Asked by: Kate Osamor (Independent - Edmonton)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, pursuant to the Answer of 20 October 2022 to Question 63289 on Social Security Benefits: Appeals, how many mandatory reconsiderations have been requested following a decision made under the Risk Review Process; and of those how many have (a) been completed and (b) resulted in a change of decision.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
Since 4th July 2022, when collation of mandatory reconsideration figures commenced under the Risk Review process, there have been 499 mandatory reconsiderations.
346 of which have been completed to outcome, with 2 resulting in a change of decision, which includes 1 being partially revised and 1 being fully revised.
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Independent - Edmonton)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what proportion of tribunals attended by presenting officers were allowed in each month from January 2013 to October 2022.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
Analysis of unpublished data held by the Department for Work and Pensions provides data on the proportion of tribunals attended by Presenting Officers (PO) where the decision was overturned. This data only covers Employment Support Allowance (ESA) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) tribunals. To provide information across all other DWP administered benefits or for PIP and ESA prior to April 2016 would incur disproportionate cost.
This data is unpublished. It should be used with caution, and it may be subject to future revision.
Proportion of tribunals attended by Presenting Officers where the decision was overturned, by month from April 2016 – June 2022
| Proportion of appeals overturned where Presenting Officer attended | |
Hearing Date | PIP | ESA |
Apr-16 | 64% | 38% |
May-16 | 63% | 51% |
Jun-16 | 61% | 49% |
Jul-16 | 61% | 42% |
Aug-16 | 58% | 52% |
Sep-16 | 62% | 33% |
Oct-16 | 61% | 52% |
Nov-16 | 61% | 56% |
Dec-16 | 64% | 62% |
Jan-17 | 61% | 61% |
Feb-17 | 63% | 60% |
Mar-17 | 63% | 62% |
Apr-17 | 68% | 58% |
May-17 | 66% | 66% |
Jun-17 | 68% | 71% |
Jul-17 | 67% | 69% |
Aug-17 | 68% | 71% |
Sep-17 | 69% | 67% |
Oct-17 | 68% | 67% |
Nov-17 | 70% | 67% |
Dec-17 | 69% | 70% |
Jan-18 | 71% | 69% |
Feb-18 | 73% | 70% |
Mar-18 | 69% | 71% |
Apr-18 | 73% | 68% |
May-18 | 72% | 71% |
Jun-18 | 71% | 69% |
Jul-18 | 72% | 70% |
Aug-18 | 74% | 67% |
Sep-18 | 74% | 72% |
Oct-18 | 71% | 70% |
Nov-18 | 73% | 68% |
Dec-18 | 73% | 69% |
Jan-19 | 71% | 69% |
Feb-19 | 73% | 65% |
Mar-19 | 73% | 69% |
Apr-19 | 72% | 72% |
May-19 | 73% | 70% |
Jun-19 | 75% | 72% |
Jul-19 | 72% | 70% |
Aug-19 | 72% | 72% |
Sep-19 | 73% | 71% |
Oct-19 | 73% | 76% |
Nov-19 | 74% | 69% |
Dec-19 | 76% | 74% |
Jan-20 | 72% | 65% |
Feb-20 | 74% | 70% |
Mar-20 | 76% | 73% |
Apr-20 | 100% | 20% |
May-20 | 83% | 25% |
Jun-20 | 73% | 69% |
Jul-20 | 78% | 60% |
Aug-20 | 63% | 27% |
Sep-20 | 60% | 53% |
Oct-20 | 64% | 26% |
Nov-20 | 69% | 69% |
Dec-20 | 65% | 40% |
Jan-21 | 62% | 57% |
Feb-21 | 60% | 60% |
Mar-21 | 63% | 56% |
Apr-21 | 70% | 50% |
May-21 | 68% | 52% |
Jun-21 | 68% | 50% |
Jul-21 | 66% | 47% |
Aug-21 | 70% | 55% |
Sep-21 | 70% | 65% |
Oct-21 | 67% | 59% |
Nov-21 | 67% | 63% |
Dec-21 | 70% | 60% |
Jan-22 | 71% | 66% |
Feb-22 | 76% | 71% |
Mar-22 | 77% | 62% |
Apr-22 | 75% | 58% |
May-22 | 72% | 58% |
Jun-22 | 75% | 64% |
Note: Number of overturns where PO attended shown as a percentage of appeals where a decision was made, therefore excluding those not cleared or withdrawn/struck out.
