Skip to main content

My DWP Timeline

A Chronology of Broken Rules: How Cambridge Jobcentre Ignores DWP Guidance

This page documents the timeline of events and injustices that I have faced from the DWP and Cambridge Jobcentre Plus. Each entry details a specific instance where their actions directly contradict their own official, published guidance. The facts are supported by dated entries in my Universal Credit journal.

Issue 1: Cambridge Jobcentre Refusing and then making up a lie to not use Email as a Reasonable Adjustment: "no policy"

The Jobcentre insisted that ID verification could not be done via email, despite it being a required reasonable adjustment for my disability and despite their own guidance permitting it.

Timeline of Events

  • 7 April 2025: I make a formal request for the reasonable adjustment of using email for interviews and communication, citing the Equality Act 2010.
  • 8 April 2025: A DWP manager, Louise, explicitly refuses this, stating,
    "we currently do not undertake ID verification for Universal Credit via email".
  • 11 April 2025: Another manager, Sarah, reiterates this refusal, saying,
    "it is not our policy to accept ID verification by email."
  • 25 June 2025: After I am forced to file a discrimination claim, my identity is finally verified using third-party information that had been provided by email earlier.

The Contradiction

The DWP's official guidance on the Equality Act explicitly lists email as a potential reasonable adjustment.

DWP Guidance: Jobcentre actions for Alternative Format, Reasonable Adjustment requirements and Email as a Reasonable Adjustment

"In line with the Equality Act 2010, DWP has a legal duty to make reasonable adjustments in all the following circumstances:

• when a disabled claimant is at a disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter in comparison with a non-disabled person, we must remove or alter what we do to avoid the disadvantage

• when providing a supporting aid would remove a disabled person’s substantial disadvantage in relation to a relevant matter, in comparison with a non-disabled person

• we should provide correspondence and information in a format that ensures the disabled person is not at a disadvantage when accessing our services.. For more information...Using email as a reasonable adjustment"

DWP Guidance: Using email as a reasonable adjustment

We can use email as a reasonable adjustment for a customer when other alternative format products are not suitable in meeting the customer’s needs.

Email may be appropriate if, for example, a customer is unable or finds it difficult to use:

• telephone because they are Deaf, hearing impaired, have no speech or have a mental health condition

• letter because they are blind, visually impaired or have a learning disability

• handwriting to fill in forms because of a physical disability such as Rheumatoid Arthritis, Parkinson’s Disease or a learning difficulty such as dyspraxia"

And I had to make a legal claim to make them use this policy! 

Issue 2: Refusing Consent Given in the Journal

The Jobcentre incorrectly insisted that I had to return a signed form by post to give consent for them to contact a third party (Cambridge City Council) to verify my identity. They refused to accept the consent I repeatedly gave in my journal, which their own guidance clearly states is a valid method.

Timeline of Events

  • 27 May 2025: I first give explicit consent in my journal for the DWP to contact my housing provider (the council) or my GP to verify my identity.
  • 4, 6, & 10 June 2025: I repeat this consent in my journal multiple times after being met with delays.
  • 5 June 2025: A manager, Sarah, rejects my journal consent, stating,
    "it is a requirement to have consent in writing. The letter should be with you shortly." [meaning hold your breath]
  • 10 June 2025: Another manager, Carla, reinforces this incorrect rule, stating that email
    "will not be accepted as confirmation of your consent or verify your identity"
    and that I must:
    "complete, sign and return the forms".
  • 25 June 2025: After weeks of delay, they finally act on the information provided by the council via email and my consent given in the journal, with Carla stating,
    "Your identity has been verified by using the Third Party Verification process as you requested."

The Contradiction

The DWP's own guidance on "Consent and disclosure" confirms that consent given in a claimant's journal is valid.

DWP Guidance: Consent and disclosure including when to share with third parties

"Explicit Consent can be given and withdrawn by the claimant using the most appropriate channel in their circumstances. This could be via: • their journal • in writing • by telephone • face-to-face"

I then then had my identity verified by writing and by email. 

