PLP sends pre-action letter to DWP on behalf of Work Rights Centre over automated Universal Credit systems

The Public Law Project has sent a pre-action letter to the Department for Work and Pensions on behalf of the Work Rights Centre, raising eight potential grounds of challenge over automated decision-making in Universal Credit.

The Public Law Project (PLP) sent an initial pre-action letter to the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) on behalf of the Work Rights Centre (WoRC) earlier this year, raising eight potential grounds of challenge to the department's use of automated technologies1. PLP said it is acting for WoRC in relation to a potential claim against the DWP concerning two uses of automation: triaging claims for Universal Credit (UC) advances for enhanced review before payment, and identifying UC payments for investigation and suspension1.

PLP said it and WoRC consider that the DWP's lack of transparency and its current deployment of such technologies may be unlawful for a number of reasons, including that their use does not appear to accord with published guidance and may be contrary to data protection law, human rights law and equalities law1. PLP said it continues to engage in pre-action correspondence with the DWP, with the aim of learning more about how precisely it is using these technologies and what safeguards it is adopting to mitigate harm1.

The letter followed the DWP's annual report and accounts for 2023-24, published on 22 July 2024, which PLP said provided more insight into the department's desire to increase reliance on AI and automation, including for detecting fraud and error in social security claims and payments1. PLP said the report speaks in general terms about the DWP's use of data analytics and machine learning, and in equally general terms about safeguards, but provides no meaningful information about what technologies the DWP is piloting or using, nor how they are or will be deployed1.

PLP said the report refers to a fairness analysis the DWP carried out on the UC advances model, but that the results have not been published. It said the report states only that the results "do not present any immediate concerns of discrimination, unfair treatment or detrimental impact on customers", and that the DWP has not provided details of its assessment because of concerns that publication would allegedly "allow fraudsters to understand how the model operates"1.

"PLP sent an initial pre-action letter to DWP on behalf of WoRC earlier this year, raising eight potential grounds of challenge."
Public Law Project1

PLP described the DWP's compliance with a Public Accounts Committee recommendation to report to Parliament annually on the impact of data analytics on protected grounds and vulnerable claimants as weak and very disappointing1. It said there is a real risk that technologies of this nature may lead to discriminatory outcomes by unfairly targeting particular claimants, including because of their protected characteristics, as identified by the National Audit Office1.

Why it matters for households

The technologies at issue sit at two points where money reaches claimants. The first is the UC advance, a payment made before a first award or when an award changes, which PLP says may be subjected to enhanced review before payment, potentially delaying it or prompting a request for more information1. The second is an existing UC award, where payments may be investigated or suspended on suspicion of fraud or error, work PLP links to DWP teams known as the Risk Review Team, the Enhanced Review Team or the Enhanced Checking Service1. A suspension affects the sanctions position of a live claim rather than its entitlement, but it interrupts the money a household receives while the review runs.

PLP said it wants to hear from UC claimants and from practitioners or caseworkers supporting them about advance payment requests that may have been subjected to enhanced review before payment, including delays or notifications that more information was required, and about UC payments investigated or suspended on suspicion of fraud or error1. It also said it wants to hear from practitioners and caseworkers who want to discuss the pre-action letter1.

What happens next

PLP said it continues to engage in pre-action correspondence with the DWP1. No outcome, hearing date or response from the DWP has been reported. The DWP's annual report and accounts for 2023-24 were published on 22 July 20241.

Sources1 cited
  1. DWP’s annual report leaves many questions about AI and automation unanswered - Public Law Project publiclawproject.org.uk