Jeg sendte en ny e-post til ICE

Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>

---

Restricted Personal Data

---

Erik Ribsskog <eribsskog@gmail.com>	Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:43 PM
To: DWP ICE gateway team <ICE@dwp.gsi.gov.uk>
Hi, thank you for your e-mail! I answer by e-mail, since I had some problems, with the phone-call, in an earlier ICE-complaint, against the same Jobcentre. Hope this is ok! To the complaint: I also think that we have the complaint, that Mr. Winther, jobcentre-manager, didn't inform me about the meeting there, in 14/7. I only went there to have a sign on-meeting, so I was un-prepared, for the sanction-meeting. (And Mr. Winter had a meeting like that again, on Thursday last week, where he just 'grabs' hold of me, to have a meeting, in stead of telling me in advance, that he want's a meeting). I think they shouldn't have sign on-meetings and other meetings mixed up. Because, when they have two meetings, after each other, (and sometimes three), without a break, then one loses one consentration more, in the latter meetings. Also, I think this is a sign of dis-respect, to have these un-scheduled meetings. Because job-seekers also have schedules, even if they are un-employed. And it says in the Jobcentre 'Our Services Standards', that job-seekers should expect to be treated with respect. And I don't think that Mr. Winther treats me with respect, when he grabs hold of me, for un-scheduled meetings, like I explained about, in complaint 4, in my e-mail to you, from 23/7. So I think this should be added, in a complaint F. Regarding 'A'. I was told that I was going to have an Employment Zone-meeting, on 3/6, (on the sign on meeting a fourthnight before). But, I didn't really know what Employement Zones was. So I felt a bit socialy alienatied, actually. I didn't know what kind of meeting it would be. So I think I should have been given the information-pack before 3/6, so to not feel socialy alienated and confused/frustrated, (because I couldn't find about Employment Zones on the internet eighter). Regarding 'B'. The sanction have now been over-turned, (after an appeal by me). And Mr.Winter has written in a letter, that the Employement Zones Jobcentre-representative, would have marked the right address in the folder. But she didn't. (So this is two complaints. The jobcentre-representative, didn't mark the right address. And, the Sencia-folders are a bit confusing, (for people who are stressed, since they go to many meetings), since they have many addresses in them). I said in the meeting, on 3/6, that I chose Sencia, because it was close to my home address. (It's really becuse Read are involved in my employment-case against Bertelsmann, but I didn't want to bring up that, then, since it would have taken a long time to explain). So the Jobcentre-worker must have understood I meant Sencia Pall Mall, I think. Still she failed to inform me, in the meeting, that it was Sencia Hanover St., which was the right office. Mr. Winter has also written to me, and said that the jobcentre-worker from 3/6, should have given me the Sencia referal-letter. But this I wasn't given. I just noted the time, for the Sencia-meeting in my calendre/'filofax', when I was told the time. And then, the referal-letter, was sent to me, in the post. So I think the Jobcentre-advisor, understood I was going to Pall Mall, but failed to correct me, (almost as if to 'mob'/trick me, I'm sorry to have to say). So I think there should be at least a couple more complaints, from what I wrote above. Do you want me to define them, or do you want me to re-view a new complaint-definition, that you make yourselves? Thank you in advance for the help! Best regards, Erik Ribsskog On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 2:06 PM, DWP ICE gateway team <ICE@dwp.gsi.gov.uk> wrote: Mr Erik Ribsskog ** Address removed for email * 29 September 2010 ICE Ref No: DWP00431/10 Dear Mr Ribsskog Further to our telephone conversation of 27 September 2010, I am writing to clarify the elements of complaint we agreed to take forward. From your correspondence I have clarified your complaints as follows; A: On 20 May 2010 Jobcentre Plus (JCP) informed you that you would have to attend an interview on 3 June 2010. It failed to inform you that this was regarding ‘Employment Zones’ or to provide you with the correct literature regarding this. As a result you were not prepared when attending the meeting. B: The literature that you received from Sencia (Your Employment Zone provider) contained three different addresses. This caused you to miss an appointment and as a result your Jobseekers Allowance (JSA) was stopped. JCP has failed to fully investigate this. C: JCP has informed you that a degree you obtained from Oslo University was the equivalent of HND level 4. You have advised that it should be level 5 but it has failed to fully investigate this. D: On 1 July 2010 you were asked to attend a meeting at Williamson Square Jobcentre at 11.15 on 14 July 2010. When attending this appointment you were informed that you should have been there at 9.30. E: You have asked JCP to clarify why you were interviewed by two people instead of one at the above meeting. It has failed to provide a satisfactory response. I confirm the elements of complaint detailed above will form the basis of our examination. If you agree that your complaint has been accurately defined please contact me as soon as possible, it would be preferable if you could telephone me to avoid any delay. If you feel this letter does not accurately reflect your complaint, please contact me by 13 October 2010. We have accepted these complaints on the basis that they have not been the subject of legal proceedings or an Ombudsman’s investigation. If this is not the case, you must tell me. Likewise, if you decide to take this action during our investigation, please notify us. If I do not hear from you by 13 October 2010, I will assume your complaint has been accurately defined, and your complaint will be passed to the Initial Action Team. Please note that we are currently experiencing a high volume of complaints, and I hope you will understand that we deal with complaints in the order that we receive them to ensure that we provide a consistent level of service. Your complaint is currently held in a queue, and as soon as a Resolution Officer is available to start the examination of your complaint, he or she will contact you direct to discuss your complaint, and determine the way forward. You will be given the opportunity, if necessary, to provide this office with any further information or evidence in relation to your complaint. You will not hear from this office until your case has been allocated to a Resolution Officer, but please be assured that your complaint will be dealt with as soon as possible. Yours sincerely Martin Bruce Gateway Officer Independent Case Examiner's Office Tel 0151 801 8824 Fax No 0151 801 8806 ********************************************************************** This document is strictly confidential and is intended only for use by the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or other action taken in reliance of the information contained in this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Any views expressed by the sender of this message are not necessarily those of the Department for Work and Pensions. If you have received this transmission in error, please use the reply function to tell us and then permanently delete what you have received. This email was scanned for viruses by the Department for Work and Pensions' anti-virus services and on leaving the Department was found to be virus free. Please note: Incoming and outgoing e-mail messages are routinely monitored for compliance with our policy on the use of electronic communications. **********************************************************************

---