Forms of fettering: application forms and the exercise of discretion in the welfare state

References

• Adler, M., 2010. Social Security and Social Welfare. In: P. Cane and H. Kritzer, eds. The Oxford Handbook of Empirical Legal Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 399–423
   Google Scholar
• Biagioli, M., 2006. Documents of documents. In: A. Riles, ed. Documents: artefacts of Modern Knowledge. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 41–70.
   Google Scholar
• Brady, A., 2012. Proportionality and deference under the UK human rights act: an institutionally sensitive approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bramley, G. and Besemer, K., 2018. Financial inclusion, financial stress and debt. In: G. Bramley. and N. Bailey, eds. Poverty and social exclusion in the UK: volume 2 - the dimensions of disadvantage. Bristol: Policy Press, 228–267.
   Google Scholar
• Brenneis, D., 2006. Reforming promise. In: A. Riles, ed. Documents: artefacts of modern knowledge. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 41–70.
   Google Scholar
• Bush, M. and Gordon, A., 1978. Client choice and bureaucratic accountability: possibilities for responsiveness in a social welfare bureaucracy. Journal of social issues, 34 (4), 22–43. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1978.tb00773.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research, 2015. Final report: evaluation of removal of the spare room subsidy. London: Department for Work and Pensions.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, H., 2016. Legal technology in an age of austerity: documentation, ‘functional’ incontinence and the problem of dignity. In: D. Cowan and D. Wincott, eds. Exploring the ‘legal’ in socio-legal studies. London: Palgrave, 204–225.
   Google Scholar
• City of Lincoln Council, 2015. Discretionary housing payment policy. Lincoln: City of Lincoln Council.
   Google Scholar
• Cowan, D. and Halliday, S., 2003. The appeal of internal review. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Department for Work and Pensions, 2016. Discretionary housing payments guidance manual, 14. Available from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/524321/discretionary-housing-payments-guide.pdf [Accessed 13 June 2017].
   Google Scholar
• Dwyer, P. and Wright, S., 2014. Universal credit, ubiquitous conditionality and its implications for social citizenship. Journal of poverty and social justice, 22 (1), 27–35. doi:10.1332/175982714X13875305151043
   Google Scholar
• Fletcher, D.R., et al., 2016. Gamers or victims of the system? Welfare reform, cynical manipulation and vulnerability. Journal of poverty and social justice, 24 (2), 171–185. doi:10.1332/175982716X14650295704731
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grabham, E., 2016. Brewing legal times: things, forms, and the enactment of law. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gray, P., 2017. The second independent review of the personal independence payment assessment. London: UK Parliament.
   Google Scholar
• Halliday, S., 2004. Judicial review and compliance with administrative law. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Harper, R., 1998. Inside the IMF. Oxford: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hoag, C., 2011. Assembling partial perspectives: thoughts on the anthropology of bureaucracy. Political and Legal Anthropology Review, 34 (1), 81–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, M.-A., 2007. Form-made persons: consent forms as consent’s blind spot. Political and legal anthropology review, 30 (2), 249–268. doi:10.1525/pol.2007.30.2.249
   Google Scholar
• Knight, C., 2009. A framework for fettering. Judicial Review, 14 (1), 73–80
   Google Scholar
• Künnecke, M., 2007. Tradition and change in administrative law: an anglo-German comparison. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Leicester, A. and Shaw, J., 2003. A survey of the UK benefits system. Available from: http://www.ifs.org.uk/ff/benefitsurvey.pdf [Accessed 10 August 2017].
   Google Scholar
• McHarg, A., 2017. Administrative discretion, administrative rule-making, and judicial review. Current legal problems, 70 (1), 267–303. doi:10.1093/clp/cux011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meers, J., 2015. Panacean payments: the role of discretionary housing payments in the welfare reform Agenda. Journal of Social Security Law, 22 (3), 115–129.
