Full review of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) application process
This petition gathered 16,561 signatures between 1 August 2022 and 15 February 2023, according to the Parliament petitions site. The Government responded on 1 November 2022. MPs debated it in Westminster Hall on 4 September 2023.
The petition
The petition's creator is not named in the Petitions site's published record. Quoted in full from the UK Parliament petitions site.
Full review of Personal Independence Payment (PIP) application process
We want the Government to conduct a full review of the PIP process. This should look at DWP policy and the performance of ATOS and Capita, which conduct the health assessments for applicants. We believe the current process is inherently unethical and biased, and needs a complete overhaul.
We believe that the Personal Independence Payment application and assessment process is inhumane and degrading. We believe Capita and Atos are not fit for purpose to be contracted as independent assessors, and that this leads to many people being unfairly denied benefits.
79% applications that are denied and taken to tribunal are overturned. This demonstrates that many decisions are initially incorrect. We believe that too often medical evidence is ignored, and decisions are not made fairly.
The Government's response
The Government published its response on 1 November 2022; the petitions site lists the Department for Work and Pensions as responsible. Its summary:
While Government has no plans to review PIP, following the Shaping Future Support Green Paper we will publish a White Paper on better meeting needs of disabled people and those with health conditions.
The opening 358 words of the 744-word response:
In response to two independent reviews carried out in November 2015 and April 2017 and a Work and Pensions Committee Inquiry in January 2018, we have already delivered a number of improvements. These include improvements to the customer journey, our communications, the assessment and our decision making. In addition, we have improved our support for our most vulnerable customers. The Government has no plans to carry out a full review of PIP.
However, we continue to review our benefit processes and procedures, most recently, for example, publishing, Shaping Future Support: The Health and Disability Green Paper, in 2021. This explored how the benefits system can better meet the needs of disabled people and those with health conditions to build a system that enables people to live independently and move into work where possible. We received over 4,500 responses to the public consultation, and we are grateful to all the individuals and organisations who contributed.
Both PIP assessment providers, Capita and Independent Assessment Services (IAS), strive to provide excellent service to claimants and are held to account for their performance. They have consistently exceeded their customer satisfaction targets of 90% for PIP, achieving collectively 96.6% until the end of February 2022. More information can be found here.
PIP relies on regular reviews based on evidence about the functional impacts of a disability or health condition to ensure the claimant receives the correct award. As part of the Functional Health Assessment process, a paper-based assessment will always be considered in the first instance for all cases. Health Professionals may contact GPs, any named specialist medical professionals or the claimant if they need more information to undertake a paper-based review. All evidence must be interpreted and evaluated using medical reasoning, considering the circumstances of the case and the expected impact on the claimant’s daily living and/or mobility. Providers work continuously to drive improvements in assessment services. They have introduced new management processes to drive performance across their services, including enhanced assessment report quality checks to improve the quality of advice the DWP receives. In addition, PIP assessment reports have been redesigned to have clearer justifications which support improved benefit decision making.
Read the full response on the petitions site.
Where the signatures came from
Signatures came from 650 constituencies on the boundaries used until the 2024 general election. The largest number, 80, came from North East Cambridgeshire.
16,530 of the signatures were from the UK and 31 from elsewhere, by the location signers gave.
| Constituency | Signatures |
|---|---|
| North East Cambridgeshire | 80 |
| Brighton, Pavilion | 77 |
| South West Norfolk | 71 |
| Leeds Central | 68 |
| Bristol West | 67 |
| Sheffield Central | 62 |
| Hove | 60 |
| Manchester Central | 58 |
| Leeds West | 57 |
| Norwich South | 54 |
| Region | Signatures |
|---|---|
| South East | 2,096 |
| North West | 1,996 |
| London | 1,678 |
| South West | 1,560 |
| East of England | 1,538 |
| Yorkshire and The Humber | 1,531 |
| West Midlands | 1,467 |
| East Midlands | 1,351 |
| Scotland | 1,216 |
| Wales | 945 |
| North East | 795 |
| Northern Ireland | 276 |
Debate in Parliament
MPs debated the petition in Westminster Hall on 4 September 2023. Read the debate in Hansard. House of Commons Library debate pack.
Source and receipt
- https://petition.parliament.uk/archived/petitions/620962.jsonUK Parliament Petitions API · read 2026-10-15 · SHA-256
da7fbfb5a75df978… - The petition on petition.parliament.uk
The petition's words are its creator's and the response is the Government's; this site quotes both and gives no view on either. Signature counts can still change while a petition is open. To report an error, send a correction request.