1

Sanctions in Stockton

2

Contents

1. Introduction ......................................................................................................... 2

2. Benefit Sanctions – An Overview ............................................................................... 3

3. Scale of the issue .................................................................................................... 5

4. Who is getting sanctioned? ...................................................................................... 6

5. Survey Findings ....................................................................................................... 7

6. Impact of Sanctions ............................................................................................... 13

7. Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................ 15

................................................................... 19

________________________________________________________________________________

1. Introduction

This report was completed with the assistance of some members of the SWAN network who

agreed to jointly collect data.

Four organisations undertook questionnaires as part of this social policy project; Stockton and

District Advice and Information Service (SDAIS), Stockton Welfare Rights (SWR), Thirteen (formerly

Tristar) and Thrive. A copy of the questionnaire used is contained at appendix 1.

A total of 57 questionnaires were completed. In addition, statistical information was used from

the DWP Stat Xplore site and from partner organisations.

3

2. Benefit Sanctions – An Overview

Benefit sanctions are limitations to welfare benefits that are imposed on claimants who do not

follow the benefit rules. A Sanction means JobCentre Plus stops or reduces the claimant’s benefits for a

certain period.

Benefit Sanctions have been used to encourage action (e.g. to actively seek work) or to discourage

action (e.g. voluntarily leaving work, non-attendance at interviews). However, the scale and

depth of benefit sanctions have escalated over recent years. The most significant change

occurred with effect from October 2012 (for Job Seekers Allowance (JSA)) and December 2012 (for

Employment and Support Allowance (ESA).

There are three JSA sanction types: low level, intermediate level and higher level sanctions

Low level sanctions continue for a period of 4 to 13 weeks. Lower level sanctions result from:

Failing to participate in interviews

Failing to participate in a specified scheme for assisting people to obtain employment

Failing to carry out a jobseeker’s direction

Other training scheme or employment programme sanctions Intermediate Level sanctions are in essence a form of low level sanction. These sanctions last for

a period of 4 to 13 weeks. Intermediate sanctions result from:

Failing to be available for paid work

Failing to take all reasonable action to get paid work High level sanctions are generally imposed for a period of 13 weeks with subsequent sanctionable actions increasing the period to 26, then 156 weeks. High level sanctions can result from:

Failing to participate in Mandatory Work Activity

Failing to apply for or accept a job

A person ‘Neglecting to avail’ themselves of a job opportunity

Losing a job because of misconduct

Leaving a job voluntarily

The rate of the sanction is the full single person rate (currently £72.40 for a claimant aged 25 or

over). If only one member of a joint claim couple is sanctioned the other member of a couple can

claim the balance of the JSA couple rate (£41.30 a week). If the claimant is a single person, or if

both members of a couple are sanctioned they will receive no Job Seekers Allowance unless they

are entitled to a hardship payment. The amount available from a hardship payment is 60% of the

single person rate – that is £43.44 per week. Hardship payments are only paid where a client can

show they, or a member of their family, would suffer hardship or are particularly vulnerable.

4

In contrast to the previous scheme, sanctions under the post 2012 arrangements are fixed,

irrespective of action that caused the sanction.

Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) sanctions have existed since the benefit was introduced

in 2008, but over recent years (see chart 1) the number of adverse ESA sanctions decisions have

increased (an “adverse” decision is a decision to apply a sanction).

Though not approaching the extent of JSA sanctions, ESA sanctions have a significant impact on

claimants due to the increased amount of the sanction. Changes to sanctions from December

2012 have increased the average sanction for a single person by three and a half times ( from

£28.45 to £71.70 per week) leaving couples with £69.30 per week and single people £28.45 per

week.

ESA sanctions are linked to the need to comply with “Work Related Activity” (WRA) which the

legislation defines as “activity which makes it more likely that the person will obtain or remain in

work or be able to do so”6 . This includes activities like Work Focused Interviews, training sessions

and work experience.

Certain clients who have more significant levels of disability or long term health problems are

exempt from the requirement to undertake WRA and therefore are not liable for sanctions. To

be in this “Support group” claimants must demonstrate that they meet one of a series of

descriptors or that Work Related Activity would significantly worsen their health.

