Shocking ESA decision obviously mail-merged

Am dealing with a case where the DWP has obviously used standard paragraphs that had nothing to do with the claimant.  Throughout the decision there is the pattern <Title><Surname> - and I mean literally that - not the actual name of the person at all!  This reveals the shocking "hatchet job" approach of the DWP to ESA - a formula of reports with standard phrases with the decision makers having the same standard phrases that are then copied and pasted into decision letters with names merged in (or not in this case).  An unlawful approach that completely fails to accurately take individual circumstances into account.  It's decisions like this that kill people.

Here's a copy of some of the offending decision, which the DWP apologised for, although the matter is ongoing as that doesn't put it right in this case: A Dodgy DWP letter

 

Gambling refund

Just got a gambling refund of money deposited to release "bonus offers".  These are unlawful under Consumer Rights Act 2015 - Unfair Terms.  If you deposited money into an "on-line cashier" or similar to release a "bonus" and then found you couldn't withdraw your money due to ridiculous "wagering requirements" you're due a refund.   Contact me with your email if you want letter templates in Word format.  This is a free service.