Before writing your submission, read Checking the law, facts and evidence
On this page:
When the DWP sends you a copy of its response to your appeal, you're asked whether you want to reply by sending further information or evidence to the tribunal. It’s usually a good idea to send a written ‘submission’.
Your submission sets out your case for the tribunal. You don’t have to send one, but your chances of winning may be increased if you do. It allows the tribunal to clearly understand what you’re asking for, how the relevant facts and evidence support this, and the points of disagreement between you and the DWP.
If you have a representative, and you gave HM Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) their details when you appealed, HMCTS should have sent them a copy of the DWP’s response and the appeal bundle. At this stage of the appeal, a representative from a professional organisation (such as an advice agency, Law Centre or a local authority’s welfare rights unit, if it has one) can usually help by drafting a submission to the tribunal on your behalf. For further information about representatives, see Your representative.
You don’t have to have a representative to help with your appeal, but if you don’t have one it's a good idea to get advice on preparing your submission from a professional organisation which provides free, independent advice on benefits (such as one of the organisations mentioned above). An adviser may be able to help you prepare the submission for the tribunal. Depending on resources, they may also be willing to act as your 'representative' and attend your appeal hearing with you. If they act as your representative and you inform HMCTS of this, HMCTS will allow them to help you put your case to the tribunal.
Getting help with your submission from an adviser or representative who understands the relevant law can help increase your chance of winning your appeal.
To find an adviser, check advicelocal.uk.
The tribunal rules say the tribunal must receive your submission and any further documents you want it to consider within one month of the date when the DWP sent their response to you.1
In practice, the tribunal is usually willing to accept a submission and documents later than this. The tribunal has discretion to to ‘extend or shorten the time limit for complying with any rule’ subject to its overriding objective to deal with cases ‘fairly and justly’.2
If your submission or additional evidence will arrive after the one-month time limit:
As a general rule, your submission should only include information relevant to the appeal. You don’t need to repeat information that’s already included in the appeal papers. Instead you can refer to it, giving the page number to help the tribunal to find it easily.
When writing the submission:
If you’re helping your client to draft an appeal submission you must decide:
Both of these decisions may depend on your organisation's practice and resources.
It might help to consider these points.
There’s no official submission form and no set rules about what a submission should contain or how it should be laid out. Ideally, your submission should be clearly structured.
Include your name and the appeal reference number on the front page and also in a header or footer on each of the pages of the submission. If the submission is written from your representative, it should also include your representative’s name, and contact information.
Then, an example structure might be:
If your appeal is about the disability conditions for PIP and the number of points you’ve been awarded, you can draft an appeal submission by using our tool (for subscribers):
This is a brief introductory statement summarising why you’re appealing and what you want the tribunal to decide.
It should clearly identify the decision you are appealing and which part(s) of the decision you disagree with. It should allow the tribunal to quickly understand the decision you think the DWP should have made. If there are parts of the DWP’s decision that you’re not disputing you can also state this.
1.1 On 10 February 2025, the DWP decided that I should be awarded the standard rate of the mobility component of PIP from the date of my claim for PIP on 20 December 2024. I am appealing against this decision as I believe I should qualify for the enhanced rate of the mobility component from that date on the grounds that I satisfy the mobility descriptors 1(d) and 2(c). The DWP agrees that I satisfy mobility descriptor 2(c) but considers I do not satisfy mobility descriptor 1(d).
1.2 I am not disputing the DWP’s decision on my entitlement to the daily living component.
This tells the tribunal the background facts that are relevant to your appeal and guides them to related evidence. Depending on what your appeal is about, relevant background facts might include a brief statement of your health condition(s) and/or disability and how they affect you, the medication you take and any relevant side effects of the medication. Refer the tribunal to any supportive evidence within the appeal bundle by including the page number.
2.1 Following a serious road traffic accident in 2020 I have PTSD and have ongoing pain in my pelvis and hip. The pain is constant but is worsened when I put weight on my legs and when I move around. Due to the pain, my mobility is severely restricted (as detailed in my GP’s letter, p87). I suffer flashbacks and periods of intense anxiety due to the PTSD. I find it very difficult to leave the house. I am under the care of a psychiatrist at my community mental health team (as confirmed by my psychiatrist’s letter, p96). I am prescribed medication for the pain and anxiety (see my prescription list, p40). The painkillers I take cause me to feel sleepy and make me forgetful.