Another feature of the new regime is that ESA sanctions are, in effect, open ended until the

claimant complies with the requirement to undertake the relevant Work Related Activity.

In most cases, Job Centre Plus cannot impose a sanction if a client has good reason for their

behaviour/action.

0

5

10

15

20

25

20

08

10

(O

ct-0

8)

20

09

10

(O

ct-0

9)

20

10

10

(O

ct-1

0)

20

11

10

(O

ct-1

1)

20

12

10

(O

ct-1

2)

20

13

10

(O

ct-1

3)

Chart 1 Adverse ESA Sanctions Decisions in Stockton (DWP stats)

5

0.95

1

1.05

1.1

1.15

1.2

Au

g-1

1

Sep

-11

Oct

-11

No

v-1

1

Dec

-11

Jan

-12

Feb

-12

Mar

-12

Ap

r-1

2

May

-12

Jun

-12

Jul-

12

Au

g-1

2

Sep

-12

Oct

-12

No

v-1

2

Dec

-12

Jan

-13

Feb

-13

Mar

-13

Ap

r-1

3

May

-13

Jun

-13

Jul-

13

Au

g-1

3

Sep

-13

Oct

-13

No

v-1

3

Sanctions per claimant (Stockton)

3. Scale of the issue

The number of decisions to impose sanctions on benefit claimants in Stockton has increased significantly from 2012, as shown in Chart 1. The increase in enquiries about sanctions has been reported by a number of advice agencies in Stockton. Enquiries at SDAIS about sanctions show an increase in numbers; in 2009 SDAIS dealt with 94 JSA sanction enquiries; in 2013 this had increased to 330 enquiries.

There has also been a steady increase in the number of sanctions applied to an individual, as

shown in DWP statistics for sanctions per claimant in Stockton for 2011 to 2013.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Chart 1 - Total number of adverse JSA sanctions decisions (DWP -

calendar year)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 (blank)

Chart 2 - Number JSA sanctions enquiries - SDAIS

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

12000

2010 2011 2012 2013

Chart 3 - All CABx enquiries regarding sanctions - National

Chart 4 DWP statistics : sanctions per claimant (Stockton borough)

This has been reflected nationally, with a similar

increase in sanction enquiries reported by

Citizens Advice Bureaux throughout England

(Chart 3).

Chart 3 – All CABx enquiries regarding sanctions -

National

6

4. Who is getting sanctioned?

There is a direct correlation between areas of relative deprivation and sanctions. This is broadly demonstrated by the map showing the distribution of sanctions based on DWP statistics over the last calendar year.

Sanctions are mainly concentrated in the centre of the Borough. If sanctions were distributed evenly it would be expected that there would be a direct relation between the level of sanctions and the JSA caseload. However, sanctions do not appear to be distributed equally throughout the population. Comparing the numbers of sanctions to the caseload of Job Seekers as a whole it appears that claimants from some areas are sanctioned at disproportionately greater rates than others. Looking at the DWP statistics for February, May, August and December 2013 (being the four months where case load statistics were available) an analysis was made of the proportion of the caseload where sanctions had been made.

Map 2 All Adverse sanctions decisions 2013 (DWP statistics) Map 1 Areas of Deprivation

Map 3 Showing the Super Output Areas with the greatest

number of sanctions as a proportion of JSA Claimants

Map 3 shows cases where the average

proportion was 11% or more (the overall

proportion was 8%).

This appears to indicate an uneven bias

towards certain wards or areas in the

Borough where claimants are more likely

to be sanctioned, such as Billingham.

7

5. Survey Findings

5.1 Reasons for Sanctions

Surveyed clients were asked what reasons they had been given by the Job Centre for being

sanctioned. The most common reason given by clients was that the Job Centre did not

consider they had looked for enough jobs (44%), followed by failure to attend Work

Programme activities (25%). Only 1 client stated that no clear reason had been given for

being sanctioned, indicating that the majority of claimants are being clearly informed of the

reason for sanctions.

