DWP’s ‘frightening’ failure to protect victim of domestic violence must lead to change, say advocates

Horrified disabled activists have called for answers from the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), after it revealed how a staff member accidentally tipped off an abuser that their victim was seeking domestic violence support.

The DWP agent appears to have posted a message to the victim on an online universal credit journal that was shared with their abuser.

The information came in a DWP policy paper on “learning and improving from serious cases”, which provides details of the 84 internal process reviews (IPRs) it completed in 2023-24.

IPRs are carried out when there is a suggestion that DWP’s actions or failings may have negatively affected a claimant, and they suffered serious harm, died, or attempted suicide.

One of the IPRs summarised briefly in the paper relates to “Customer 5”, a claimant of universal credit who appears to have set up their own single person claim following domestic abuse by their partner.

But the paper says that a DWP staff member accidentally posted information about domestic abuse support to the online journal of the claimant’s joint account with their partner instead of to the journal for their new single person claim.

Because DWP provided only a short, anonymised summary of the case, it is not clear whether the claimant – who was probably a woman – was killed by their partner as a result of the error, or whether they suffered serious harm.

But as a result of the IPR, DWP’s universal credit (UC) team agreed to review the information its staff receive on “domestic violence awareness” on “the subject of not recording messages on the journal of a joint claim”.

DWP later revised its guidance to include references to “domestic violence and joint claims”, including “journal message awareness”.

The IPR information was only released because of a Disability News Service freedom of information case which eventually reaching the information rights tribunal, with support from the Information Commissioner’s Office (see separate story).

Angie Airlie, chief executive of Stay Safe East, a user-led organisation which provides advocacy and support to disabled Londoners who have survived domestic and sexual violence, hate crime and other abuse, said she was “extremely concerned” to hear of the DWP failings that may have contributed to serious harm or even the death of the claimant.

She said: “The DWP must commit to establishing processes that embed the highest standard of care when recording information about customers’ experience of domestic abuse.

“We are aware that agents do receive training on domestic abuse; this case should trigger a review to ensure this training is fit for purpose, and that agents have a full understanding of the risks relating to domestic abuse, and their part in mitigating these risks.”

Claire Glasman, from the disabled women’s organisation WinVisible, said it was “frightening” but unsurprising “that UC staff were so careless as to reveal information to a domestic abuser, and some kind of harm resulted.

“We don’t know what happened, and the DWP has deliberately not released more information.

“The way universal credit was set up, with all the payment going to one partner, unless you specifically ask for alternative arrangements, makes women financially dependent on partners, with greater risk of abuse.

“And disabled women are twice as likely to suffer domestic abuse as non-disabled women.

“Women say personal independence payment is a lifeline as it’s the only money we can call our own in an abusive relationship with joint finances – but even that is under threat.

“The DWP must prioritise women’s safety and protection, and our continuity of income, including when we have left violent men and are trying to set up home in a new place.”

She added: “The list also reveals many people wrongly cut off benefit, with tragic consequences.

“Our experience is, the DWP is indifferent to women’s and mothers’ suffering in all kinds of situations, regularly sanctioning bereaved claimants, cutting off survivors of violence and traumatised refugee women, which we have lodged complaints about.”

DWP did not answer questions about the case this week, but it insisted that it had improved its processes to ensure claimants in vulnerable situations receive the support they need (see separate story).

A DWP spokesperson said: “Our thoughts remain with those affected by these serious cases, and with their loved ones.

“We support millions of people each year, and we are committed to listening, learning and acting on the lessons from the small number of serious cases, so that we can continue improving our services and make sure people get the support they need.”