailed 4-6 page job search sheets.
Confirmation of the claimant's acceptance is a legal requirement. Be reviewed regularly and updated as required
p.s Now that the DWP have resorted to using the Police to intimidate me, I feel compelled to meet these threats head on. I am afraid of what I might do whilst in the fog of depression. I did try to get in to see my Doctor (who has an understanding of my history, but the social anxiety stopped me making the appointment, and I started cutting again.
Why does DWP not provide claimants with the documents needed to support an appeal
when urgently requested, egs Reconsideration Notices, long overdue documents etc and put
claimants at risk of an unfair hearing?
1.9 What law and regulations make it mandatory for someone on Jobseekers Allowance to
give DWP or Jobcentre Plus copies of personal private and confidential correspondence with
employers, to retain, concerning job applications?
There is no law or regulation making it mandatory for someone on Jobseeker’s Allowance
(JSA) to give DWP or Jobcentre Plus copies of personal private and confidential
correspondence with employers. However, JSA claimants must demonstrate what they are
doing to look for work under section 24 of the Jobseeker’s Allowance Regulations 1996; or
demonstrate that they have complied with a requirement to apply for a vacancy notified to
them by their adviser. Failure to do so without good reason could result in a benefit sanction
Thank you for your reply Darren, and good luck with your endeavors.
I'm fighting job center sanctions right now and appreciate any helpful advice, both here and on your web site.
Innocent Until Proven Guilty
There is something wrong in a society that can punish a person 'before' a person is proven to be guilty, or even before that person has heard what they are accused of. In my case, my Universal Credit has been withheld without reason, I've suffered financial hardship, illness and my requests for appropriate information pertaining to these sanctions have gone unanswered.
The feeling of helplessness, can be debilitating, and its difficult, when you literally haven't eaten ANYTHING for 9 days, to find the strength to put up a decent fight.
I don't want to come off sounding like a victim, but that is how I'm feeling right now - and when you feel under attack you can either be the punchbag or the one hitting the bag.
I Futher submit to the appeal Tribunal that from the date of the failure period 19/01/17 to 25/01/17 and 26/01/17 to 01/02/17. To date Mr Paul cardall has not provided any further evidence in relation to his recorded work seach for the aforementioned periods.
Mr Paul Cardall has further stated that concerns regarding his mental health conditions have not been taken into consideration by his Work Coach in relation to his work search activities.
However there are no records of any health barriers or previously declared periods of sickness.
Statement OF fitness for work, award of Personal Independence Payment (PIP), Disability Living Allowance, details of Anti-depressant/anxiety medication such as Sertraline, Fluoxetine, Citalpram, Fluvoxamine, Mirtazapine etc and or any records of Mr Paul Cardalls mental health conditions affecting his employment prospects. Mr Paul Cardall also failed to declare any pre-existing health conditions when applying for UC. This is recognised as a “knockout question” that may have prevented a valid UC entitlement from being progressed.
Whilst Mr Paul Cardalls requirement within the ALL Work Related Requirement Regime remains valid, it is at the Work Coachs discretion whether a reduction in the work search activities is warranted. Taking into consideration such evidence as suggested above.
Mr Paul Cardall has further stated that in his opinion his Work Coach had previously not paid attention to his demonstrated work searches. This is considered as hearsay evidence as it cannot be determined. However what can be taken into consideration is that Mr Paul Cardall has been in receipt of UC from the 04/02/2016 and no previous work search doubts have been identified and or lead to sanction-able failures during said period of time. It is also reasonable that Mr Paul Cardall has offered no further valid explanation as to why his work search did not meet the above requirements.
I have taken this into consideration, as to establish regular patterns. However this is not sufficient enough when weighed against the facts of this failure, as provided above.
As such cannot be attributed to failure either in procedural error or on law by the DWP.
