Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what number and proportion of Personal Independence Payment decisions overturned at tribunal were due to (a) the tribunal panel drawing a different conclusion based on the same evidence, (b) oral evidence given by the individual and (c) new written evidence provided at the hearing in each year for which data is available.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
Analysis of unpublished Personal Independence Payment (PIP) data held by DWP provides data on why decisions by DWP decision makers have been overturned at a tribunal hearing between January 2014 and September 2023 and is shown annually in the tables below. This information is taken from Decision Notices and recorded on the PIP computer system.
This data only provides one reason per appeal why decisions by DWP decision makers have been overturned at a tribunal hearing, and therefore may not give the full story as there may be other reasons.
Appeals data is taken from the DWP PIP computer system’s management information. Therefore, this appeal data may differ from that held by His Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service for various reasons such as delays in data recording and other methodological differences in collating and preparing statistics.
These figures are the result of a complex data match across a number of data sets. This data is unpublished data. It should be used with caution, and it may be subject to future revision.
Learning from this information, we have made improvements to our decision-making processes to help ensure we make the right decision as early as possible in the claim journey. We have introduced a new approach to decision making at both the initial decision and the Mandatory Reconsideration stage, giving Decision Makers additional time to proactively contact customers where they think additional evidence may support the claim.
Summary reason DWP decision | Appeal clearance year | |||||||||
2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 (to September) | |
Cogent documentary evidence | 100 | 2,000 | 6,300 | 5,000 | 4,400 | 2,600 | 1,900 | 400 | 200 | 300 |
Cogent oral evidence | 1,100 | 14,700 | 22,900 | 26,500 | 25,100 | 26,200 | 11,800 | 8,800 | 8,800 | 11,800 |
Reached a different conclusion on | 200 | 2,900 | 7,700 | 13,600 | 21,100 | 24,600 | 26,100 | 16,300 | 16,700 | 17,500 |
Other | 100 | 2,300 | 5,200 | 8,200 | 7,600 | 7,100 | 5,000 | 1,900 | 1,900 | 2,000 |
Summary reason DWP decision | Appeal clearance year | |||||||||
2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | 2023 (to September) | |
Cogent documentary evidence | 6% | 9% | 15% | 9% | 8% | 4% | 4% | 1% | 1% | 1% |
Cogent oral evidence | 75% | 67% | 54% | 50% | 43% | 43% | 26% | 32% | 32% | 37% |
Reached a different conclusion on | 14% | 13% | 18% | 26% | 36% | 41% | 58% | 60% | 61% | 56% |
Other | 4% | 10% | 12% | 15% | 13% | 12% | 11% | 7% | 7% | 6% |
Note:
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether his Department has made an assessment of the reasons for Personal Independence Payment decisions being overturned at mandatory reconsideration in 2022-23.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The reasons for Personal Independence Payment decisions being overturned at Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) are evaluated locally on a case-by-case basis, and we continue to learn from this. The Department’s overarching focus at the MR stage is on ensuring that each application is thoroughly reviewed, including considering all available evidence and contacting the claimant where necessary. Decisions will be changed at the MR stage where the evidence supports this, resolving disputes as early as possible and reducing the need to appeal.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many appeals against Personal Independence Payment decisions were lapsed by her Department in each of the last five years.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
A lapsed appeal is where DWP changed the decision in the customer’s favour after an appeal was lodged but before it was heard at a tribunal hearing.
The table below provides information on Personal Independence Payment (PIP) appeal registrations and lapsed appeals. Data provided is for the last five financial years.
Table 1: Appeals registered for each financial year and how many were subsequently lapsed
Financial year | Appeals registered | Appeals subsequently lapsed |
2018-19 | 94,000 | 18,000 |
2019-20 | 82,000 | 27,000 |
2020-21 | 55,000 | 23,000 |
2021-22 | 50,000 | 17,000 |
2022-23 | 81,000 | 18,000 |
Notes:
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many people have been employed by his Department to investigate suspected benefit fraud in each year since 2017.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
The table below provides the average staffing (full-time equivalent) utilised for investigating benefit fraud for the years requested.
Year | Average staff (full-time equivalent) investigating benefit fraud |
2017-18 | 1359.0 |
2018-19 | 1245.2 |
2019-20 | 1358.7 |
2020-21 | 128.9 |
2021-22 | 543.3 |
2022-23 | 1022.0 |
2023-24* | 1076.6 |
*Average (full-time equivalent) over April and May 2023 | |
For years 2020-21 and 2021-22, the Covid-19 pandemic impacted DWP’s Fraud Investigation Service, with large numbers of staff redeployed to support the unprecedented demand for financial support.
