(No Ratings Yet)
Loading ...Taken from Watching A4e’s Two Memoranda article:
A4e says that it has introduced a procedure whereby 50% of all claims are routinely checked by an independent team which phones the employer to verify that the client is working there, and can check with the Jobcentre that the client is off benefit.
Whats the point of getting an independent team to check just half of the claims to see if they are genuine?
This may seem like they are making steps to prevent this happening, however, Emma Harrison stated on her blog:
I have personally tried to find out more about employee fraud. (A4e has many audit and risk management people who are experts in this). I have been informed that the instance of employee fraud in all companies is thought to run at a startling 5%.
So how is checking 50% of claims going to stop the 5% of fraud from the other 50%?
Shouldn’t A4e internally be contacting employers and Jobcentre Plus before making the claim?
The A4e website claims they have over 3100 employees… using the above benchmark it means 155 employees are potentially fraudulent or 1 in 20.
Its too easy with such a large margin of missing (whether incidentially or intentionally) the fraudulent claim cases.
the independant team, how are they paid, selected, do they get money from the state, which loves a4e and their ilk.. and dont want to see anything wrong with them. Or do they get paid from a4e, who dont want to find a problem which may stop them getting more money..
Itm would be interesting to see any links this independant body has with others.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I would also be interested who this independent team is.
Like or Dislike:
2 
0
well reading it lots of red tape talk.., on section 3.9, it says a4e has set them up. how could they be independent, if the company they are investigating are their employers. i quote 3.9
A4e has created an independent team who, as a matter of normal operational practice, check 50% of all job outcomes claimed across all contracted employment provision directly with the employer. This entails telephoning an employer to verify the detail of a job outcome claim, ie they are employing one of our clients. In the event that the employer is not able to verify the information in the Job Outcome claim a number of further checks, including off-benefit checks are triggered. If further checks highlight evidence of non compliance with procedures, appropriate disciplinary action will be taken. In cases of proven fraud this will lead to dismissal for gross misconduct and prosecution.
Like or Dislike:
1 
0
I got a temp job for a few weeks while at a4e southport i have asked jcp for data on me from my time at a4e ie the form that they sent to jcp about my job, i want to see if they claimed i had a full time job. it has been 100 days now since the data request i have had nowt. Pauline Hughes, Data Protection Officer for Merseyside Jobcentre Plus was emailing me but now she just ignors my emails. i made a complaint to southport job center about it it has been 4 weeks since my letter of complaint heard nowt !!!!by there rules they should have got in touch with me in 10 days……. THE TRUTH WILL COME OUT SAYING THAT EMMA LOVE I NO THE TRUTH TELL US ABOUT THE INVESTIGATION IN MERSEYSIDE ?????????????????????????????????
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Considering how few people A4e clients get a job anyway, you’d have thought they could check every claim.
I note Emma says employee fraud is running at 5% across the board. But in the welfare to work industry, which still like the Wild West, I would imagine it is much higher than 5%.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
what complete and utter tosh,while numbers continue to grow in the number of unemployed,highly profitable for A4e the taint that has followed this company continues to fester away behind the scenes “fraud”.
what environment is this to place people looking for work.
the unemployed don’t trust them,now they don’t trust themselves’ with a whistleblower policy installed. come on this reaks of a company that’s out of control and not able to deal with the considerable problems it faces,firefighting its way from one crisis scandal to the next.what is their recruitment process,background checks on those who deal with the public purse.
the system in place given the failures isn’t working,and judging whats been commented in regard to this organisation a complete and utter overhaul is necessary in the interests of both the taxpayer the unemployed.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
background checks..the A4e that i went to our placement officer was in court for glassing some poor soul in the face. The skills tutor was in our local paper he used to be an ambulance man before a4e he got the sack for lie about his qualifications he said he had 5 a levels or somthing like that http://www.maghullstar.co.uk/maghull-aintree-news/maghull-aintree-breaking-news/2009/02/06/north-west-ambulance-paramedic-struck-off-after-lying-about-qualifications-101022-22872936/.. when it came out in our local paper he seen us reading it called us all in the room he said his mate made them for him on the computer, he said he had better qualifications. then strait after he told us, he was teaching Interview Technique, typicall A4e i will try find the link for our placement office
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Thats naughty lying qualifications but what difference does it make if a paramedic has any of them qualifications at all?
What subjects could they be?
history….. of no help whatsoever
geography….. of no help whatsoever
english lit. ….. of no help whatsoever
religious education….. of no help whatsoever
art….. of no help whatsoever
economics….. of no help whatsoever
business studies….. of no help whatsoever
french….. of no help whatsoever
german….. of no help whatsoever
spanish….. of no help whatsoever
woodwork….. of no help whatsoever
etc.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
with these statements it not surprising there is fraud,people with this reputation should not be allowed to work with vulnerable people.
when on new deal those that were on community service and through the parole office were not allowed to handle the days takings or till work,i was given the days takings on new deal and had to handle the cash through the town to the bank frequently although i wasnt happy about doing this.any thing that was seen as non compliance there was a swift phone call to the new deal provider.
it looks as if a certain company is little more then a “cowboy outfit” with no standards,no reputation other then being a “no good”.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
http://www.whoisincourt.com/view_story.php?id=1629
Like or Dislike:
0 
0