Good reason is not defined in the law, but ‘good cause’ and ‘just cause’ are considered in case law. It includes facts which would probably have caused a reasonable person to act as the claimant did. The principles established are equally applicable to good reason. (CD R (SB)6/83)
A person is expected to exercise a degree of care in relation to their own financial and other interests. (CD CSG6/48 (KL))
Mr Paul Cardall has failed to take sufficient amount reasonable steps or vacancies against the agreed Claimant Commitment in the 18/01/17.
My work search and preparation pan lists the things I’ll do to give me the best chance of finding work quickly. This means I will normally spend 35 hours each week looking and preparing for work.
I’ll spend 35 hours each week looking for and preparing for work.
This will include all the activities and actions in this plan.
Therefore, the original decision of the 27/01/17 to impose a sanction on Mr Paul Cardalls universal Credit award is not revised. The Medium level sanction of 28 days remains.
My Response: This original decision makers disision was based on false evidence provided by my work coach (Karen D) to represent my supplied work sheet.
Mr Paul Cardall is not deemed to have undertaken all reasonable work search action for the period 26/01/17 to 01/02/17 as per his claimant conditionality commitement agreement.
Mandatory Reconsideration evidence has been considered. The duration/sanction length has been checked and is deemed accurate as afrementioned on the original decision above.
Again I must point out that the sanctions, and the reasons for the sanctions are based on FALSE evidence submitted by my work coach. She has knowingly submitted FALSE information. I CAN NOT argue a case that is based on FALSE information. You can not disprove a negative.
Donna, I have gone through the Appeal papers and refuted the claims as I saw them. However, no where in these pages does it mention some of the problems I’ve had with the DWP/Job Centre/Work Coach (I.e. with regard to banning me from 14 Job Sites, no mention of not answers SARs etc).
Where do I insert those events, and how.
However as detailed within the original decision above, the original decision maker was able to verify Mr Paul Cardalls UJM as described above.
Although UJM is not solely relied upon for work search purposes and there is alternative methods that can be used to record a work search and is required as per the terms of Mr Paul Cardalls Claimant Commitment as stated below. This however can be used in determining evidence to consider a work search failure.
Details of Mr Paul Cardalls work search evidence have however been uploaded to the Document Repository System, however remains unclear if this was supplied separately when promoted to provide evidence as described in the above Work Coach notes, this information was recorded as follows:
The evidence deemed to be my work search evidence, were in fact my notes, and not my detailed Work Search papers. My work coach, Karen D, knowingly submitted this to the Document Repository System knowing this was NOT my work search sheet.
PAGE 37 IS UNREADABLE AND I’M THEREFORE NOT ABLE TO RESPOND.
16/03/2017: Telephone call from the claimant who has received his SOS (secretary of state) letter for his UC payment and was concerned that he has sanctions on the claim that he was unaware of. Checked portal and explained the decision of the sanctions were for 19/1/2017 and 26/1/2017 – both for no work search.
Claimant said he was told he doesn’t have to provide work search as he is building a business. Checked on portal and claimant was on NEA which finished in December but has not had any gateway interviews to continue as self-employed – claimant said he should have been told by with work coach about being self-employed because he thought he still was. Offered to complete a Mandatory Reconsideration but he said he would speak to the CAB about that.
Explained about a hardship payment but claimant said he would be keeping his payment to live off and not pay his rent.
Although the above issues were discussed on said date, the whole conversation isn’t recorded here and therefore, unless the call was recorded, and a copy can be produced, its difficult to reply.
My notes: Checked on portal and claimant was on NEA which finished in December but has not had any gateway interviews to continue as self-employed.
Although I had NO gateway interview to continue as self-employed, I also had NO Gateway interview to say otherwise. So in my defence, I was both looking for clients for my business (magazine advertisers) and also looking for work in retail, warehouse and as a marketeer. And if I said “I wasn’t told I have to provide a work search as I’m building a business” then it’s possible I said I’m not required to provide a work search, as at the time I had not yet had a Gateway interview to ascertain where I stood with regard to either looking for advertisers and/or looking for work. Please also note that my CC has, as one of its Regular Work Search Activities, the following -
* I will continue to explore setting up my own business.
My notes: Offered to complete a Mandatory Reconsideration but he said he would speak to the CAB about that.
