7 Effect of claiming
7.1 Effect of process
Throughout the interviews with claimants, and in the small number of interviews with supporters, people told us about some of the effects of engaging with the claiming process – how they felt about procedures in which they had taken part and what they had to do. They spoke about some of the costs they incurred (Section 7.1.1) and some of the beneficial effects to do with the process (Section 7.1.2). There are also some perspectives from staff, for example, from talking to people on the telephone. There are also some findings from staff about the effect of the delivery process on themselves.
7.1.1 Costs of claiming
Costs of claiming, identified by claimants and supporters, included: • time expenditure;
• financial expense;
• negative emotional effect.
The overall time involved for people claiming PIP varied, according to how long each part of the process took (as described in earlier chapters). The strongest criticism was made about the time between attending an assessment and receiving a decision letter. While there was a general feeling of dissatisfaction with the length of time taken for the whole claiming process to be completed, few claimants reported actual, tangible negative effects. Some delays were outside the influence of both claimants and Disability Benefits Centre staff, such as waiting for appointments with medical or advice staff, or waiting for health professionals to respond to requests for medical reports.
Case managers said that they dealt with some professional support workers who expressed annoyance about the time involved for them. This was particularly related to claims made under Special Rules, where some professionals who regularly supported claims said that going through the standard telephony script wasted their time. Case workers and case managers had to deal with claimants who telephoned the helpline or the PIP claim line who were frustrated about the length of time their claim was taking. They said it was often puzzling and frustrating for such people when delivery staff could give them no firm time parameters for expecting a decision. In telephone calls following a letter of disallowance, some claimants said that going for their appointment with the assessor had taken up a whole day for themselves and their supporter.
It was not just the length of time claimants spent on the process that affected people. Case workers said that finding an appropriate time to make a telephone call was sometimes not easy for people, for example, if they were at work or had other commitments for large parts of the day, or if a time had to be found when a claimant and supporter could be together to manage a call.
Some of the financial costs for claimants have been described in previous chapters. Costs of telephoning the helpline and keeping mobile phones running to get incoming calls were reported to case workers when they spoke to claimants. Delivery staff were aware that such costs were increased if there were failures in their telephone systems (discussed further in Chapter 8). It was not only phone calls to tyhe Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) that contributed to the expense of claiming – there was evidence from both claimants and delivery staff that some people had to make calls to family or friends who supported their claim, GPs and hospitals, health professionals in the community and supporters in third sector organisations.
Going to their assessment appointment meant considerable travel expenses for some claimants and their supporters, which most claimants in the sample had not had reimbursed (most were not even aware that travel costs could be reimbursed).
Negative emotional effects for some claimants have been described in previous chapters. The claiming process, or particular stages of it, could be stressful or upsetting for some who found difficulty in understanding what was required of them or found questions embarrassing, intrusive or insensitive.
Such emotional effects for some claimants and some people supporting them were
recognised by call centre and delivery staff, from their telephone conversations with them. Additionally, call centre staff sometimes perceived concerns and embarrassment of people who found telephone discussion hard, because they had learning difficulties, could not concentrate, could not answer questions, or had to ask staff to say things again.
In group discussions with staff, job satisfaction and the emotional effect of the nature of work involved in delivering PIP were discussed. The call centre staff who took part said that, in general, they thought that workplace morale was quite high. They were trained to deliver a telephony service, and although they had suggestions for improvement in their script (discussed in Chapter 3) they were generally maintaining job satisfaction. Negative emotional effect was most frequently related to discussions with terminally ill people and their families.
Delivery staff in Disability Benefits Centres who took part in discussions, however, described general low morale and loss of job satisfaction. Key factors contributing to this included: • levels of claimants’ frustration and anger, related particularly to claimants’ lack of
information about the progress of their claim; negative experiences of assessment, and length of processing time;
• inability to answer claimants’ questions for example about their assessment, or how long it would take to get a decision;
• emotional effect of dealing with very ill or terminally ill people and their families;
• inconsistencies in service that staff perceived throughout the process, as they looked for solutions they could not find in guidance or dealt with matters not included within their training;
• continued experience of system failure, and perceived inadequacies in scanning procedures;
• having no sense of professional ‘ownership’ or overall responsibility for delivery of a benefit, which would bring some satisfaction in achieving goals;
• pressures of backlogs of work, and concerns about anticipated introduction of performance targets linked to quantified ‘task objectives’.
7.1.2 Beneficial effect of process
Positive experiences during the claiming process, as reported by claimants, have been discussed in earlier chapters.
With only one or two exceptions, the staff of call centres were described positively as
‘friendly’, ‘polite’, ‘helpful’ and ‘understanding’. Some claimants explained how welcome and encouraging such treatment was. The initial telephone calls were also largely unproblematic for claimants, with some commenting on how (unexpectedly) quick these calls had been. Experiences of the assessment by an Atos or Capita assessor were more mixed, but there were few complaints about the personal manner of the assessor. In contrast some claimants made positive, complimentary comments (as reported in Chapter 5).
There were also positive experiences for delivery staff, when claimants expressed thanks, appreciation, said they understood what they had been told or what was happening. Staff also said they thought average processing times were gradually shortening, which made them hopeful that improvements in delivery were beginning to have some effect. There was a general view that a rigorous review of guidance and training, some further training in dealing with people in very difficult circumstances, and technical improvement in the system would be beneficial in raising morale and job satisfaction.