Robin's story, below, is shocking, and it ably demonstrates his earlier point that taking a complaint right to the top will have an effect.
I have sent several letters of complaint, re issues about the use of incontinence pants, to the Royal Free Hospital. My last letter was sent after taking advice from Whine & Cheese members. I wrote to the Chair of the Trust and to six other heads of department within the Trust, as well as my MP, Glenda Jackson.
It was my second letter to Glenda, and this time she took action, sending a note to the hospital. The Chair of the Trust has now arranged for me to talk with three matrons about my concerns. While this isn't quite what I wanted - it seems to me that my concerns are well established and what they should be doing is getting someone to investigate in-house and come up with solutions or a written policy - I am happy to know what I have to say is being taken seriously.
Separately to this, my house insurance payments have just doubled. This is because I have made four claims in six years. Actually, the first 'claim' was an inquiry when I mislaid jewellery that I later found. I asked what I should do if I didn't find it. The second 'claim' was four years ago. The people next door insisted a leak from my house had caused damp in the party wall. I refuted this. The insurance sent an assessor who confirmed the leak was on their side.
Separately to this, I have made two real claims in the past two years: for a stolen iPod and a smashed laptop, but these are not, according to a LloydsTSB call centre person, reason enough for my premium doubling. "It's because you have had four claims, which increases the risk with your policy"
After Easter, I shall be writing to Victor Blank, head of LloydsTSB and to Archie G Kane who is Group Executive Director of Insurance and Investments. Other ideas welcome. Shyama
Friday, April 6, 2007
Thursday, April 5, 2007
The mean of 'Means Tested Benefits'
A friend is currently employed in a lowish paid job in London and receives a contribution towards his rent from his local council. This is called housing benefit. The rules stipulate that if his financial circumstances change he is to inform them immediately.
At the end of January, he got a small bonus from his employer and he dutifully wrote to the benefits office to tell them.
10 days later he received a letter from the benefits office telling him an officer will call at his home to review his claim. Could he please make available his birth certificate, passport, drivers licence, a utility bill, the last 2 bank statements, certificate of savings and the last 2 pay slips for the officer to check.
The officer attended and during the interview she expressed surprise my friend had not declared the fact that his rent had increased by 12% 6 months previously and also that he no longer received working tax credit. Both of which could lead to his being able to claim more housing benefit.
My friend replied that he thought he should only inform the council when things got better not worse.
He provided all of the documentary evidence except the payslip for January, which had been mislaid. Given that he provided November’s and December’s plus the fact he had written to them in January anyway and specifically informed them of the bonus as well as showing the council officer attending, his January bank statement with the salary amount visible, he thought the documentation provided was more than sufficient.
A week later a letter from the benefits office arrived at his door and in an accusatory tone he was informed that "It has been drawn to our attention that your circumstances have changed and because we think this might lead to our making an overpayment we are suspending benefit pending an investigation, effective immediately".
It is generally accepted that people who claim and receive benefits do so because they need them. It does not take much intelligence to understand that to have them withheld would most likely cause hardship and to have them suspended without notice would definitely cause hardship. My friend had already proved he was a reasonable, honest person because he had not declared the rent increase, nor the cancellation of tax credits but had given accurate information about an improvement in his situation-at least for the month of February-.
He enquired by e-mail and letter why they felt the need to suspend benefits under these circumstances but forwarded a substitute payslip anyway.
They received this letter along with more payslips for the past 9 months on 12th March 2007 by which time his income for the month was down by 20% and without any notice whatsoever.
He received no reply for some time and as a direct result of this suspension he was behind with his rent for the first time.
When he phoned the benefits office and asked why, under the circumstances, they had suspended his benefit they replied "because we can".
This was now a crisis. To resolve it he wrote them a strong letter demanding an explanation which he copied to two councillors in his ward. In it he said if this was not resolved within 48 hours he would take it up with the relevant secretary of State via his local MP as well as contacting the ombudsman.
7 days later he received his benefit -which had been increased as a result of the information he had given and despite their apparent concern they might make an overpayment-.
He is still waiting for an explanation of their behaviour so the ombudsman threat remains.
More on this later.....
At the end of January, he got a small bonus from his employer and he dutifully wrote to the benefits office to tell them.
10 days later he received a letter from the benefits office telling him an officer will call at his home to review his claim. Could he please make available his birth certificate, passport, drivers licence, a utility bill, the last 2 bank statements, certificate of savings and the last 2 pay slips for the officer to check.
The officer attended and during the interview she expressed surprise my friend had not declared the fact that his rent had increased by 12% 6 months previously and also that he no longer received working tax credit. Both of which could lead to his being able to claim more housing benefit.
My friend replied that he thought he should only inform the council when things got better not worse.
He provided all of the documentary evidence except the payslip for January, which had been mislaid. Given that he provided November’s and December’s plus the fact he had written to them in January anyway and specifically informed them of the bonus as well as showing the council officer attending, his January bank statement with the salary amount visible, he thought the documentation provided was more than sufficient.
A week later a letter from the benefits office arrived at his door and in an accusatory tone he was informed that "It has been drawn to our attention that your circumstances have changed and because we think this might lead to our making an overpayment we are suspending benefit pending an investigation, effective immediately".
It is generally accepted that people who claim and receive benefits do so because they need them. It does not take much intelligence to understand that to have them withheld would most likely cause hardship and to have them suspended without notice would definitely cause hardship. My friend had already proved he was a reasonable, honest person because he had not declared the rent increase, nor the cancellation of tax credits but had given accurate information about an improvement in his situation-at least for the month of February-.
He enquired by e-mail and letter why they felt the need to suspend benefits under these circumstances but forwarded a substitute payslip anyway.
They received this letter along with more payslips for the past 9 months on 12th March 2007 by which time his income for the month was down by 20% and without any notice whatsoever.
He received no reply for some time and as a direct result of this suspension he was behind with his rent for the first time.
When he phoned the benefits office and asked why, under the circumstances, they had suspended his benefit they replied "because we can".
This was now a crisis. To resolve it he wrote them a strong letter demanding an explanation which he copied to two councillors in his ward. In it he said if this was not resolved within 48 hours he would take it up with the relevant secretary of State via his local MP as well as contacting the ombudsman.
7 days later he received his benefit -which had been increased as a result of the information he had given and despite their apparent concern they might make an overpayment-.
He is still waiting for an explanation of their behaviour so the ombudsman threat remains.
More on this later.....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)