Issue 3: Demanding a Work-Related Interview While Unfit for Work

The Jobcentre is currently insisting that I must attend a "Gateway" interview for self-employment before my claim can be processed. This contradicts their policy that a claimant who has been signed off sick and referred for a Work Capability Assessment (WCA) should not attend work-related interviews.

Timeline of Events

  • 5 April 2025: I declare that I have health problems and am unfit for work at the very start of my claim.
  • 1 July 2025: A UC50 form is sent to me, officially starting the WCA health journey.
  • 1 July 2025: On the very same day, a manager, Carla, insists I am
    "required to attend a Gateway appointment" and that my payments "will not be calculated and released until you have undertaken this appointment".
  • 18 July 2025: I am still having to formally complain in my journal that this interview should be cancelled as per DWP policy, as I have been signed off sick.
  • Status: Unresolved as of 19 July 2025.

The Contradiction

The DWP's guidance on "Periods of sickness and self-employment" states that when a claimant submits a fit note (SOFFW) and is referred for a WCA, they join the "health journey" and are subject to the rules of that journey, not work-related interviews.

Guidance: Periods of sickness and self-employment

"When a claimant has a long-term or severe health condition... they are allocated to the regime appropriate to their circumstances and if they are submitting a SOFFW, will join the health journey and are referred for a WCA."

This is the third time they are dragging their feet deliberately. This is called gatekeeping. I would call it stupidity. What else can I do but make this aas public as possible. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Day in the Journal: April 5th - The Broken System at Day One

A Day in the Journal: April 5th - The Broken System at Day One My Universal Credit claim began on April 5th, 2025. It began with a broken door. The very first, and most critical, step—verifying my identity—was an impossible task designed by a system that doesn't talk to itself. For nearly two hours, I was stuck in a loop, trying to use the GOV.UK Verify system as instructed by the Universal Credit portal. The system repeatedly failed, but I kept trying because the alternative it offered was a telephone call—a method of communication that is extremely difficult for me due to my disabilities. After completing every other section of the application, from housing to health, the system finally logged a crucial, but false, confirmation. The Ghost in the Machine At 11:16 PM on the night my claim was submitted, my Universal Credit journal was updated with a single, misleading line: Journal Entry: 5 Apr 2025 at 11:16pm "Confirm your identity completed" I...
Post a Comment
Read more

Watch failure - Cambridge Jobcentre Plus delays easy fix to housing

The Hidden Scandal: How Cambridge Jobcentre Ignored a Three-Month Mistake Welcome back to Universal Credit hell. Today, we are unpacking another lawless failure from my partner's journal—a simple mistake that Cambridge Jobcentre Plus allowed to cause three months of financial hardship, and a legal request they chose to ignore. The Problem: A Lie Written into the System The situation was straightforward. My partner lives in a shared house with three flatmates. But when Universal Credit calculated her housing costs, they didn't see flatmates. They saw "family members." This wasn't just a clerical error. It was a lie written into the system. It meant that because she was out of work, the DWP's calculation wrongly assumed her "family" would pay her share. Her flatmates were now financially responsible for her in the eyes of the DWP. A bigger problem is that nothing we said could make the Cambridge team understand this basic re...
Post a Comment
Read more

A Day in the Journal: June 10th - The Day My Consent Wasn't Good Enough

A Day in the Journal: June 10th - The Day My Consent Wasn't Good Enough The fight shifted. After the initial battle over my right to use email, Cambridge Jobcentre opened a new front in their war of attrition: consent. I was trying to follow their process. I was trying to get my ID verified via a third party. I was trying to give them the permission they needed. They had a choice: follow their own guidance, use common sense, or invent a new rule. On June 10th, 2025, they chose to invent a new rule. The New Roadblock In a message timed at 12:20 PM, a manager named Carla laid down the new law. She dismissed my repeated attempts to provide consent through my journal. She insisted on a single, slow, and unnecessary method. Direct quote from UC Journal: 10 Jun 2025 at 12:20pm "To progress your Third Party Verification request DWP requires you to complete, sign and return the forms via the return envelope supplied. Whilst email maybe your preferred option this w...
Post a Comment
Read more