12th June 2015
It's now been over 15 months since the UNLAWFUL & ILLEGAL Suspension and (14 months since the) UNLAWFUL & ILLEGAL Termination of my JSA Claim.
Since that time i have made an attempt to make a new claim but have been UNLAWFULLY & ILLEGALLY hindered in my ability to claim social security entitlements.
What follows is the latest correspondence from and to the DWP. I shall also attach all other relevant material/evidence.
11/06/15
Ref #:- "Redacted"
To whomsoever it may concern.
Firstly with regard to the letter i received from the DWP, dated 24/03/2015, signed "N.Ganley" Of which i enclose a copy. EV 22
It seems that various members within your department are experiencing a degree of difficulty in understanding/grasping the following. Allow me to re-iterate this yet again for them, so that perhaps they can understand it slightly better.
The statement that reads..
"Your JSA claim was closed from 11/04/14 as you failed to attend a jobcentre appointment on 24/04/14 and did not supply a reason for your failure within 5 working days. Decision notified you on 09/05/14."
Is false. I had NO prior notification of this appointment whatsoever, thus I cannot "fail" to miss something that I am not aware of. Secondly I did not supply a reason for this alleged "Failure within 5 working days, because it was only on my next signing date (19/05/14) after a holiday signing period exemption, that I was notified in person of this UNLAWFUL and ILLEGAL termination of my JSA claim.
I to this day, have received NO OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE whatsoever, so your claim that I was notified on 09/05/14 is entirely fallacious.
"You reclaimed JSA from 22/05/14 but did not sign the claimant commitment supplied by your advisor. As this was a condition of receiving JSA that claim was closed. Decision notified to you on 09/05/14."
Is an interesting statement, because apparently the DWP can now "see the future". How was a decision notified to me on 09/05/14 when I reclaimed from the 22/05/14!? This is yet another prime example of gross incompetence within your department.
"You have not requested a mandatory reconsideration against any of these decisions"
It should be blaringly obvious by now, that I have in fact made multiple attempts to request a mandatory reconsideration on these matters, and to have this "phantom sanction and unlawful/illegal termination" of my JSA claim addressed.
With Case ending 00249, I was under the impression that this was so, as it was alleged to have been a favourable result. (See letter labelled 00249 Result). EV 23
However upon wondering why the full-amount that I was due for the period in question was not released, I contacted the DWP over the phone, and was informed that this "phantom sanction", that was allegedly preventing me from accessing the entitlement to which I am due, still remained.
It is worth noting here that for the mandatory reconsideration for case 00249, I made mention of this phantom sanction. * See Original Appeal* EV 24 Thus I was awaiting an adjudication on this matter, as it is/was directly relevant.
The DWP "backed-down" on case 00249, issuing an "award letter" (included with this correspondance) which resulted in the case being closed, without actually addressing the concerns I had raised about this "phantom sanction". The response I received from the Tribunal service was that the decision was a "favourable one". (see "00249 Result") EV 23 When evidently it was not. [1]
To this date I have still not received any official notification about this "permanent suspension" and of the unlawful/illegal termination of my JSA claim, and I have had nothing official informing me of my right of appeal against them. I.e mandatory reconsideration e.t.c. For this reason and others I continued the only course of action I perceived available to me, which was to do the following...
At this point I made every effort to re-open case 00249 and/or get this ruling consolidated into outstanding cases (in order to save the taxpayer money on multiple tribunal hearings).
This is evident from the following correspondence which I sent to the DWP.
*Further Evidence Submittal*. EV 25
Which then i believe resulted in 2 new cases being opened. ending 00405 & 00407. EV 21
With regard to your letter dated 27/03/15..
Ref "Redacted" *(A copy of which is also included)
EV 26
It seems very much like you are simply plucking random dates out of a hat and then making a very poor attempt at joining the proverbial dots.
I have detailed every encounter with your department in explicit detail, and will be doing everything I can to hold those who have wilfully neglected their positions of relative responsibility, accountable.
So allow me to set the record straight, so to speak.
"The appeals officer at Norwich has addressed your queries regarding the failure to sign or agree a jobseekers agreement (JSAG) or a Claimant Commitment (CC) and other sanctions on your benefit (sic)."
No, the appeals officer at Norwich has seemingly done nothing but regurgitate the same falsehoods, as well as inserting a few extra ones, along with some fallacious dates.
Repeating the same mistruths over and over and over again, does not suddenly make an inaccuracy true. Although i'm sure this philosophy worked well for certain authoritarian regimes in the not so distant past, I’m not sure it is particularly progressive for the DWP to adopt such policies in the 21st Century.
I believe you are getting confused with your dates, the decision to overturn the periods that you mentioned (adjudicated within case ending 00249) was taken and executed. *see "award letter". EV 4
Resulting in the sanction being overturned, allegedly in my favour.