These numbers do not include our Compliance staff, who carry out robust and challenging interviews to ensure benefit claimants receive their correct entitlement, nor staff employed on preventative fraud work, for example our Enhanced Review Team, who are delivering significant savings for the Department as part of our shift to disrupting fraud at the outset.
Our fraud plan, ‘Fighting Fraud in the Welfare System’, published May 2022, sets out our plans to recruit additional staff into our counter-fraud teams, and we continue to recruit and train new fraud investigators in order to maximise our headcount post Covid. It should be noted that training an investigator can take anywhere between 12 and 18 months.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make an estimate of the number of low-income houses which are unable to afford living essentials due to a lack of funds.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
We do not collect this information; however, National Statistics on the number and percentage of people in poverty are published annually in the “Households Below Average Income” publication. This can be found here.
A family is in combined low income and material deprivation if they have a material deprivation score of 25 or more and a household income below the relevant threshold of contemporary median income, Before Housing Costs. See here.
The estimated number of children, working-age adults, and pensioners in combined low income and material deprivation can be found in tables 1_4d, 1_5d and 1_6c, respectively, in the summary-hbai-1994-95-2021-22-tables file.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the implications for his policies of the proposals by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation and Trussell Trust on an essentials guarantee when setting Universal Credit.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
No formal assessment has been made.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether his Department has made an estimate of the cost to the public purse of extending the £20 Universal Credit uplift to legacy benefit claimants during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
No such assessment has been made and it would incur disproportionate costs to make an estimate at this stage.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether she has had discussions with (a) the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, (b) other Cabinet colleagues and (c) stakeholders on the potential merits of classifying long covid as an occupational disease.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
The Government is committed to providing a strong financial safety net for those in need. The benefit system is set up to consider the impact that a health condition has on an individual’s ability to work and carry-out day to day activities. In terms of support for those with health conditions, decisions are based on an assessment of an individual’s functional ability, not their diagnosed health condition(s). All health care practitioners who carry out assessments on behalf of the department have access to specific training and guidance modules on a wide range of clinical conditions, including long-COVID.
DWP is responsible for the Industrial Injuries Scheme which compensates for injuries arising from an industrial accident or a prescribed disease contracted as a result of a person’s occupation. The Industrial Injuries Advisory Council (IIAC) is an independent body of experts who advise the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions regarding the scheme. The Council considered the available scientific and epidemiological evidence around COVID-19 infection and has published a Command Paper entitled, ‘COVID-19 and occupational impacts’. See: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-and-occupational-impacts.
We will carefully consider the recommendations in the Command Paper and respond in due course.
We will also continue to liaise with colleagues across Government and other stakeholders.
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, whether she is taking steps to provide long-term support with seeking employment to people suffering from long covid.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
A range of Government initiatives are supporting disabled people and people with health conditions, including those suffering from long covid, to start, stay and succeed in work. These include:
Asked by: Richard Burgon (Labour - Leeds East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what assessment he has made of the impact of the two-child benefit cap on trends in the level of child poverty.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
No such assessment has been made of the impact of the two-child benefit cap on trends in the level of child poverty.
The Government has committed to annual statistics releases related to the operation of the policy to provide support for a maximum of two children. Statistics up to April 2022 can be found here:
The latest child poverty figures (2019/20) demonstrate that absolute poverty rates (before housing costs) have not changed since 2016/17 when the two-child benefit cap was introduced. In 2019/20, 16% of children were in absolute poverty (before housing costs), the same level as in 2016/17.
This government believe that work is the best way out of poverty, and the latest statistics (2019/20) show that children in workless households are around 6 times more likely to be in absolute poverty, before housing costs, than those where all adults work. In 2019/20, the absolute poverty rate (before housing costs) of children, where both parents work full-time was only 3%, compared to 42% where one or more parents in a couple were in part-time work.
The government feels it is proportionate to provide support through Universal Credit for a maximum of two children. A benefits structure adjusting automatically to family size is unsustainable.
On 9 July 2021, the Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the judicial review of the two-child policy. The court found the two-child policy lawful and not in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights.
This policy ensures fairness by asking families on benefits to make the same financial decisions as families supporting themselves solely through work. We recognise that some claimants are not able to make the same choices about the number of children in their family, which is why exceptions have been put in place to protect certain groups, including those likely to have been born as a result of non-consensual conception. This includes rape or where the claimant was in a controlling or coercive relationship with the child’s other biological parent at the time of conception. In this case, before a claim is approved, claimants are asked to contact a suitable third-party professional who can confirm the claimant’s circumstances, as described by them, are consistent with the criteria for the exception. The third-party professional does not judge the credibility of the claimant’s statement or require any further evidence.