Checking the law, facts and evidence

Once you've received the DWP’s response, you can prepare to write your submission to the tribunal. This will involve checking the relevant law, deciding what facts are relevant to your appeal, checking the DWP’s response and considering what evidence you have to confirm your explanation of the relevant facts.

On this page:

Preparing to write your submission

To write an effective submission, ideally you should:

  • check the relevant law
  • decide on the relevant facts
  • check the DWP’s response and the documents in the appeal bundle
  • think about the evidence

Getting advice

It's always worth getting advice about a PIP appeal from an advice agency that provides free, independent advice. An adviser may be able to help you with these steps and may be willing to draft a submission on your behalf.

To find an advice agency near you, check advicelocal.uk

Checking the relevant law

When making decisions, the DWP and the First-tier Tribunal must apply the relevant law. It has no discretion to ignore it and can’t alter it. The main sources of social security law are in legislation and caselaw.

The DWP’s response to your appeal normally sets out the law it has relied on to reach its decision. However, the DWP doesn’t always interpret the law correctly or apply the law correctly to your circumstances. It’s important to look at what the law says to know what facts you have to prove to win your appeal.

As well as checking the law mentioned in the DWP’s response, you can find the law relevant to your appeal by looking up the issues raised in your appeal in our Welfare Benefits Handbook (for subscribers). Then, check the reference for the information given in the text, which should tell you the legal source of that information. 

Does your appeal involve a complex legal issue?

  • Most PIP appeals don’t involve complex legal issues. The tribunal is usually more concerned with facts, such as how your illness or disability affects you.
  • However, some PIP appeals involve more complex legal issues, such as if there’s a question about whether a particular rule may be in breach of human rights legislation, or whether the law permits a particular regulation to have been made.
  • Sometimes, the caselaw that has developed around a particular rule may be complex. 

If a complex legal issue is involved and you have an adviser, your adviser can help you establish the best arguments to put forward in your submission. Your adviser can contact us for further help if necessary.

Support for advisers

Legislation

Legislation includes Acts of Parliament (primary legislation) and regulations, rules and orders (secondary legislation). Broadly, Acts of Parliament set out the main framework for the rules about particular benefits and their administration, and rules and regulations set out the details. 

Sometimes the legislation is amended; the legislation relevant to your appeal is the legislation in force on the date of the decision you are appealing against. You can look up the legislation online and see the changes to it over time at legislation.gov.uk.

The main legislation relating to PIP

Acts of Parliament
Regulations

Caselaw

Caselaw clarifies how the rules in the legislation should be interpreted and applied. For example, what the meaning of particular words or concepts in the legislation should be. Caselaw relevant to PIP is made up of decisions of:

  • the Administrative Appeal Chamber of the Upper Tribunal (and, for decisions made before the Upper Tribunal was established, the Social Security Commissioners)
  • courts such as the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court

Their decisions on points of law ‘set precedent’, which means that the DWP, lower courts and tribunals must follow them in similar cases (they are ‘binding’ on them). 

Decisions of the First-tier Tribunal are not caselaw. They don’t have to be followed by the DWP in other cases or by other tribunals or courts. 

Sometimes a decision of the Upper Tribunal may conflict with another Upper Tribunal decision (that is, it comes to a different conclusion on a similar point). When there are conflicting decisions, a decision made by a three-judge panel of the Upper Tribunal is given preference over a decision made by a single judge of the Upper Tribunal.

Until 7 April 2025, if a decision of the Administrative Appeal Chamber of the Upper Tribunal was particularly important, it was 'reported'. If an unreported decision conflicted with a reported decision, the reported decision was normally followed. 

So, for example, If you see 'UKUT' as part of a legal reference (like this: ET v Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (UC) [2021] UKUT 47 (AAC)), that means it’s a decision of the UK Upper Tribunal. If the reference also includes 'AACR', it means that the decision has been reported.

From 7 April 2025, decisions of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeal Chamber) are no longer reported.

