And So it Goes..#687

In 26 days time ( at the time of posting  this blog ) ,Her Majesty’s Courts & Tribunal Service ( HMCTS ) will grant my Appeal against the Job Seekers Allowance ( JSA ) Sanction imposed on me by the Department of Work & pensions in May for what they misleadingly termed my  ” failure to attend ” a Mandatory work Activity Placement back in April 27th.  Under any circumstances ,curtailing the £ 72 a week JSA for 13 weeks is a brutal ,nasty and vindictive thing for the State to inflict on an unemployed person ,especially one with no other means of support . That amount of JSA is what ,according to the DWP itself says ” is the amount the Law says you need to live on “. So,replacing 13 x £ 72 with 11 x £ 43 ” Hardship ” payments for the State’s imposed 13 weeks long period of Sanction must,logically be a good deal LESS than what the previously cited Law decides you need to live on . Not according to the self same DWP which announces at the top of their letter confirming that you are entitled to ” Hardship ” payments – they cite the same phrase that this new £ 43 a week is what the Law decides  is the amount you need to live on. And all of that is merely the Prelude to virtual economic apartheid and subjugation at the behest of the State ,where even the most paltry means of economic survival and social inclusion are forced below the level of penury and destitution. And why is that ? Well, my 2 page appeal letter , (versus the DWP’s official 32 pages of reply to my Appeal,)will bring this farce to an end on October 1st. ” The term  ” Failure to participate ” is not defined in Law “,according to the DWP’s own 32 pages long submission to HMCTS !!  ” The term ” Good Reason ” is not defined in Law ” ,again according to the DWP’s same 32 pages  long submission to HMCTS. And what is a ” Good Reason ” supposed to entail ? Good Reason is what the DWP demands from you ,in writing no less ,in order for a Decision maker to peruse your explanation as to why he/she ought not to sanction you for ” Failing to Participate “. You see your Good Reason answers  the ” Doubt ” the DWP received via my MWA Placement Providers,Interserve with whom several senior DWP officials have along term financially corrupt relationship. Interserve for their morally abject part passed on a report from their own financially-corrupt partners,the MWA placement hosts Flutterbuys charity shop,part of the even more corrupt Wakefield and District Housing & Community Services Ltd charity.  Alas , the DWP Decision Maker issued the Sanction against me 3 days before receiving my officially required Good Reason in Writing without which he/she cannot actually make a decision. You’re getting the picture now ? It also turns out ,many months down the line , that the original report from Frau Ilse Koch-Mitchell,the £ 38k. charity shop manager had actually filed a misleading and dishonest report about me to Interserve . And so we come to the Information Commissioner’s Office. Kafka has nothing on these guys.My most recent emails show that :- 04 September 2015 Case Reference Number RFA0587408 Dear Mr Kasatkin, I am writing in response to your email of 21 August. 

 Sep 4 at 10:40 AM

Louis Kasatkin


Sep 4 at 11:02 AM
Thank you for your observation and comments. Let me know if I’ve understood you correctly. You have told me ,in short,that any organisation -in this instance three, ,a charity ,a work placement provider and the DWP- are lawfully entitled to record ,process and use lies and misinformation for the purposes of getting me sanctioned.Are you telling me  that an organisation is not required to check whether the information it has on me ( and which it  records ,processes and uses that information ) is in fact truthful ? they are allowed to say whatever they want without any recourse for me to challenge them ?Your opening statement makes no sense whatsoever “the statement that you have provided us with appears to be based on an opinion and is unlikely to be factually inaccurate. ” That’s the point ;they are using lies and misinformation and that is not an opinion.
Bizarrely the ICO states
” You can also ask an organisation to stop sharing information about you However, they only have to do so where the sharing causes you unjustified damage or distress.”
Figure that one out !!!  Yes they can actually denounce you on the basis of outright lies and disinformation !!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s