Appeals data is taken from the DWP 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.
We have provided data up to June 2022, in line with published statistics.
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Independent - Edmonton)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many presenting officers attended tribunals on behalf of her Department in each month from January 2013 to October 2022.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
Analysis of unpublished data held by the Department for Work and Pensions provides data on the number of tribunals where Presenting Officers (PO) attended. This data only covers Employment Support Allowance (ESA) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP) tribunals. To provide information across all other DWP administered benefits or for PIP and ESA prior to April 2016 would incur disproportionate cost.
This data is unpublished. It should be used with caution, and it may be subject to future revision.
Tribunals attended by Presenting Officers, by month from April 2016 – June 2022
| Number of PO attendances | |
Hearing Date | PIP | ESA |
Apr-16 | 530 | 130 |
May-16 | 510 | 160 |
Jun-16 | 550 | 150 |
Jul-16 | 620 | 130 |
Aug-16 | 770 | 150 |
Sep-16 | 670 | 140 |
Oct-16 | 690 | 110 |
Nov-16 | 830 | 150 |
Dec-16 | 570 | 140 |
Jan-17 | 620 | 150 |
Feb-17 | 600 | 180 |
Mar-17 | 990 | 290 |
Apr-17 | 1,140 | 410 |
May-17 | 1,900 | 1,280 |
Jun-17 | 2,100 | 1,820 |
Jul-17 | 2,060 | 2,160 |
Aug-17 | 2,040 | 2,120 |
Sep-17 | 2,130 | 1,950 |
Oct-17 | 2,230 | 2,110 |
Nov-17 | 2,380 | 2,470 |
Dec-17 | 1,610 | 1,650 |
Jan-18 | 2,440 | 2,440 |
Feb-18 | 2,010 | 2,240 |
Mar-18 | 1,940 | 1,870 |
Apr-18 | 1,880 | 1,670 |
May-18 | 2,000 | 1,820 |
Jun-18 | 1,640 | 1,870 |
Jul-18 | 1,600 | 1,540 |
Aug-18 | 1,290 | 1,180 |
Sep-18 | 1,000 | 1,230 |
Oct-18 | 1,180 | 1,230 |
Nov-18 | 1,090 | 1,330 |
Dec-18 | 680 | 850 |
Jan-19 | 1,420 | 1,110 |
Feb-19 | 1,360 | 850 |
Mar-19 | 1,500 | 1,260 |
Apr-19 | 1,360 | 1,160 |
May-19 | 1,500 | 1,200 |
Jun-19 | 1,330 | 950 |
Jul-19 | 1,670 | 1,050 |
Aug-19 | 1,580 | 800 |
Sep-19 | 1,350 | 770 |
Oct-19 | 1,540 | 830 |
Nov-19 | 1,610 | 820 |
Dec-19 | 1,290 | 510 |
Jan-20 | 1,970 | 560 |
Feb-20 | 1,690 | 500 |
Mar-20 | 1,150 | 260 |
Apr-20 | 10 | 10 |
May-20 | 20 | 10 |
Jun-20 | 30 | 20 |
Jul-20 | 40 | 30 |
Aug-20 | 50 | 50 |
Sep-20 | 80 | 50 |
Oct-20 | 370 | 50 |
Nov-20 | 490 | 80 |
Dec-20 | 550 | 90 |
Jan-21 | 760 | 130 |
Feb-21 | 750 | 80 |
Mar-21 | 1,380 | 100 |
Apr-21 | 1,440 | 90 |
May-21 | 1,240 | 110 |
Jun-21 | 1,290 | 80 |
Jul-21 | 1,360 | 160 |
Aug-21 | 1,470 | 130 |
Sep-21 | 1,080 | 110 |
Oct-21 | 1,010 | 130 |
Nov-21 | 1,210 | 150 |
Dec-21 | 940 | 130 |
Jan-22 | 980 | 110 |
Feb-22 | 1,130 | 130 |
Mar-22 | 890 | 100 |
Apr-22 | 750 | 140 |
May-22 | 810 | 110 |
Jun-22 | 700 | 70 |
Note:
Appeals data is taken from the DWP 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.
We have provided data up to June 2022, in line with published statistics.