Finding caselaw

  • Many decisions of the Administrative Appeal Chamber of the Upper Tribunal are on GOV.UK:
  • Many court decisions can be found on the website of the British and Irish Legal Information Institute (bailii.org)
  • Many judgments from 2001 onwards, and from 7 April 2025 all judgments of the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeal Chamber), can be found on the National Archive’s Find Case Law
  • Details of relevant cases can be found in the commentary to Social Security Legislation Volume I: Non-Means Tested Benefits and Volume III: Administration, Adjudication and the European Dimension, published by Sweet and Maxwell. The tribunal has copies of these books it can refer to.
  • Write-ups of social security caselaw are included in our Welfare Rights Bulletin (for subscribers)
  • pipinfo.net has details of caselaw relevant to PIP.

DWP guidance

The DWP publishes guidance for its decision makers and for assessment providers who do PIP health assessments. These explain the DWP’s interpretation of the law.

Sometimes the law could be interpreted differently, or the DWP’s interpretation is incorrect. So, if the guidance does not support your case, it doesn’t necessarily mean that your appeal won’t be successful. The success of your appeal depends on what the law says rather than what the guidance says. However, if the guidance supports points you’ve raised in your appeal, it may be worth mentioning this in your submission as it adds weight to your argument about your entitlement. 

Finding DWP guidance

DWP guidance on PIP includes:

What are the relevant facts?

Broadly, a fact is relevant if it helps to confirm whether you meet the legal requirements for what you're arguing you’re entitled to. The tribunal expects you to help it establish the relevant facts as far as you can.

The tribunal then has to decide what it thinks the true facts are (in other words, what your true situation is) – for example, when you and the DWP disagree about them or when there is contradictory evidence. However, even when there’s no disagreement or contradiction, the tribunal can come to its own conclusion about the facts if this is supported by the evidence.

If possible, try to get more evidence that supports your statements about the relevant facts, particularly on points where you and the DWP disagree.

When you read the DWP’s response, it’s useful to identify the facts that the DWP has relied on to reach its decision.

Example

The point of Paola’s appeal is to show that she’s entitled to the standard rate of the mobility component of PIP. The relevant facts concern her ability to move around (as she has no difficulty with planning and following journeys). Relevant facts might include the following:

  • Paola can stand and move unaided more than 20 metres but not more than 50 metres (according to the legislation, this means she should qualify for 8 points, enough to be awarded the standard rate of the mobility component).
  • This is because she has severe arthritis in both hips.
  • She suffers pain all the time and the pain increases when she stands and worsens when she moves.
  • She is prescribed painkillers but, although these reduce the pain, she is still in a considerable amount of pain every day.
  • Even when she has taken her painkillers, the further she walks the more intense the pain becomes and on the majority of days, when walking unaided, she would have to stop to rest and let the pain subside after walking about 30 metres.
  • If she doesn’t stop to let the pain subside, she has a tendency to fall if walking unaided.
  • Although she can drive, she rarely does so because of the pain in her hips and legs, and her car has automatic transmission (this is relevant because the DWP has said the fact she drives indicates she can stand and move unaided more than 50 metres).

These are just examples; other facts may also be relevant. 

Checking the DWP’s response

It’s important to read the DWP’s response and all the documents in the appeal bundle carefully so that you understand the DWP's reasons for its decision. You should check:

  • the legal basis the DWP has given for its decision
  • the facts the DWP has decided are relevant to its decision
  • the evidence the DWP has relied on to establish those facts
  • whether the documents you would expect have been included in the appeal bundle

Checking the DWP’s response: what you should know

To prepare your submission you need to understand the reasons the DWP reached its decision and particularly the reasons for the parts of the decision you disagree with. To do this, think about:

  • What law has the DWP relied on to make its decision?
  • What does the DWP say are the relevant facts it has relied on to reach its decision?
    • Has the DWP got the relevant facts wrong?
    • Is there anything relevant that has been overlooked by the DWP?
    • Has it failed to fully understand your circumstances?
    • Do you agree with the facts as stated by the DWP?
  • If the DWP has got the facts wrong, or if it hasn’t considered, or not fully understood your circumstances, are these omissions or mistakes significant to the outcome of the appeal? If so, it’s worth drawing the tribunal’s attention to them in your submission.
  • What evidence has the DWP relied on to reach its decision?
    • Has it drawn the wrong conclusions from the evidence, or used poor-quality evidence?
    • Has the DWP given consideration to your explanation of your circumstances?
    • What did you say about your circumstances when you claimed?
    • Did you represent the facts correctly on the claim form and in your mandatory reconsideration request?
    • Has what you've said about your circumstances been consistent?
    • If your appeal is about your illness or disability and you had an assessment, are there any important mistakes in the healthcare professional's medical report?
    • Did the healthcare professional who wrote the medical report explain what happened and what you said accurately?
  • Is there anything included in the appeal papers that supports your appeal? 