Pointless completing a Mandatory Reconsideration at this point, as I had not been given the reasons behind the sanctions and therefore couldn’t refute it.
My notes: Explained about a hardship payment but claimant said he would be keeping his payment to live off and not pay his rent.
True: However, the UC payment was less than the Rent required, using the UC to pay my rent would leave Zero funds to pay my bills/commitments, including council tax, food, and other living expenses etc. I therefore, used the UC payments to pay these (and so not fall into, non-payment fines etc) and used my credit card to pay my rent.
29/03/2017: Attended On-going Work Services Interview: great job search seen on PDF. Variety of job search methods and good use of all sites. Paul is working on getting work with Druckers and is waiting to hear about a face to face meeting. Druckers currently have Pauls CV and a relative has handed in a cover letter. Currently following re-consideration for sanction applied for 2x periods of ASE. Paul has already spoken to staff at SC and is waiting on JCP manager to call him back.
My response to : 29/03/2017; Attended On-going Work Services Interview: great job search seen on PDF. Variety of job search methods and good use of all sites.
NOTE: I do not remember the name of the Coach Worker I saw on this date however, this is the typical response to my Work Search Job Sheets. A GREAT Job Search and GOOD use of ALL sites.
As described above Mr Paul Cardall was asked to agree to the terms of a new claimant commitment and subsequently advised on more than one occasion to provide work search evidence to meet those said requirements.
Mr Paul Cardalls job goals were updated and agreed as follows:
Care/Support Worker, £7.20 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35.
Factory Labourer £6.20 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35.
Retail Assistant, £6.70 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35.
Warehouse, £6.70 Per Hour, Minimum Hours Per Week 35.
I have never, and will never agree to having CARE WORKER being added to my claimant commitment. See AUTUMN LEAF (sub xx09) interview for reason.
Karen D did NOT have my permission to alter the CC to include CARE WORKER.
Upon checking Mr Paul Cardalls Universal Job Match (UJM), as Mr Paul Cardall had previously given UC authorisation to do so. I have been unable to concur with the work coach and original decision maker’s assertions statement.
So here we have another Work Coach disagreeing with the findings given by work coach, Karen D (who has supplied false-evidence to represent my work search) and the original dicision makers assertion was based on false eviendce provided by Karen D.
The original Decision Maker states that Mr Cardell discussed the work search activities he had completed for 26/01/2017 to 01/02/2017 with his work coach at the appointment on 02/02/2017.
He stated he had applied for 2 jobs and saved 2 jobs to look at later. He had researched becoming a day worker and registered on 2 jobsites. He had no activity recorded on Universal Job-match despite being reminded on 03/01/2017 and 18/01/2017 that he needed to be producing full job search in line with his claimant commitment requirement of 35 hours per week, as his self-employment activities were not producing any leads.
Mr Paul Cardall as described above within his Mandatory Reconsideration statement has taken action to remove UC authorisation to his UJM account as the account number and e-mail address previously provided by Mr Paul Cardall are no longer available.
The Decision Maker notes that this has also been confirmed by Mr Paul Cardalls work coach.
I submit to the Appeals Tribunal should Mr Paul Cardall execute his right to appeal. That it is noted for consideration, that Mr Paul Cardall has to date provided no documented evidence as held upon his UJM account for the aforementioned period.
The original decision maker, made their decision based on false evidence, supplied by Karen D, to represent my work search sheet.
10. These conversations are dated as follows: (page 34?)
03/01/2017: S/E not producing any leads and profits. Advised needs to be producing full job search next attendance.
18/01/2017: Attended today-still doing activities for S/E (Self Employment) not producing any positive outcomes as far as money/income. Spoke to Jane-EA and she said to send Paul upstairs for Autumn Leaf Interview. Support Worker.