Asked by: Colleen Fletcher (Labour - Coventry North East)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what recent estimate he has made of the average waiting time for mandatory reconsideration of a benefit decision in (a) Coventry, (b) the West Midlands and (c) England; and what steps his Department is taking to ensure that mandatory reconsiderations are carried out (i) quickly and (ii) effectively.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
We endeavor to complete Mandatory Reconsiderations without delay. Recently, we added over 400 staff to the Disputes Resolution Service to help ensure that applications are dealt with in a timely manner. Our overarching focus, however, is on taking the time necessary to thoroughly review all the available evidence, to help ensure we make the right decision.
Information on Personal Independence Payment (PIP) and Employment and Support Allowance (ESA) Work Capability Assessment (WCA) Mandatory Reconsideration (MR) clearances are available on GOV.UK:
https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/personal-independence-payment-statistics
Additional breakdowns of the figures, including by region, local authority and parliamentary constituency, are available on Stat-Xplore for PIP and ESA WCA MR clearance times:
https://stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk/.
Guidance for users is available at:
https://stat-xplore.dwp.gov.uk/webapi/online-help/Getting-Started.html.
PIP MR clearance times for financial year 2021-22 are shown in the table below. Additional figures by region, local authority and parliamentary constituency, are available in the tables released with the PIP publication referenced above, specifically Tables 4B(ii) and 4B(iii).
Table 1: Median PIP MR clearance times (calendar days), Normal Rules, from April 2021 to March 2022
Year | Coventry | West Midlands | England |
April 2021 to March 2022 | 61* | 62** | 62*** |
*Source: PIP statistics to July; table 4B_(ii)
**Source: PIP statistics to July; table 4B_(iii)
***Source: PIP ADS
Notes:
Asked by: Hywel Williams (Plaid Cymru - Arfon)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many claimants aged under 25 have had their sanction overturned as a result of a mandatory reconsideration, both as a total number and as a proportion of all mandatory reconsiderations for this age group, in the most recent month for which data is available.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The information requested is not readily available and to provide it would incur disproportionate cost.
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Independent - Edmonton)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how much her Department has spent on defending benefit appeals in each year from 2010 to 2022.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
DWP cover the administration costs of an Appeal. However, the Department is unable to provide the total government spend on defending appeals.
This is because appeals are a joint process between DWP and HM Courts and Tribunals Service. DWP do not handle tribunals for appeals; the cost of handling appeal tribunals sits with HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) and we do not hold their cost information. If this information was required, we would suggest that this element of your request be submitted to HMCTS.
The only DWP staff who attend actual Tribunals (and therefore defend appeals) are Presenting Officers. We do not have information before 2013-14.
The information for the financial years covered by the request are detailed in the tables below:
2013-14 | 2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 |
|
£3.69m | £5.18m | £4.45m | £5.42m |
|
2017/18 | 2018/19 | 2019/20 | 2020/21 | 2021/22 |
£7.93m | £7.16m | £6.47m | £1.45m | £5.77m |
Cost figures are rounded to the nearest £0.1m
Data Source: ABM
The cost figures quoted are estimated DWP level 1 operating costs, including both direct delivery staff and non-staff costs. Non-staff costs are only those costs incurred in local cost centres, relating to direct delivery staff.
Costs provided are for Presenting Officers only and excludes Admin Support or Decision Making operational staff dealing with the Appeals processing work. Child Maintenance Group figures include Enforcement Presenting Officers.
Please note that the data supplied is from the Departmental Activity Based Models. This data is derived from unpublished management information, which was collected for internal Departmental use only, and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standards. It should therefore be treated with caution. The Departmental Activity Based staffing models are a snapshot of how many people were identified as undertaking specified activities as assigned by line managers.
The data is frequently revised and changes to definitions / benefits / DWP structure effect comparisons over time. It should therefore be treated with caution and must be seen as an indication of cost, rather than the actual cost.
2020/21 figures impacted by COVID
Asked by: Jonathan Ashworth (Labour (Co-op) - Leicester South)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the costs to her Department relating to appeals to the Social Security and Child Support Tribunal were for each financial year from 2010-11.
Answered by Guy Opperman - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Transport)
The only DWP staff who attend these Tribunals are Presenting Officers.