Checking the evidence

In deciding what the facts of your case are, the tribunal considers the evidence. Unlike in some other courts, there are no rules about what type of evidence the First-tier Tribunal can or cannot take into account; all kinds of evidence can be considered.

The tribunal has to ‘weigh’ the evidence to decide what it considers the facts to be. This may involve it assessing how ‘reliable’ the evidence is. For example, when considering how your health problem or disability affects you, the tribunal may look at the details you gave to the DWP (such as, on a claim form and when you requested a mandatory reconsideration of the decision) and to the healthcare assessor (if you had a health assessment) as well as the information you give in the hearing. They’re unlikely to try to ‘catch you out’ but if there are glaring, unexplained inconsistencies in your evidence, the tribunal may consider it to be less reliable. For this reason, it’s important explain the reason for any significant inconsistencies.

Example

The DWP decided Frankie shouldn’t score any points for the PIP activity ‘Planning and following journeys’ as the healthcare assessor who conducted their PIP assessment said Frankie could reliably plan and follow even an unfamiliar journey alone without an orientation aid or prompting. 

Frankie has consistently said to the DWP that they cannot follow the route of an unfamiliar journey without someone with them. They have submitted letters from their GP and support worker that explicitly confirm this. The tribunal has to consider which evidence it prefers: that of the healthcare assessor or the evidence of Frankie, Frankie’s GP and support worker combined.

Getting evidence to support your appeal

You don’t necessarily have to get more evidence to support your appeal. The tribunal can make its decision on the basis of the evidence already in the appeal bundle. Also, what you say to the tribunal doesn’t have to be supported by other evidence (’corroborated’) to be accepted by the tribunal. 

However, the tribunal will decide your appeal by looking at the law, facts and evidence. This means that any additional evidence that you can get, which confirms the facts that are relevant to establishing your case, is likely increase your chance of success.

The stronger the evidence is which supports your appeal, the more chance you have of winning your appeal. If possible, try to get supportive evidence and send it to the tribunal in advance. The more closely the evidence applies to the point of your appeal, the more the tribunal is likely to consider it relevant and important. 

It doesn't matter if the evidence (including medical evidence) is dated after the date of the decision, as long as it clearly relates to your condition at the time of the decision you’ve appealed. The tribunal can’t take into account any changes in your circumstances that occur after that date. This includes if your condition has got worse.

The tribunal rarely gets evidence for you (unless, in exceptional cases, it considers that it’s necessary for making a decision). However, if you think that the DWP may have other relevant evidence that hasn’t been included in the appeal bundle (such as a previous medical report), you can ask the tribunal to direct it to produce this.

Examples of types of evidence the tribunal may consider

  • Your own first-hand evidence explaining your circumstances. This may include information that you’ve given:
    • to the DWP in connection with your PIP claim
    • at your health assessment
    • in writing, to the appeal tribunal
      It also includes evidence you give at the hearing of your appeal, such as what you say in response to the questions put to you by the tribunal.
  • The healthcare professional’s report from a PIP health assessment.
  • Other medical evidence. This may have been obtained by the DWP (for example, a form sent to your GP) or by you, such as evidence from your GP, consultant, physiotherapist, psychiatrist or a nurse.
  • Evidence from other professionals who support you, like a social worker or support worker.
  • Evidence from family or friends who know you well. They can provide this in writing and/or they can attend the hearing as a witness.
  • Evidence obtained in connection with another of your benefit claims (such as a healthcare professional’s report relating to a work capability assessment for employment and support allowance or universal credit).

Medical evidence

If your appeal is about whether you meet the disability conditions for PIP, it’s useful to get supportive medical evidence if you can. It can help you counter evidence in the healthcare professional’s medical report which the DWP has obtained.