This decision is not linked to the 2 new cases that were opened ending 405 & 407, and that then found in my favour. These cases being opened were a direct result of me sending "further evidence submittal", EV 25 in an effort to try and Re-open case ending 00249.
To suggest as much is to propagate a lie. I have attached evidence to this accord. It also seems as though you are trying to conflate two separate issues in an attempt to try and confuse the situation.
The letter i received on the 22nd MAY (00249 result) was informing me about case ending 00249 being favourable and thus dealing with the periods that you afore-mention. 28-01-14 - 10/02/14 & 11/02/14 - 28/04/14. EV 4
With regard to the other page of your correspondence...
"and not on the JSAG you agreed on the 02/12/2013"
For the Nth time i did not agree a JSAG on the 02/12/13. The last JSAG that I signed was, i believe, 16/01/12.
I have once again attached physical PROOF to this accord. As you can see from the copy, that I have provided. *see included jsag - UNSIGNED". EV 27
The spurious reasoning for the unlawful/illegal "permanent suspension" of my claim was in exact words "failure to sign a proposed variation of a jsag".
I refused to sign something which might bind me to more steps than the law says that i should reasonably undertake. (more than 2 steps per week to look for work (Jobseekers Regulations 1996 18 (1)). My Jsag dated 16/01/12 met these lawful desirements.
The proposed steps that were put forward by the DWP, in the jsag that i refused to sign around the 19/02/14, were far above and beyond any lawful obligation.
Thus at this point Sean Harris (DWP - Stafford jobcentre) illegally and unlawfully, hindered me from accessing my entitlement to social security benefits, as a U.K citizen.
Following this my claim was then stopped entirely, on extremely nefarious grounds. I was told that i had missed an appointment, for which i Had NO Prior notification of whatsoever, and that my claim was closed on these grounds.
I have and will continue to dispute this until it is remedied.
Thus forth it has been over a year, i have made numerous attempts to address this as is evident.
To summise:-
Since i began requiring social security entitlements approximately 3 or 4 years ago, i have been sanctioned a significant number of times. Each time i appealed the sanction in question, and each time the sanction was rightfully over-turned.
As well as being unlawfully/illegally executed, these sanctions have been massively hindering with regards to my ability to look for future work. To say that it is "helping people back to work" is a ludicrous claim. How is removing a persons ability to eat, heat their home, and restricting their communications, helping someone back to work?
The latest sanction that was perpetrated against me and resulted in the permanent suspension, that i have attempted to have remedied, as is EVIDENT, was now over a year ago. This was closely followed by the UNLAWFUL and ILLEGAL termination of my JSA claim, around April 2014.
Following these ILLEGAL/UNLAWFUL actions taken by the DWP, and with no viable income, i proceeded to try and make a new claim for Social Security entitlements in Approximately May 2014. This resulted in an exchange of terms.
The DWP put forward terms that were entirely unreasonable, and again above and beyond what is desired by the law, and once again i refused to sign the agreement. They then asked me to put forward a set of terms, which i did.
The terms i proposed included the use of the word "reasonable", And basically eluded to the fact that i would take the steps, that are desired of me according to the relevant law on the matter.
I was then once again ILLEGALLY and UNLAWFULLY DENIED access to social security entitlement provisions.
It became obvious at this point that i was/am being POLITICALLY PERSECUTED for opposing a FLAWED, FAILED and genuinely ILLEGAL, IDEOLOGICALLY driven REGIME.
Since this time i have made a number of appeals, and engaged with both the DWP and the tribunal service. Both departments suffer from both gross incompetence and probable corruption. (Definite in the case of the DWP).
For example to even get one of my earlier cases heard, it took over 7 months, for the tribunal service to arrange a hearing. That's 7 months for someone with no viable income whatsoever.
The entire system/concept of sanctioning someone and removing their only living allowance (for that is the reality of the situation), is bad enough as is, however doing so BEFORE they even have a chance to defend themselves is a CORRUPTION of the NATURAL LAW and ORDER system, not only in this country, but on the world stage also. In the sense that due process is not being abided by. I believe it also contravenes Article 6 of the ECHR - The right to a fair trial.
It is now 15 MONTHS later. And the latest correspondence i have received is suggesting that the issue has not even begun to be dealt with.
Thus this letter is, as far as i'm concerned, the LAST-CHANCE for the DWP to correct it's wrong-doings via the regular channels. Address the issues that i have raised, reinstate my original JSA claim, that was ILLEGALLY and UNLAWFULLY suspended and then terminated, and release the monies that are due to my person.
I thus ask the recipient of this letter to escalate this communicae accordingly, to whomsoever has the relevant level of responsibility to deal with it.
