I've just had a response from JCPlus and the SAR is in hand and DP issues being looked at, AND I have just had a letter from A4Greed confirming my appointment BUT - it is with Framework Housing but on A4Greed paperwork with FH address details. So, a little confused as to how FH are related to A4greed particularly regardng the data sharing aspect. Any ideas? Only FH near me is a charity which I used to work with many years ago when employed. I assume they are partners in pimping BUT wonder if the data sharing issue can be employed again as I haven't even seen them yet. Let battle commence!

Wll I guess that Framework Housing are sub contractors to A4greed. I don't know what criteria they use to decide who gets passed on and who doesn't but it looks like you have been sent straight to the sub contractor. They will use the same arguments as the DWP used when passing your data to a4greed - this freedom to pass on data seems to have no end to it provided all are in the same "chain". I am sure that different rules apply to data of a sensitive personal nature where your express permission is required.

Mmmm, having re-read the DP Act (8 points) and DWP guidelines I reckon they have committed a big faux pas. I stated in the call to A4E I did not consent to data sharing and did not confirm even my NINO (you have to bear in mind I was only setting up initial appt) so haven't even seen anyone yet, never mind data waiver forms. So - if A4E have sent across more details then just name and address they are in breach of DP Act as it specifically states that Data Processors must have consent to share info. However, the proof is in the response to my letter to A4greed which has gone off tracked mail today. I am 'mandated' so a bit stuffed but I am not going to give up my rights so I will test it all the way. I have asked for a SAR from A4E too along with details of what info has been shared with this Framework subby, that'll wind them up as they have to log those with JCPlus and I already have an outstanding SAR with them too. What worries me is that within 3 days of a referral at JCPlus my personal details have been passed onto 2 separate organisations with no informed consent - a travesty!grrrr

The SAR to a4greed will probably produce a response that you should pay them £10 and provide them with 2 documents to prove identity. To my mind this is a cheek! I think that they have no right to ask for either a payment or ID. My reasoning is that a4greed are acting as contractors to the DWP (indisputable I would have thought) and as such they should conform to the DWP's standards when dealing with a SAR. The DWP do not ask for payment or ID - therefore a4greed shouldn't either.

Interesting - JCPlus confirmed they don't charge for SAR so as a contractor for them A4greed should follow suit - I will research the law on this one and see if I can come up with an argument not to pay if they raise it. As its only a recent referral they should only have the info JCPlus dumped to them so if anything else crops up woe betide lol. Although it may be a drawn out battle I am determined to set precedents that can be then passed onto others being pimped out. And as I have consistently stated 'no consent' from JCPlus to A4E I reckon they could be on dodgy ground bearing in mind some form of data has now gone to Framework Housing. I have instigated a FOI request from A4E on what they shared with FH so that will clarify matters a little, if its just name and addy I have failed but we shall see. Cheers for assistance and backup. I am not easily scared and quite willing to put my neck on the line to help others, after all, unlike the millionaire MP's, we unemployed are actually all in it together!

Well I complained to a4greed about being asked for payment and ID. They responded with name of individual who would answer my query. No response yet and they are well outside of their own time frame for responding. My next step is to complain to ICE. I have held back from doing so as a sort of unspoken bargaining position. If I become what I consider to be "unparked" there will be a complaint winging its way to ICE.
Good Luck!

never forget that the person sitting the other side of the desk is neither the brightest nor the best, from what I've experienced they only excel in spiel, aggression and delivering piss-poor NLP speak. Never let them make you doubt yourself. When they are spewing words at you at a rate of knots don't let them rush you into answering, take your time, think first, consider what you're going to say, it's one way of retaining control of the encounter. You can't be sanctioned for considering your words before you speak them, however your advisor may become a little frustrated by the lengthy silences and their inability to get you to say something that they can twist to their advantage. Apologises if stating the obvious.
"Before you speak, ask yourself: Is it kind, is it true, is it necessary, does it improve upon the silence?" -Shirdi Sai Baba. It is also attributed to the Quakers.