The DWP tends to rely heavily on what has been said in the healthcare professional’s medical report and may argue that this should be given more weight than evidence from your own GP.

However, caselaw has established that:

  • The official medical report should not automatically be preferred to the claimant's own evidence.1
  • Holding that the official medical report must automatically be preferred to that of the claimant would fly in the face of the obligation of the tribunal to consider all the evidence.2
  • The tribunal may prefer the evidence of a GP who has treated the claimant over many years; in other cases, it may prefer the evidence of a specialist who is skilled in the condition from which the claimant suffers. It may attach little weight to a 'terse' certificate from a GP.3
  • Tribunals should not give ’formulaic’ reasons for endorsing the official medical report – that is, merely on the basis that it is ’expert’ and by someone trained in applying the test.4
  • A GP is a professional person not forced by anyone to give one answer rather than another. The tribunal should not assume that the claimant is putting words in the GP’s mouth.5
  • A claimant's GP is just as professional as any other doctor or healthcare professional who gives evidence to a tribunal and, save where a proper explanation is given as to why they would do this, should not be assumed to be a vehicle for repeating what the claimant has told the GP as opposed to offering the GP's professional opinion.6 

Sometimes it’s difficult to get medical evidence – for example, your GP may say they don’t have the resources to provide a letter. You can’t insist that your GP or whoever is treating you or providing you with medical care gives you evidence for your appeal. And even if they’re willing to do so, you may be charged for it. 

To be given 'weight' by the tribunal, your medical evidence should focus on what is relevant to your appeal. A diagnosis and list of treatments is less useful than a letter stating how you are affected by your condition, ideally referring to the point of the appeal. However, it’s best to make it clear that you're asking the doctor or other medical professional to express their own opinion.

Getting medical evidence: what you should know

If your appeal is about the disability conditions for PIP:

  • Consider asking for medical evidence from someone like your GP, consultant, community psychiatric nurse, psychiatrist or physiotherapist. There’s no guarantee the evidence will make a difference to your appeal so, if they’re charging you, consider carefully whether the evidence they’ll provide will be worth it.
  • If they’re willing to provide medical evidence, try to give them information about the PIP activities and descriptors which you think apply to you, so they know what they need to concentrate on in their letter.
  • Medical evidence should relate to your condition at the time of the decision and should make this clear. The tribunal can’t take into account any worsening of your condition that occurs afterwards. However, if a change just clarifies what your circumstances were when the decision was made, it can be taken into account. For example, if you were waiting for a diagnosis when the decision was made and you got it after the date of the decision, the diagnosis can help the tribunal understand what your situation was when the decision was made and so can be taken into account.
  • If you can’t get a letter from your GP, you can ask them to provide your ‘patient summary report’. Although this may be less helpful than a letter as it doesn’t specifically relate to the conditions for PIP, it may confirm some information that’s helpful to your appeal. It’s normally provided for free.
  • If you think your medical records contain other information that would be useful to your appeal, such as consultant’s letters, you could make a ‘subject access request’ to request copies. For further information, see Getting copies of your information (SAR) on ico.org.uk.
  • Check if you already have other medical evidence that would be helpful, such as copies of letters sent to your GP from your consultant, or a hospital discharge report.

Other evidence

Getting other evidence that supports your appeal can also be helpful. For example, you could:

  • get written evidence from family and/or friends who know your situation well and who can describe the difficulties they have seen you having with the activities relevant to the PIP assessment
  • keep a daily diary for a week or two (or longer if your condition fluctuates), detailing the difficulties you have with the activities relevant to PIP on each day
  • get evidence from non-medical professionals who support you, such as a carer, support worker or social worker
  • provide a copy of a local authority needs assessment if you’ve had one and the information in it is helpful to your appeal
  • 1

    MW v SSWP [2016] UKUT 76 (AAC)

  • 2

    R(DLA) 3/99

  • 3

    R(M) 1/93

  • 4

    AG v SSWP [2009] UKUT 127 (AAC)

  • 5

    CIB/14442/1996 and CDLA/2277/2005

  • 6

    BH v SSWP (AA) [2013] UKUT 241 (AAC)