However, regardless of whether this happens or not, i will be doing everything I can to see that my experiences see the light of day, as i do not believe it is right to treat people in the manner that i, and more than likely others, have been treated.
As i have aforementioned in previous correspondence, i have meticulously detailed all encounters with the DWP over the last 15 months or so, and will endeavour to collate a report on the matter.
Perhaps in order for our country to move forwards with regard to fairness and equality, we must first learn what was not working well, and try to correct those issues, so that we can create a stronger economy in future, forged on decent values, such as those of social justice.
To allow a countries citizens to starve in order to try and force through an ideology is a morally bankrupt position to assume, and does this country no favours on the whole.
I hope this clarifies things for you.
- Dan J***
[1]
Case 00249 was closed (imho prematurely) and found in my favour (allegedly). Having not in fact received a favourable response, I then made a request to reopen case 00249, *further evidence submittal* in order to have a ruling on the illegal/unlawful "phantom sanction" and general cessation of my claim.
This then resulted in 2 new cases being opened. (00405 & 00407)
Dated : 18-04-14 ("Original Appeal" For Case SC049/14/00249)
Appeal With regards to disallowance from 28/01/14 - 10/02/14 and further sanction from 11/02/14 - 28/04/14.
Included with this correspondence is a copy of the jobsearch that i performed during the above period in question. It is clearly labelled as such, but should not be confused with the 3 pages of evidence, that include an old jobsearch as evidence of error/corruption. I have not managed to procure the ASE form that is used internally, so do not know what steps the DWP have alleged i have taken. I have once again however, I believe, fulfilled the 3 steps that are desired according to the law.
This longer sanction (11/02/14 - 28/04/14) is also directly related to the original pending case, (SC049/14/00137) and has been handed out, regardless of the fact that an outcome has not been reached on the original case. I would like to raise the point, that i consider this extremely unjust.
I have not received any JSA for nearly 2 months now. The last "full" payment was received on 30th jan 2014. I received a reduced payment of £81.95 on 27th Feb, and have received nothing since then. I have been entitled to JSA constantly, and have continued to "sign" throughout the disputed periods, where i have received no payments, both in the pending case, and this new case.
This has been a massive hindrance on my ability to seek out employment, as i have not had basic funds, to meet basic job-seeking criteria such as mobile phone credit, nevermind the ability to maintain a healthy/non-starvation diet. This combined with the massive amount of time and effort i have spent trying to repeal these seemingly unlawful sanctions, leads to extremely handicapped/detrimental conditions for anyone actively seeking employment.
Nonetheless i have adhered by what is desired in law, to take a minimum of 3 steps per week towards employment, including recently attending a 2 hour interview/selection process at a local warehouse.
As aforementioned these "doubts" i believe to be unwarranted and hope that they will be allayed if not by this letter, then by my tribunal appearance.
With regards to the "jobseekers agreement". (This point is highly relevant to both the current pending case (SC049/14/00137) and this second appeal.
It is true that i have signed one, dated 16/01/12.
However if you would please look at page 20 of the evidence of the aforementioned case. You will see that it states very clearly under "General Statement"...
"I understand that this is general information and not a full statement of the law".
This would reasonably lead one to conclude that anything that is signed with regards to the jobseeker agreement, is not legally binding, if it was, then a statement/disclaimer such as "This is a legally binding document" should in my opinion be included, as otherwise this is extremely misleading.
Aside from this reasonable and logical argument, please note that on page 20 in the box under "My Responsibilities" RE: I know i must: that there is in fact no number filled in on the proceeding box. The DWP copy has the number "4" assigned to this box. This has been filled in as far as i am aware and can recall in good conscience, AFTER i have signed it. This is part of the departmental corruption i spoke of. I will attach more proof of such corruption, as it appears to of been subtly requested, and you may admit it as evidence.
Let us then assume that the jobseeker has been deceived by the extremely misleading general statement, and that the jobseekers agreement is in fact a legally binding document. Then in my specific case, this sentence actually says that "i must actively seek work by doing at least NULL things a week. This creates a logical paradox, assuming for a moment that the jobseekers agreement is indeed a legal instrument, where it apparently states that it is not under "General Statement".
Under these paradoxical/conflicting terms i suspect that the law defaults back to the original 3 steps per week suggestion.
It would seem that these particulars in the jobseekers agreement are being used in an effort to give a constant reason/excuse to sanction jobseekers. I have heard stories of people having to meet over 30 steps per week, which is i believe completely unreasonable. These steps are then being used in order to constantly have an excuse to sanction the jobseeker. This is wrong. Which leads me onto my next point.
