70) To Whomsoever It May Concern

18th July 2014

Ref nos:- SC049/14/00249 & SC049/14/00137

To whomsoever it may concern.

With regard to the above case number (SC049/14/00249).
The decision that was made was not a favourable one.

I appealed the sanctions in question and they were revised and allowed. (Award letters included Pg 1 & 2). EV 4
I suspect a copy of these were then sent to the tribunal service in order to "allay" the courts. However i have not yet received full remuneration for these periods.

I have received a couple of token payments of £225.35 & £71.70 around the 19th & 23rd May respectively.
A shortfall (up to the 24th April) of Approximately £682.20.
However upon calling the DWP, i was informed that a suspension is still in place on my claim, a suspension for which i have had no official written notification of whatsoever.

I was informed that this suspension is still in place, and that another sanction still applies from 3rd Dec - 16th Dec.

The secondary sanction (3rd - 16th Dec) mentioned above is currently pending and awaiting adjudication (SC049/14/00137). Therefore the funds relating to it (£129.10) are still disputable, however for the period in question £553.10 is still due.

I made mention of this "phantom sanction/suspension" in my appeal (SC049/14/00249) and as it is seemingly this, that is restricting my ability to access payments due, i respectfully ask that the aforementioned case is then re-opened in order to attain access to justice, and to assess this "phantom sanction/suspension". During this "suspension" i had no access to hardship provisions of any kind.

If the re-opening of this case is not possible, then i would instead like to append further evidence to my forthcoming case, (SC049/14/00137) as i believe it is highly relevant, and given the circumstances, and the long-waiting times for tribunal hearings, feel that putting this adjudication off would not be a just thing to do. This long-delay in opening a case is obviously the outcome the DWP desires.

The evidence i would like to submit to either the re-opening of case (SC049/14/00249) or the pending case (SC049/14/00137) is as follows.

I have in the period since i started disputing these unlawful "disallowances" that have been perpetrated against me, been faced with many occasions of injustice that i feel should be mentioned, and thus i will do so now.

I have documented pretty much all my encounters with the DWP, because i would like to shine some light on the way that they currently operate, which is currently in an extremely nefarious fashion. I will endeavour to compile/collate these "encounters" into a form of report, which can then possibly be used to analyse and/or improve the services offered by this countries civil servants, and local jobcentres e.t.c I received no payment for this, thus the results will be financially unbiased/impartial.

Firstly i expect 4 things when i am dealing with civil servants, and i will extend the same courtesies also.
Respect, professionalism, transparency and the ability to reason.

I have already detailed in amongst the 39 pages of evidence pending in case (SC049/14/00137) local corruptions including but not limited to :- jobsearch steps being omitted when documented on the internal ASE system, jobs that do not exist being used to sanction, and generally extremely unprofessional behaviour, both on a local level, and via call-centres.

However sadly it would seem the buck does not stop there.

Since then i have witnessed more serious/sinister concerns.

Firstly i have had my jobseekers agreement suspended indefinitely, from 14th Feb. I have had no official notification of this whatsoever, other than one extremely unhelpful person informing me of such. (Sean - Stafford jobcentre). He informed me verbally that because i would not sign a new jobseekers agreement (that had terms that i believe to be unreasonable), that i had failed/refused to "sign a proposed variation of a jobseekers agreement". He then stated that i did not have a valid jobseekers agreement, thus my claim would be suspended indefinitely.

I disputed and continue to dispute this, saying that i did/do indeed have a jobseekers agreement already in place, as the very wording of the alleged purported "offence" ("failure/refusal to sign a proposed variation") actually suggests. A "variation" intrinsically implies that something already exists. Thus as far as I'm aware my original jobseekers agreement still exists. An agreement for which i have done what is desired of me according to the law. I have continued to sign even with this dubious suspension in place.

This is also evident from pg 24 of the original evidence, the original agreement dated 16/01/12. I have not signed any jobseekers agreements since then, as far as i can recall. (one was proposed but i refused for reasoning that i will mention later on, in this letter) thus the original agreement remains in place, and thus perhaps the politically motivated reasoning behind the "suspension" that became active from the 14th Feb (or thereabouts), becomes more apparent.

I refused to sign a proposed variation of a jobseekers agreement because i deem it entirely unreasonable to force citizens to comply with signing up to the universal jobmatch "service".

In short the reasoning behind this being that i will not wilfully or otherwise render my personal details to a foreign nation state (by proxy or otherwise). (Please see attached document "Reservations about creating a ujm online profile" for more specific reasoning). It does not matter if the state is the U.S, Russia or China, forced rendering of a citizens personal details to a foreign state is wrong and in my opinion, treasonous.

Having continued to sign whilst this dubious suspension was in place, I was then extremely disconcerted to find that after coming in to sign as usual after a holiday period, that my jobseekers claim had been completely terminated, on the grounds that i had "failed to attend an interview". An interview for which i had had, no prior notification of whatsoever.

Even worse was that i was given no notification that my claim had been terminated (illegally) and it was only on the 19th May, and turning up to sign for JSA, that i was notified in person casually "your claim has been closed".

Apparently it was closed (illegally) on the 10th April. I still to this date have not received any official documentation to state that my original claim had been closed.

I have continued since the 10th April to attend bi-weekly signing dates, and adhered by my responsibilities according to the law to look for work each week. The only exception being the last week of writing, and the reasoning for such i will now discuss.