18/01/2017: Claimant commitment accepted face-to-face and pack issued to Paul. Updated job goals
02/02/2017: Attended today-jobs x3 saved to account. UJ jobs issued x3 and copies of saved jobs. ASE (Actively Seeking Employment) stencils issued-will bring back in as hasn’t got his glasses. Said that he wasn’t told that hw had to do detailed job search. Conversation from 3/01/2017 and Claimant Commitment updated and job goals on last attendance amended and explained what is expected as previously NEA claimant.
PUT AUTUMN LEAF STUFF HERE.
06/02/2017: ucm/008 ase DOUBT.Stencils issued to claimant to complete but not returned to me (LIE, never issued, never accepted) Printed information sent to Mail Opening Unit-asked to complete stencils as not sufficient information on stencil. It’s not clear to me what ‘printed information was sent to Mail Opening Unit. If a blank work sheet stencil was submitted as my evidence of my job search – That’s the work coach mis-representing my submitted evidence of my work search. If the work coach submitted printed material as my evidence of looking for work, then she clearly submitted my ‘notes’ as my evidence of searching for work, again, misrepresenting my activities, failing to submit my full and detailed work search.
No UJ Job Search. (The work couch was made aware that she wasn’t accessing my UJ account. I had informed the work coach that upon requesting access details from the UJ web site, I had been sent access details to another (older) account, and that I was using that one for job search purposes. I provided the UJ account number on the back of my appointment card. (sub xx05)
15/03/2017: Attended appointment with job searches – has no CV – copy of CV given and name given to Angela to book an appointment (True, I hadn’t brought a CV to the appointment, however I was not asked to bring a copy of my CV to the appointment dated 15/03/2017. Up until then I had no up to date CV as I had spent the last year trying to start a business (a community magazine sub xx-8) – checked UJM account no permission given to access, taken downstairs to change to DWP access. It isn’t clear here if the work coach was trying to access the old UJ account (the inaccessible one as explained to Karen D earlier), or the new one that I had provided her with, which if she had tried to access, she’d have seen my job search notes (sub xx06).
Apt letter sent out to customer and sent to Mail Opening Unit.
5. On 27/02/2017 it was decided that the evidence did not show that Mr Cardall had spent 35 hours looking for or preparing for work in the period in doubt, nor that he had undertaken all reasonable work search given his circumstances. Good reason was not established for his failure to do so.
(Docs 19-20, 21-23)
My response to 5:
The evidence submitted as my work search activities by the work coach, Karen D, did not reflect in any way the evidence I supplied Karen D with pertaining to my actual job search for that period. What the work coach submitted as my evidence was nothing more than my ‘notes’ from which my actual work search sheets are created. The work coach Karen D would have been aware of this, based on my privious work sheets (Submissions 02-03-04) and knowingly and falsely submitted them as evidence.
6. My letter requesting a mandatory reconsideration. (Docs 24-27)
7. The decision maker reconsidered the sanction decision on 23/05/2017 but did not change it. The decision maker noted that Mr Cardall had been advised on 03/01/2017 that he needed to provide full details of his job search at his appointment and that he was issued with a work search stencil on 02/02/2017 to provide details of his work search which appeared insufficient and that Mr Cardall had advised that he would take this home as he did not have his glasses with him and would return it.
My Response to 7:
The decision maker has been presented with false information with which to make their decision. I, Paul Cardall, was not given a work search stencil to take home, complete and return it. I had provided my work coach with my usual work search sheets (see subs 02/03/04) detailing my self-employment AND job search activities. I would NEVER have agreed to try and shoe-horn all that information into the standard ASE form. Could the work coach please provide evidence (by way of my wet signature) of my accepting this.
On 01/06/2017 Mr Cardall appealed against the decision and sent this to HMCTS.
He stated that he has complied with his claimant commitment duties and more besides. He stated that the claimant commitment he is subject to was agreed when he first claimed UC in 2016 and has not been amended since then. He stated that he will consider providing further evidence once he has received a copy of the appeal papers.
My response to 8:
I could not provide further evidence to back my case for the decision maker, as at this point the DWP had not given any reason as to WHY I was sanctioned.
I sought out legal advice ( ) and was advised to submit Docs 9-15, submitting that I would provide further evidence at a later date, once the reasons for the sanctions had been provided.