However, over three-quarters of clients (76%) considered that the sanction was not

reasonable and disputed it to some degree – 65% of clients said they disputed that it was

reasonable to be sanctioned for the reason given, and a further 12% said they disputed it “

partly”.

Not looking for enough jobs

44%

Not attending Work Programme

25%

Not attending interview/

appointment - 16%

Not attending training

12%

No clear reason given/other

4%

What reasons did Job Centre give for Sanctions?

Client comments:

“I knew I would be sanctioned as I didn’t have any bus fare to travel to Middlesbrough”

“I feel the information I gave them was satisfactory but they would not accept I had not

written them down. I have learning difficulties and am unable to read or write”

8

Only 19% of clients did not dispute the reasonableness of the application of the sanction in

any way. Clients were particularly likely to consider the sanction unreasonable where they

had been sanctioned for not attending training (86% of those sanctioned for this reason

considered it unreasonable) or not attending work programme activities (85%).

5.2 Knowledge about Sanctions

The survey demonstrated that clients have a low level of understanding about what actions

would lead to sanctions, with 51% of clients responding that they had little or no

understanding of what would trigger sanctions before they were actually sanctioned. Only

5% of clients said they “fully understood” what would trigger sanctions.

Yes 65%

No 19%

Only partly 12%

No response 4%

Dispute that it was reasonable decision to sanction?

Client comments:

“didn’t sign on as she was sectioned under the Mental Health Act”

“had done the job searches but forgot to log in so searches weren’t recognised”

“got dates mixed up as looked at wrong appointment letter”

“did not receive letter with the appointment”

“car broke down couldn’t ring as not got phone number”

“no record of my job search as there was a problem with the computer I was using”

“suffered a panic attack that day and couldn’t leave the house”

“had MRI Scan with son so unable to attend”

“part of the training was using the internet, which I can’t use cos that’s part of my bail

condition”

9

This lack of knowledge about what activities would be sanctioned may be due to the

information given to clients about the kind of things that would cause sanctions. In the

survey, 37% of clients said they had received no such information, with a further 19%

saying they had received some information. Only 19% of clients gave an unqualified “yes”

to the question of whether they had been given information about what could cause

sanctions.

Respondents who were given information were then asked if this information helped them

understand that sanctions could be applied and that this could mean that benefits would

be stopped.

Of those who responded, 63% thought that it did inform them about actions that would

result in sanctions and a further 19% thought it did in part. Only 19% thought it did not

inform them. Over a third of clients said the information provided did not help them

understand that benefits may be stopped if they were sanctioned.

Understood fully 5%

Understood well 19%

Some idea 14%

Little understanding

25%

No knowledge 25%

No response 12%

Before you were sanctioned, how well did you understand the things which would trigger sanctions?

Yes 19%

Partly 19%

No 37%

No response 25%

Were you given information about things that cause sanctions?

10

5.3 Information about the Sanctions

Clients were then asked if they had been informed that the Job Centre intended to sanction

them. Two thirds of clients indicated the information was not provided or clear.

30% of clients said they had not been informed about the intention to sanction them and a

further 34% said the information had been not clear. Only just over a quarter (27%)

considered that they had been clearly informed about the intention to sanction them.

A similar number reported that they did not get a letter telling them why they had been

sanctioned (32%), whilst of those who got a letter, 34% thought it was not clear about why

they had been sanctioned.

63%

50%

19%

13%

19%

38%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

where failure to attend would result insanction

that benefit would be stopped ifsanctioned

Yes

Partly

No

Not told at all 30%

not clear 22% Fairly unclear

11%

Fairly clear 18%

Very clear 9%

No response 11%

How clear was information telling you of intention to sanction?

Information about Sanctions – did it help you understand?

11

Clients were also asked to comment on letters they had received explaining the sanctions. It

appears from responses that many claimants (around a third of the respondents) had not

received a decision letter at the point where they had approached the organisations that

completed the survey. 60% of individuals who said they had received letters found them not

very clear or fairly unclear. One respondent reported that he had not understood the letter

because he couldn’t understand it due to his learning disabilities.