I currently have a permanent sanction decision against me for "refusal to sign a proposed variation" of my jobseekers agreement. The wording of this allegation in itself, suggests that i already have a viable jobseekers agreement. Thus remain entitled to jobseekers allowance.
I refused to sign it for the aforementioned reasoning in my current pending case. The DWP went away to "reconsider it" They came back and the agreement was virtually unchanged (i.e the main points, signing up to universal jobmatch remained intact). I refused to sign it once more and was then told i had 21 days to sign this, or i would face a permanent sanction on my JSA claim. I will attach a copy of the Reasons why i refuse to sign up to universal jobmatch, and this may be included as evidence.
There was no further mediation or attempts to "make" a jobseekers agreement, by the DWP. I was then informed that a permanent sanction was put in place. This also had the effect of removing my entitlement to any hardship provisions.
Why would i sign a jobseekers agreement that has completely unreasonable terms, that non-compliance with, will result in putting me in a severely detrimental situation? Given the fact that i have had a permanent sanction assigned against me, for refusing to sign a variation, suggests that this agreement is not an agreement at all, but a forced mandation, the signing of which is UNWILLFUL and UNLAWFUL, by reason of being obtained under duress. If an agreement is reached under duress/threat, i suggest that it is not legally binding. I would argue that having ones only living allowance removed is substantial duress. However citizens of this country are as far as I am aware, legally entitled to social assistance.
With regards to the current mandatory reconsideration notice.
Another prime example of either departmental incompetence/error and/or corruption is incidentally as follows.
On page 2 of the included mandatory reconsideration notice the author (again unnamed, so i do not know who is making this claim against me) has made a claim that :-
"On your jobseekers Agreement you have agreed to contact employers by phone once a week, visit employers once a week, check newspapers online daily, check indeed e.t.c to conduct online searches, on a daily basis and to check Universal Jobmatch on a daily basis to look for vacancies."
At no point have i agreed such things. This was the PROPOSED VARIATION, that remains UNSIGNED by me, and that i refused to sign, resulting in the aforementioned permanent sanction decision, that was i believe unfairly brought against me.
From this paragraph on the author refers to a jobseekers agreement that i have not signed. Thus the basis for this entire sanction(s) is/are rendered upon false grounds. And i stand by my assertion that i have fulfilled my responsibilities with regard to the law.
Further Evidence Submittal
Ref nos:- SC049/14/00249 & SC0149/14/00137
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).
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.
Further Evidence Submittal (Continued)
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. (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 re-installation 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 practice 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. [1]
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 localized 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***
[1] This total outstanding was for around June/July 2014, the total outstanding since then, is significantly more - Edit - 11/06/15
*Note the relevant material that is mentioned in the later Posts *Original Appeal & Further Evidence Submittal* has been uploaded by me onto here, when it was topical. It would mean finding such things and creating a link, in order that the case is clearly compiled. I would probably require some form of blog space to do this in the most clear and concise manner.
AD I can't believe this situation still isn't resolved.
Have you put in a Data Protection Act request for ALL the information they hold on you? That would come out as a print out with the correct dates etc.
Dan Kinobi I don't quite follow A***, how would a Data Protection Act request help the current situation? Speaking on the topic of Data Protection however. ;)
It would appear, that the real reason behind why I was sanctioned in the first place, was because i refused to essentially render my personal/private information to a third party corporation. Something for which the data protection act should theoretically award me a form of cover against.
The more i look over the case notes the more i realise this was more than likely the case with, firstly the universal jobmatch scenario, but also with something called NCIS (or thereabouts).
They were/are some sort of "careers service", who i refused to divulge any personal information/data whatsoever to.
In hindsight shortly after this happened, was the timing behind the dubious permanent suspension under the guise of "failure to sign a proposed variation of a jsag".
In fact i need to confirm that for both myself and for the official "records" so to speak. But i believe it was literately a week or two before the extremely dubious "failure to sign a proposed variation of a jsag" claim was made against me.
I withheld my data from this third party organization, PERFECTLY LEGITIMATELY under the protection of the Data Protection ACT 1998. They had no business collecting or utilizing my data.
Then the dubious permanent suspension raised it's head.
I will search my records and post the proof of this happening, as i feel it may be a useful form of compound evidence, as to behind the motive for the DWP's actions.
Thanks for raising the point A*** ;)
Did you mean the freedom of information act by the way? I don't mean to patronise, but perhaps thats what you meant?
AD I'm going to take this to PM in case the DWP snoops are watching this account.
Like · Reply · 12 June at 19:53
Dan Kinobi Thankyou for sharing your thoughts on the matter A***, they are appreciated.:)
Edited For Spelling & Names Redacted 3/11/15
Original Source:- https://www.facebook.com/J3D15/posts/10152980826576089
No comments:
Post a Comment