9. The decision has been reconsidered again in the light of Mr Cardall’s appeal but remains unchanged.
I am unable to access Mr Cardall’s Universal Job-match account as he has withdrawn permission for DWP to access his account.
My response to 9: unable to access Mr Cardall’s Universal Jobmatch account Upon receiving notice of said sanction (received on 16th March 2017), I tried in vain to get more information about the sanctions from the job centre. Multiple letters were sent, and I received zero response. I sent the job centre manager (Chris Jones) a SAR’s requesting information about the sanctions, this to was ignored. Through this and other events, I lost all trust in my work coach (Karen D) and the Job Centre manager, and I took the decision to revoke access to my account until AFTER this matter has been sorted, to avoid the possibility of tampering.
Section 4: The facts of the case (as submitted by the Work Coach)
1. Mr Paul Cardall claimed Universal Credit (UC) from 04/02/2016
(See linked submission)
2. On 18/01/2017 Mr Cardall attended an appointment with his adviser at Chelmsley Wood job-centre and agreed/accepted a further Claimant Commitment (CC) and was placed in the All Work-Related Requirements Group.
The Claimant Commitment required that he undertakes 35 hours of weekly activity to secure employment. He was required to consider any and all positions for which he is potentially suitable.
(see linked submission)
TRUE: We discussed the Claiment Commitment. I intend to prove that I did enough to satisfy the requirements of the CC (Sub xx 01)
3. On 02/02/2017 Mr Cardall next attended an appointment with his adviser/work coach at the local UC office. Mr Cardall provided the following evidence of his work search for the above period:
Researched the idea of becoming a day worker. This type of work would suit me very well. The idea being that I make myself available as a day worker to businesses that require an extra pair of hands for a few days rather than a part time or time vacancy.
Note: I could add this to my Great News community magazine as a service I provide for both myself and others who are unemployed and seeking work of any kind.
29 January – 2 February
Applied for two jobs off Jobsearch.direct.gov. Saved two others for looking at later.
I searched for jobs related to marketing for small businesses. Seeking businesses that are too small to employ a full time marketer. I will offer my services as a day worker, charging the businesses only for the hours worked (Day rate £80)
Great News Community Magazine
Created February Great News Community Magazine, with Valentine’s Day promotional leaflets. I will deliver these to businesses in and around Chelmsley Wood throughout Feruary. (Docs 16-17 and 18)
FALSE: The above evidence was not submitted by me, to my work coach as evidence of my job search for the period in question. Docs 16 & 17, are of a blank Work Search sheet (which I have NEVER used to submit my fortnightly work search, ever).
The work coach has knowingly submitted extracts from my work search ‘notes’ (Doc 18), as evidence submitted by me of a work search. I create these notes, and these are later used to create my finished work search sheets, typically 4-6 pages in length (Submission 02-03-04 are typical samples of my work search sheets, which I’ve supplied here to show a regular pattern. My presenting a standard EAS would be totally out of character).
4. The work services coach considered that Mr Cardall had not taken the actions agreed in respect of work search for the period from 26/01/2017 to 01/02/2017.
Noting-Attended today-jobs x3 saved to account. UJ jobs issued x3 and copies saved of saved jobs. Work search stencils issued-will bring back in as hasn’t got his glasses. Said that he wasn’t told that he had to do detailed job-search.
Conversation from 3/1/17 and CC updated and job goals on last attendance amended and explained what is expected as previously New Enterprise Allowance claimant. Did not bring additional information. The work coach also noted that Mr Cardall had not made searches on Universal Job match and was still looking for self employed opportunities and should be focusing on his job role as a carer where there are opportunities available. She did not consider that Mr Cardall was being pro active.
My response to : Attended today-jobs x3 saved to account.
If the work coach saved x3 jobs to the UJ account. She saved them to an inaccessible account. My work coach was informed of the account I had access to. I had explained to the work coach that after a year of trying to start a business I had lost access to the email connected with said UJ account, and had used the ‘Request Password’ option to gain access to my account, but that the UJ web site had sent me log in details for an older account (xx05).