The 17 respondents who indicated that they had not received a letter were asked how they

found out they had been sanctioned. 8 clients said that they had only found out when they

found payment had stopped in their accounts; the remainder of respondents had first been

told by their advisor at DWP.

One respondent reported the Job Centre advisor said no letter would be sent out as they

didn’t warn people about sanctions.

Just over half (56%) of clients stated they had been informed by the DWP about Hardship

Payments, but only 14% said they had been advised that Housing Benefit/Council Tax

support could also be stopped.

The survey also asked if clients were advised about Hardship Payments and that

No letter 31%

Not very clear 18%

Fairly unclear 16%

Fairly clear 23%

Very clear 5%

No response 7%

How clear was the letter informing you of your sanction?

Client Comments:

“when I went to the bank there was no money in account”

“I was informed in the JC when signing on but did not receive the sanction letter was

told would receive”

“money did not come to bank. Phoned JC and told about sanction”

12

5.4 Appeals against Sanctions

Information about a client’s right to appeal against sanctions was only clearly understood by

19% of respondents, with over a third (35%) stating they were not informed and a further

39% saying they received information but it was not clear.

Yes 56%

No 40%

No response

4%

Informed about Hardship Payments?

Yes 40%

No 11%

No response

49%

Worried about rent or Council Tax arrears?

No information 35%

Not very clear 35%

Fairly unclear 4%

Fairly clear 14%

Very clear 5%

No response 7%

How clear was information about rights to challenge sanction decision?

Yes 14%

No 72%

No response

14%

Informed that Housing Benefit/ Council Tax support could stop?

When a sanction decision stops payment of

JSA, the Housing Benefit Department is

informed. As Housing Benefit (and Local

Council Tax Support) is generally paid when

Income Based JSA is in payment, without

further information regarding the claimant’s

financial situation ceasing or reason for JSA

Housing Benefit Department can stop

HB/LCTS payment even though the client

may actually still be eligible.

13

The majority of respondents did not know that they also had the right to go to an

independent tribunal to challenge the sanction decision, with only 7% saying they were

aware of this.

6. Impact of Sanctions

6.1 Financial Impact

The survey also asked people who had been sanctioned about the impact it had and what

people had done to cope financially during the period of the sanction. A majority of

respondents reported that the sanctions had resulted in financial problems for them, with

77% reporting a negative impact on their financial situation.

Yes 7%

No 54%

No response 39%

Did you know you can appeal to tribunal?

How did the Sanction affect your financial situation?

“have no money to pay bills, buy food etc”

“difficult to get to library to search for jobs”

“particularly worried about food and electric”

“in rent arrears and facing eviction”

“panic attacks worse when under financial strain”

“reliant on parents for money”

“got into debt with Council Tax, gas, rent”

“no money to buy food – very stressed out”

“unable to pay bills, buy essentials such as food. Borrowing money from friends and

family. Worried about losing home due to rent arrears”

14

Eleven clients (19%) reported that they were having problems with rent arrears and four

stated that they were facing court action and eviction. When asked what action they were

taking to cope financially, 41% of respondents said they had stopped paying bills and 41%

had used a Food Bank or other emergency food relief service.

6.2 Family Impact

Respondents were asked if the imposition of sanctions had impacted on their family

situation. 30% of respondents reported a negative impact; there were no reports of positive

impact.

The most frequent response was concern from clients about having to seek support from

other family members and how this had caused relationship strain – this was referred to in

16% of cases.

How did the Sanction affect your Family Circumstances?

“Living off money designated for children”

“caused arguments between myself and partner”

“asked help from family. Parents both are not well health wise. I felt I am an extra burden on them”

6.3 Health and Wellbeing Impact

Over half of respondents (54%) considered that the benefit sanction had a negative impact

on their health or the health of other family members.

Stopped paying bills 31%

Food parcels/food

bank 41%

Borrow off family/friends

41%

Contacted Back on Track

5%

Used Savings 3% Took out more

debt/credit - 0%

Which of the following did you try to cope financially during period of sanction?

15

The most frequent health problem reported was related to stress, with 38% of all clients

stating that the sanction had caused or exacerbated stress, worry or depression.

