politics.co.uk blog post, by Natalie Bloomer, 16 May 2017: ‘Outrageous interference’ with rule of law as DWP sets 80% benefit appeal rejection target

“Since 2013, benefit claimants who wish to appeal against a decision made by the DWP have had to request a mandatory reconsideration before being able to take their case to a tribunal.”

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has set staff a target of upholding 80% of the benefit decisions that they are asked to reassess, it has been revealed.

In response to a Freedom of Information request, the department stated that a key measure used to monitor the performance of Mandatory Reconsiderations (the first step in the benefits appeals process) is that 80% of the original decisions are to be upheld.

It went on to confirm that between April 2016 – March 2017 staff exceeded that target with 87.5% of original decisions being maintained.

Henry Brooke, a former judge and member of the Access to Justice Commission, wrote in a blog post yesterday that the revelations appeared to be an “absolutely outrageous interference” with the rule of law.

Since 2013, benefit claimants who wish to appeal against a decision made by the DWP have had to request a mandatory reconsideration before being able to take their case to a tribunal. Staff then look at the application again and have the power to overturn the original decision if they think it was incorrect. Many of the cases relate to claims for disability benefits.  Read moreDRUK blog post,

DRUK blog post, 16 May 2017: DWP says that it has no PIP reconsideration refusal target 

Note: The latest DWP statistics show that despite no KPI target, the level of accepted PIP mandatory reconsiderations is very low.

By the end of January 2017, 85% of new claims reconsiderations and 79% of reassessed DLA reconsiderations for normal rules resulted in no change to the PIP award.

DRUK blog post, 16 May 2017: DWP has 80% targets for refusing benefit reconsiderations 

 

This entry was posted in News and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *