Tacit support becomes vocal. Now, I didn't make an allegation of fraud against Pertemps. I looked at an official document that showed a discrepancy of 5500% in job outcomes, and another document that said it was fraud for a contractor to a government department to claim payments for services that weren't provided, which lead me to ask a logical question about these discrepancies. If they are going to publish information about fraud and the positive nature of whistleblowing, they shouldn't be surprised when somebody reads it. What do you think? My first thoughts are shock and awe that I have encountered someone at Jobcentreplus with a spine, followed by curiosity about an official review document not being considered to be evidence and contradicting the numbers on this letter.
The original letter enquires about the basis on which the answer is given. That, unfortunately, has been omitted in Phil's reply. Let me explain to you about how Jobcentreplus operate. In order to fulfill the contract that I had with them, they weren't willing to accept just my word, I had to complete a jobsearch log and timesheet weekly, the former being daily when I was on full time jobsearch. Therefore, Phil completely understands that your word is nothing without such supporting evidence. Hang on, did I say I was on full time jobsearch? That is impossible because it would mean that Pertemps weren't providing a suitable placement tailored to me, in my chosen occupational area, which would mean that they weren't meeting the terms of the contract, which is not that case, as Phil makes very clear to us. So there you go, I imagined it all or inhaled too much second hand smoke, that clouded my judgement. All that was required was to send something like this with the letter, only not full of zeroes.

Update: When I originally wrote this, I made a poor job of reading the letter. The actual words are "Jobcentreplus are satisfied that the contract is being delivered to the required standards". That is of course, not the same thing as "Yes, the terms of the contract are being met", but merely an expression of satisfaction. Clever writing, stupidity by my myself or a combination of both. Nevertheless, whatever it means it lacks credibility without backup in the face of contradictory evidence.