There were also reports relating to food and diet, with 12% of clients referring to a negative

impact the sanction had on eating.

How did the Sanction affect your Health and Wellbeing? On Mental Health

“Caused lots of stress and anxiety”

“Very stressed out.”

“Stressed out due to not having money and needing to be reliant on parents”

On Diet

It has caused me to be even more depressed and abuse alcohol more than before I was sanctioned”

“Caused me and partner to be depressed. Not eating enough having to skip meals”

“Had not realised was pregnant and not eating properly”

“Stressed from worrying and not eating well as having to borrow food and rely on family”

7. Conclusions and Recommendations

The survey indicates that there are a number of issues of concern associated with both the

administration of sanctions and the impact that sanctions may have on claimants and their

families.

Evidence from the survey indicates that there are elements of the administration of

sanctions that may benefit from further review.

At an early stage, claimants do not appear to universally understand what actions may make

them liable to be sanctioned, or what the impact of such sanctions could be.

Recommendations:- When the Claimant Commitment is signed, claimants should be given clear information about:

- the actions that may precipitate sanctions; - how information about sanctions, or threat of sanctions will be communicated; - what sanctions for JSA would mean for other benefits and clients should be given

sufficient opportunity to fully understand and agree the Commitment.

16

Whilst the vast majority of clients understood at the time of the survey why they had been

sanctioned, there does appear to be a lack of consistency in how claimants are informed that

a sanction may be, or has been, imposed, with only 27% of respondents considering that

they had been clearly informed of the intention to sanction.

Recommendation:- The procedure for informing clients of the intention for them to be sanctioned be reviewed to ensure claimants are clearly informed at the earliest possible opportunity.

Early and clear information to clients about the reasons for sanctions may go some way to

reducing the high proportion of claimants who felt it was not reasonable for them to have

been sanctioned. It may also save time (and aggravation/frustration) for all parties if there

was an opportunity at an early stage to consider the action that could lead to a sanction and

for claimants to be given an opportunity to provide explanations or evidence which may

negate the need for, or suitability of, a sanction.

Recommendations:- Claimants be given an opportunity to present evidence as early as possible if they dispute the appropriateness of a sanction.

The opportunity for early resolution should not obscure the need evidenced from the survey

that people who have been sanctioned should be given clear information about:

- their rights to appeal decisions they disagree with;

- how they may get support or advice on the appeals process and the merit of any appeal.

Recommendation:- The information used to advise claimants of their right to appeal and sources of support, be reviewed to ensure it is clear and comprehensive.

There also appears to be a need to ensure clients are fully informed about the impact of

sanctions and that any negative effects are minimised. In particular, the potential loss of

other benefits or support, notably Housing Benefit and Local Council Tax Support, should be

clearly explained to clients together with practical steps that can be taken to reduce the

likelihood of this occurring.

Recommendation: - that claimant be clearly advised about potential impact of sanctions on other

benefits/support; - that Job Centre Plus and Housing Benefit/LCTS departments consider how

information can be shared to ensure clients continue to receive their benefits where eligible.

The benefit of giving claimants clear and consistent information is clearly highlighted by the

significant negative effects of sanctions expressed by respondents. The evidence suggests

17

that the consequences of sanctions are considerable and far-reaching. This is not just for

claimants, but also for their family and potentially the wider community.

The financial impact of sanctions revealed in this survey seems to echo the results of a

survey by Manchester CAB, which found that 80% of respondents said they had got into debt

as a result of sanctions.

The health consequences of sanctions appear considerable and are likely to impact

disproportionately upon poorer and more vulnerable people as they will have fewer

resources to fall back on; only 4% of respondents said they had coped with the effect of

sanctions by use of savings.

Recommendation:- Further work be done to assess the full impact of sanctions on the health and wellbeing and financial situation of claimants, with particular reference to the needs of vulnerable people.

The information provided by respondents indicates that there could be significant longer

term repercussions from the imposition of sanctions and the inability of claimants to

manage the subsequent reduction in their income. The impacts on family, diet and mental

health are referred to in a large number of cases and suggest that there could be a wide

range of secondary problems arising from sanctions which should be considered.

