DWP Policy Paper Under Fire for Ignoring Coroner’s Concerns on Disabled Woman’s Universal Credit Review

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) is facing criticism for overlooking the concerns raised by a coroner regarding the review of a disabled woman’s universal credit claim in its latest policy paper on benefit fraud.

The policy paper outlines various measures aimed at tackling fraud in the social security system, including targeted case reviews of universal credit claims to address fraud and error.

Despite claiming to have robust safeguards in place, DWP admitted to crucial errors in handling the claim of Naz Anderson, a disabled woman from Melton Mowbray whose death was linked to failings within the universal credit system.

Following Anderson’s tragic death after a targeted review of her claim, Coroner Fiona Butler highlighted six missed opportunities by DWP to record her vulnerability and act on her mental distress during the review process.

The policy paper, however, makes no mention of Anderson’s case or the coroner’s concerns, raising questions about the effectiveness of DWP’s safeguards.

DWP’s plans to extend enhanced reviews to other benefits, including Personal Independence Payment (PIP), are also under scrutiny in light of the missed opportunities in Anderson’s case.

Furthermore, the proposed use of artificial intelligence for financial surveillance on benefit claimants through their bank accounts has sparked concerns among disabled campaigners and activists.

Campaigners argue that the new powers, if implemented, could lead the UK into another scandal akin to the Horizon case, jeopardizing privacy and rights.

Mikey Erhardt from Forbes Burton cautioned against the government’s push for untested and potentially invasive measures, urging for a system built on respect and support for claimants.

With the pending fraud bill in the next parliament, which includes powers for DWP fraud investigators to make arrests and seize possessions, the debate on balancing fraud prevention and safeguarding vulnerable claimants continues.

As debates on the evolving social security landscape unfold, the need for transparency, accountability, and respect for claimants’ rights remains paramount.