Their Costings are as below:
2013-14 | 2014-15 | 2015-16 | 2016-17 |
|
£3.69m | £5.18m | £4.45m | £5.42m |
|
2017/18 | 2018/19 | 2019/20 | 2020/21 | 2021/22 |
£7.93m | £7.16m | £6.47m | £1.45m | £5.77m |
Cost figures are rounded to the nearest £0.1m
Data Source: ABM
The cost figures quoted are estimated DWP level 1 operating costs, including both direct delivery staff and non-staff costs. Non-staff costs are only those costs incurred in local cost centres, relating to direct delivery staff.
Costs provided are for Presenting Officers only and excludes Admin Support or Decision Making operational staff dealing with the Appeals processing work. Child Maintenance Group figures include Enforcement Presenting Officers.
Please note that the data supplied is from the Departmental Activity Based Models. This data is derived from unpublished management information, which was collected for internal Departmental use only, and has not been quality assured to National Statistics or Official Statistics publication standards. It should therefore be treated with caution. The Departmental Activity Based staffing models are a snapshot of how many people were identified as undertaking specified activities as assigned by line managers.
The data is frequently revised and changes to definitions / benefits / DWP structure effect comparisons over time. It should therefore be treated with caution and must be seen as an indication of cost, rather than the actual cost.
2020/21 figures impacted by COVID
Asked by: Kate Osamor (Independent - Edmonton)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, for what reasons an (a) Employment and Support Allowance, (b) Personal Independence Payment and (c) Universal Credit appeal may be lapsed by her Department when a decision is not changed after a mandatory reconsideration.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
When preparing an appeal response, the department will review the original decision, considering both evidence previously submitted to DWP and any new evidence submitted by the claimant in support of their appeal. A decision can be revised and the appeal lapsed on any ground which has the effect of changing the decision in the claimant’s favour.
The aim of lapsing is to ensure that decisions which should be changed are identified at this stage, so that the claimant does not need to proceed to an appeal hearing. Where the change does not award the claimant the maximum they could be awarded by a tribunal, the appeal will only be lapsed with the claimant’s agreement.
Asked by: Mohammad Yasin (Labour - Bedford)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the (a) mean, (b) median, (c) longest and (d) shortest wait time was for processing mandatory reconsiderations of benefits decisions in the latest period for which data is available.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
The lower quartile, median, mean and upper quartile waiting times for processing mandatory reconsiderations for PIP, UC and ESA benefit decisions are below. To provide information across all other DWP administered benefits would incur disproportionate cost.
Note that information about the extremes of a distribution (e.g. the maximum clearance time) risks being disclosive. We would not release this information publicly. Therefore, we have presented information on the lower quartile, median, mean and upper quartile of clearance times. Please note, the mean can be unduly affected by outlying cases. As such, the median is our preferred central measure for MR clearance times.
Table 1: PIP MR clearance times (calendar days), Normal Rules, from August 2021 to July 2022
Year | Lower Quartile | Median | Mean | Upper Quartile |
August 2021 – July 2022 | 38 | 57 | 55 | 70 |
Notes:
Table 2: UC MR clearance times (calendar days) from October 2021 to September 2022
Year | Lower Quartile | Median | Mean | Upper Quartile |
October 2021 to September 2022 | 23 | 51 | 67 | 100 |
Notes:
Table 3: ESA WCA MR clearance times (calendar days) from August 2021 to July 2022
Year | Lower Quartile | Median | Mean | Upper Quartile |
August 2021 to July 2022 | 5 | 10 | 13 | 14 |
Notes:
1. ESA MR clearance times are based on the date when the Benefit Centre has decided that the MR received is a valid MR, having considered whether they can initially change the decision in the light of any new information to the date when the decision maker at the Dispute Resolution Team (DRT) has cleared and logged the final decision.
Notes
Asked by: Dan Jarvis (Labour - Barnsley Central)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what recent estimate he has made of the average waiting time for mandatory reconsideration of benefit decisions.
Answered by Tom Pursglove - Minister of State (Minister for Legal Migration and Delivery)
The average (median) waiting times for Mandatory Reconsiderations are 57 calendar days for PIP, 51 calendar days for UC, and 10 calendar days for ESA-WCA.
Whilst we endeavour to complete Mandatory Reconsiderations without delay, our overarching focus is on taking the time necessary to thoroughly review all the available evidence to help ensure we make the right decision.