Recommendation:- Further consideration given to how it can be identified where sanctions may have an unreasonable negative impact on claimants, or their family or other vulnerable persons and how this could be avoided or reduced.

18

This Social Policy report was co-ordinated by the Stockton Welfare Advice Network (SWAN) and

included information provided through a number of agencies who are part of SWAN. These

agencies were:-

Stockton & District Advice & Information Service

Stockton on Tees Council Welfare Rights Team

Thirteen

Thrive

19

YOUR COMMENTS NEEDED ABOUT SANCTIONS PROBLEMS Age UK, Harbour, Mind, SDAIS/CAB, Stockton Welfare Rights, Tadea, Thirteen Group and Thrive are working

together to obtain views to help us with our work to influence rules in connection with Sanctions. Information you

include about your experience of sanctions will be used anonymously to highlight problems caused by sanctions.

Your Age and Postcode

Your postcode or ward ……………………………………. Your Age ………….

About the Sanction

What reasons did Job Centre Plus give for sanctioning you?:

No clear reason Said I didn’t look for enough jobs Said I

didn’t attend training

Said I didn’t attend work programme Said I didn’t attend a work focused interview Other

(detail) …………………………………………………………………………………………………

……........................………………………………..……………………………………………

Do you dispute that it was reasonable to sanction you for the above reason? Yes/No/only

partly

If you felt the sanction was not reasonable why was this: …………………………………….

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………

If you want to appeal but have not done so we recommend that you seek advice

What you knew about sanctions

Before you were sanctioned, how well did you understand the things which trigger sanctions? Understood fully Understood well Had some idea Had little understanding Did not know

at all

Were you given information by the job centre/work programme staff about the

kind of things that cause sanction? Yes/No/only partly

If yes did this information help you understand

i. When a failure to attend work programme (e.g. Avanta/Triage)

would result in a sanction occurring Yes/No/only

partly

ii. That your benefit would be stopped completely if you were

sanctioned. Yes/No/only

partly

Information given to you about the sanction

How clear was the information telling you that the Job Centre was intending to sanction you?

Did not get told at all Not very clear fairly unclear fairly clear very clear How clear was the letter telling you why you had been sanctioned?

Did not get a letter at all Not very clear fairly unclear fairly clear very clear

20

If you did not get a letter that helped you understand you had been sanctioned, how did out find out

about the

sanction?....………………………………….……….………………….……………………

……………………………………………………………………………..…………………………

…..

………………………………………………………………………..………………………………

…. Please turn over

Information given to you about the sanction continued …

Did the department tell you that you might be able to claim a hardship payment? Yes /No

If you were told about hardship payments how helpful was the information given?

Not helpful at all fairly unhelpful fairly helpful very helpful

Did the Job Centre tell you that Housing Benefit/Council Tax Support would stop? Yes /No

If no how did you find out: Did not know before today My Landlord told me

A friend/Relative told me Other (who) : …………………………………………..

Are you worried that you will have rent or council Tax arrears as a result? Yes /No

Information about appealing

How clear was the information about your rights to challenge the sanction decision?

No information at all Not very clear fairly unclear fairly clear very clear

Did you know that if the Job Centre Plus does not change your decision when you challenge it,

that you can appeal to an independent tribunal? Yes /No

Coping Financially

Which of the following did you try to cope financially during the period of the sanction? (tick

all)

Borrow off family/friends stopped paying bills contacted Back on track

Took out further debt/credit Lived off savings Food parcels/food bank

Other (specify) …………………………………………………………………………….

Did you have any problems accessing help from this source (detail):

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Effect of the Sanction How did the sanction effect your:

Financial Situation ……………………………………………………………………..……………..

21

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

..

…………………………...…………………………………...………………………………………

…

Family circumstances …………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………...…………………………………...………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

…..

Health and Wellbeing

..…………………………………………………………………………………

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………

..

………………………………………………………………………………………………………....

..

THANK YOU FOR YOUR HELP

ORGANISATION REF : ………………………………