   Google Scholar
• Meers, J., 2018. Awarding discretionary housing payments: constraints of time, conditionality and assessment of income/expenditure. Journal of Social Security law, 25 (2), 102–119.
   Google Scholar
• Moffatt, S., et al., 2015. A qualitative study of the impact of the UK ‘bedroom tax’. Journal of public health, 38 (2), 197–205. doi:10.1093/pubmed/fdv031
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien, C., 2017. Unity in adversity: EU citizenship, social justice and the cautionary tale of the UK. Oxford: Hart.
   Google Scholar
• Oswald, M., 2018. Algorithm-assisted decision-making in the public sector: framing the issues using administrative law rules governing discretionary power. Philosophical transactions of the royal society A, 376 (2128).
   Google Scholar
• Perry, A., 2017. The flexibility rule in administrative law. Cambridge law journal, 76 (2), 375–398. doi:10.1017/S0008197317000320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pottage, A., 2012. The materiality of what?. Journal of law and society, 39 (1), 167–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pottie, L. and Sossin, L., 2005. Demystifying the boundaries of public law: policy, discretion, and social welfare. U.B.C. law review, 38 (1), 147–188.
   Google Scholar
• Reading Borough Council, 2018. Discretionary housing payment policy Available from: http://www.reading.gov.uk/media/5808/Discretionary-Housing-Payment-Policy-2018-19/pdf/DHP_Policy_Feb_2018_(1).pdf
   Google Scholar
• Reed, A., 2006. Documents unfolding. In: A. Riles, ed. Documents: artefacts of modern knowledge. Michigan: The University of Michigan Press, 158–179.
   Google Scholar
• Riles, A., ed., 2006. Artifacts of modern knowledge. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Royston, S., 2017. Broken benefits: what’s gone wrong with welfare reform. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Seddon, J. and O’Donovan, B., 2013. The Achilles’ heel of scale service design in social security administration: the case of the United Kingdom’s Universal Credit. International social security review, 66 (1), 1–23. doi:10.1111/issr.12000
   Google Scholar
• Singh, R., 2017. “Please check the appropriate box”: documents and the governance of domestic violence. Law & social inquiry, 42 (2), 509–542. doi:10.1111/lsi.12201
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sossin, L., 2004. Boldly going where no law has gone before: call centres, intake scripts, database fields and discretionary justice in social welfare. Osgoode hall law journal, 42 (3), 363–414.
   Google Scholar
• South Cambridgeshire District Council, 2013. Revised policy for the award of discretionary housing payments. Available from: http://scambs.moderngov.co.uk/documents/s71954/Discretionary%20Housing%20Payments%20-%20Revised%20Policy%20-%20app%201i.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Stark, S., 2019. Non-fettering, legitimate expectations and consistency of policy: separate compartments or single principles? In: J. Varuhas and S. Stark, eds.. The frontiers of public law. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 443–470.
   Google Scholar
• Stewart, A.B.R. and Wright, S., May 2018. Final findings: jobseekers. Available from: http://www.welfareconditionality.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/40426-Jobseekers-web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Taylor-Gooby, P., Larsen, T., and Kananen, J., 2004. Market means and welfare ends: the UK welfare state experiment. Journal of social policy, 33 (4), 573–592. doi:10.1017/S0047279404008001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinson, A., et al., 2014. Poverty and the cost of living: an evidence review. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Valverde, M., 2003. Law’s dream of a common knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Woolf, H., et al., 2018. De Smith’s judicial review. London: Sweet & Maxwell.
   Google Scholar
• Work and Pensions Committee, 2016. The local welfare safety net. London: House of Commons.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, S., et al., May 2018. Final findings: universal credit. Available from: http://www.welfareconditionality.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/40414-Universal-Credit-web.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• York City Council, 2018. Discretionary housing payments policy and guidance. Available from: http://www.york.gov.uk/download/downloads/id/1745/discretionary_housing_payments_-_our_policy_and_guidance.pdf.
   Google Scholar