My response to : Work search stencils issued-will bring back in as hasn’t got glasses.
I did not accept a work search stencil, why would I? I had produced my work search in the format I always had in the past as evidence of my work search.
My work search activities would NOT fit on a standard work search stencil, and I’ve never been asked to complete one. The Jobcentre staff (multiple work coaches (including Karen D) and Chris Jones (the job centre manager) have always accepted my own printed work search activity sheets, as evidence of work search.
My response to : Said that he wasn’t told that he had to do detailed jobsearch.
If I said those words, it is being taken out of context. During 2016, I was on the New Enterprise Allowance, researching the possibility of starting a community magazine business, and marketing my business as such to 100s of local small businesses. During this period I would not have been required to do a detailed job-search. The 3/1/2017 would have been my first UC appointment right after Christmas, and prior to this date would not have had to do a complete job search.
My response to : Conversation from 3/1/17 and CC emended
CC updated: On this date (3/1/2017) I did not agree to the CC being amended. I wasn’t even made aware that the CC was amended.
To the best of my knowledge, we were still on the original CC. If the work coach is claiming that I was presented with an amended CC agreement and agreed to it, please ask the work couch to produce a copy of this, with my written consent by way of a wet signature.
Note: The work search stencil referenced is an enquiry form requesting details of what activity had been undertaken in the period in doubt along with details of any circumstances which prevented/limited the activity undertaken.
(Docs see linked submission)
Mr Cardall discussed the work search activities he had completed for 26/01/2017 to 01/02/2017 with his work coach at the appointment on 02/02/2017. He stated he had applied for 2 jobs and saved 2 to look at later. He had researched becoming a day worker and registered on 2 job sites.
My Response: The work coach submits that: “He stated he had applied for 2 jobs and saved 2 to look at later. He had researched becoming a day worker and registered on 2 job sites”
This is completely untrue. The work coach has failed to submit my entire ‘Work Search’. What she has appeared to submit as my evidence of a job search, is merely an extract from my notes page (from which I later compile my very detailed job search, examples of which have been submitted for comparison – Submission xx02-03-04)
He had no activity recorded on Universal Job-match despite being reminded on 03/01/2017 and 18/01/2017 that he needed to be producing full job search in line with his Claimant Commitment requirements of 35 hours per week, as his self employment activities were not producing any leads.
It is true we discussed my work search activities.
During 2016 – Jan 2017 I was exploring self employment. Late Jan my work coach told me I had to turn my efforts from seeking advertisers for my magazine, to seeking paid employment. I informed my work coach that as I had forgotten my UJ password, and used the onsite ‘Forgotten your password?’ option. When this process completed, the login details and password sent to me by the UJ web site were for a previous (older) account. I informed my work coach of this, and wrote my User ID on the back of my Universal Credit Appointment Card.
Submission: S01 xx05
Appointment card showing new UJ ID
Submission: S02 xx06
A screen shot, showing the UJ in use
The work coach was therefore made aware that she was looking at the ‘wrong’ UJ account, and for her to use this as evidence of ‘not looking for work’ is downright dishonest. She is knowingly supplying false evidence.
Having considered all the evidence provided in this case I have decided that Mr Paul Cardall has not undertaken all reasonable work search action for the period 26/01/2017 to 01/02/2017 and has not provided good reason for that failure.
The evidence provided by the work coach to the decision maker DID NOT accurately represent my job search evidence as submitted by me, to my work coach, Karen D.
I have never (ever) used the standard work search stencil to submit my job search activities due to it being ineffective, you can NOT record a detailed 35 hour job search on the standard ASE. I have ALWAYS submitted my own printed job search stencil, typically 4-6 pages in length (sub xx2/3/4), and in the past, these have always been well received, by my work coach, other work coaches and even the Job-centre manager, Chris Jones.
AR Number: UCM008 (Failure to undertake all reasonable work search action)
UNIVERSAL CREDIT SANCTION/TRIBUNAL