The DWP have now deemed it of vital importance to retrospectively cancel my entitlement to housing benefits as of the 24/02/2014. EV 10  (Notification letter supplied). This when assessed with the other evidence of DWP corruption/foul-play strongly suggests that they are trying to bully people into complying with their demands, through various subtle and not so subtle measures. (I will sum this up at the end of the letter). Retrospectively cancelling my entitlement to benefits is seemingly a pointless endeavour, because i am entitled to the same period, but under the "no-viable income" category. However unsurprisingly i got a "oh you owe over a £1,000 in housing benefits" statement, from the local government worker, until i rightfully mentioned the fact that i was entitled via "no viable income". This is attempted scare-tactics. And thankfully i know my rights on this. However others might not.

However the effect of such a tactic is that it stalls my ability to receive money in order to pay the rent, (psychologically speaking this bestows uncertainty onto the citizen) and generally compounds the situation of the recipient. The previous times this has happened to me (even though i was complying with what was desired of me according to law,) it has involved a 2 - 4 week wait until reinstallation of benefits. Which has meant i either had to sell what meagre possessions i have, or borrow money from others.

It also entails the extremely invasive practise of requiring a full bank statement for the last number of months in question, i have already supplied this, and do not mind supplying it again.

However, as an idea, perhaps we could implement such scrutinous measures elsewhere in society also, and perhaps this might then help stem the large exodus of potential tax monies currently being evaded from this society, to various tax-havens around the world. (Which on a side-note currently outweighs benefit fraud, about 100-1).

I would like this tribunal service if it has been awarded the appropriate responsibilities/jurisdiction by our U.K society, to please consider the following requests, in order that justice may be served. If not i ask that such an access to appropriate justice be made available, preferably swiftly.

1) To make a ruling on the legality of forcing citizens to comply with the current legislation forcing them to sign up to universal jobmatch. I consider this a matter of national interest. As i believe citizens are currently being forced to render their personal details to a foreign nation state. My refusal to sign up to UJM, is also the primary reasoning behind the dubious "suspension" of my claim.

2) Mandate the DWP to reinstate my original jobseekers agreement, as i believe it was unlawfully/illegally terminated.

3) To mandate the DWP to release the monies that are owed to my person. I can provide bank statements to show the periods that i received no payments. I will provide these to the tribunal service as a tertiary matter, should it be so desired. Up to the 24th April, (the time-frame that the attached dwp letters suggest i am "allowed" and thus should of been payed) the amount outstanding is approximately £682.20.

Since the 24th April (and having continued to do what is desired of me according to the law) I believe the amount outstanding to be approximately £788.70. (this is calculated using the "old allowance" figures of £71.70 p/w) although i have received £268.92 in a couple of payments during this time from the DWP.

This creates a sub-total of £519.78, and a grand total, still outstanding of approx £1201.98.

I would also like to make a final recommendation.

I have been explicitly documenting virtually all happenings with the DWP and will compile a full report into my "encounters" with the DWP and other local and regional government offices, which i would then like to publish.

Perhaps this could then be used to start an internal investigation into both localised and regional policy-making, and to shine light on both some of the underhand strategies that have blatantly been employed against those in our society who are in need, and also the atrocious level of professionalism exhibited within both my local jobcentre, and regional call-centres alike.

Sincerely,

Dan J***
Dan Kinobi The above is a letter to the tribunals service requesting that the aforementioned be taken into account and that the case that was wrongly closed, due to a falsified document, by the DWP, be re-opened, Or that the points made at the end of the letter be appended to the currently open case awaiting adjudication.

It is because of the urgency of this case, with regards to the "suspension" and illegal termination of my claim, that i requested such happenings to be dealt with swiftly. And felt it was a reasonable measure to suffix this as evidence to the currently pending case.

Sadly today i received notification from the tribunals service that 2 new cases, have instead been opened.

With the casual appendage "We are sorry that there is likely to be delay in dealing with the appeal."

Well another 6 months wait, plays directly into the DWP's hands.

Some justice.

EV 5

Dan Kinobi Above is the letter from the tribunal service saying that the case was "more favourable" and thus has lapsed. However the dwp, did not actually allow the periods they claimed they had "allowed", thus as far as I'm aware they knowingly lied to the courts, in order to allay them.

Notice how they also state "if you think the new decision is still wrong you must lodge a fresh appeal".

You could almost reason that this was a co-ordinated action.
18 July at 17:05 · Edited · Like
Dan Kinobi So the avenue of re-opening case SC049/14/00249 was seemingly closed.

It was worth trying to re-open though as i had already invested a substantial amount of time/effort into that case. I cannot remember if i have published those particular notes, if not, i will upload them in due course.

However the request to append the evidence to the currently pending case SC049/14/00137 was overlooked entirely.

This was a legitimate request and the "further evidence" was delivered before the requested 7 days prior to the tribunal hearing, that is desired.

The reason i mention this, is because in the response that i got to the original evidence submittal, it mentions how my appeal is late. I do not believe this to be the case.
EV 13

Dan Kinobi Above is the letter clearly stating "If you have any further evidence, that you want the tribunal to see, please send it to me at least 7 days before the tribunal hearing.".

This is the pending case i was talking about, in the original letter, and I fulfilled this requirement.

Edited for spelling 28/10/15

Original Source:- https://www.facebook.com/J3D15/posts/10152283511536089