2.2 I found it difficult to explain my condition fully to the healthcare professional who conducted my health assessment for PIP. Because of travelling to the assessment centre, I was in a lot of pain and experiencing a great deal of anxiety on the day of the assessment. I had taken an extra dose of painkillers to allow me to manage to get to the assessment, but this combined with the anxiety I was feeling, left me forgetful and confused. I found it difficult to concentrate on some of the questions and did not like to keep asking the assessor to repeat them as the assessor seemed in a hurry.
This is a more detailed explanation (sometimes known as 'submissions') of why the appeal should succeed. It should draw the tribunal’s attention to the relevant facts that show you meet the legal conditions for the outcome you want from the appeal, and to any evidence that supports those facts.
If your appeal relates to the disability conditions for PIP, remember that:
3.1 I consider that I should be entitled to the enhanced rate of the mobility component as the following descriptors apply to me.
3.2 The DWP decided that in relation to this activity, I satisfy descriptor 2(c). The DWP therefore awarded me 8 points, sufficient for me to qualify for the standard rate of the mobility component. I agree with the DWP’s decision that I satisfy descriptor 2(c) and do not wish to dispute this.
3.3 The DWP decided that I do not satisfy any of the descriptors relating to this activity. I disagree with this aspect of the DWP’s decision and believe that I satisfy descriptor 1(d). This is for the following reasons.
3.4 I was involved in a very serious road traffic accident in 2020. As a result of being hit by another vehicle while travelling at high speed on the motorway, my car hit the central reservation, skidded back across the other lanes of traffic and rolled over. I was trapped in the car for several hours while emergency services tried to free me and was hospitalised for 3 weeks due to injuries I sustained to my pelvis, hips and lung (see the hospital discharge letter, p89). I refer the tribunal to the details I gave of this in my claim form (p35) and to the healthcare professional who conducted my PIP assessment (p46 and 49).
3.5 As well as causing me physical injury, this accident has had a long-term effect on my mental health. Since the accident I have flashbacks, severe anxiety, panic attacks and depression. I find it difficult to leave the house and only do so when prompted and encouraged by my family members.
3.6 Because of these difficulties, my GP referred me to the community mental health team in August 2022. Since that time, I have been under the care of Dr Antakis, a psychiatrist at the community mental health team, who diagnosed me with PTSD in December 2022 (see the letter from Dr Antakis, p96).
3.7 When I am outside, I tend to be hypervigilant, particularly if I am near traffic (see the letters from my psychiatrist (p96) and mental health support worker (p92) which confirm this). I get feelings of panic on at least one occasion whenever I go out, and often have panic attacks, during which I sweat, my heart races and I feel disorientated and dizzy. The panic attacks don’t occur every time I go out but tend to be more likely to occur when I go to unfamiliar places. They are unpredictable, but because I feel unsafe and very vulnerable when they occur, I fear going out alone and never go to unfamiliar places alone - even the thought of doing so causes me severe anxiety (as detailed in my psychiatrist’s letter, p97).
3.8 I have not been to an unfamiliar place alone since the accident. If I have to go somewhere unfamiliar (for example to an appointment) I always have to make sure I have someone with me who knows me well, such as my partner or mental health support worker (see their letters, p99 and p103 which confirm this).
3.9 The DWP says the reasons for their decision was that I told the nurse who did my PIP health assessment that I drive and that the medical report from that assessment said I engaged well at the assessment, maintained good eye contact, was not agitated and did not rock back and forth (p29). The DWP states that they therefore consider I am able to plan and follow journeys without prompting, assistance and without overwhelming psychological distress.
3.10 In fact, I explained to the nurse that, although I can drive, since my accident I rarely do so. When I do drive, I only go to familiar places near my home and never drive to unfamiliar places or on very busy roads (see the letter from my partner which confirms this, p104). I would not feel safe doing so.
3.11 My condition does not cause me to rock back and forth, even when I am experiencing severe anxiety. I found the health assessment very stressful, and during it I was shaking. I had taken extra medication, above my normal prescribed dosage, to cope with going. My partner attended with me (as mentioned in the medical report, p45). I would not have been able to get there alone. During the assessment, I tried very hard to hide how I was feeling because I tend to feel embarrassed and ashamed by my inability to cope with situations I used to be able to deal with, even though I know it is outside my control. I found it hard to concentrate on what the nurse was saying and my partner had to help me by prompting me to explain things when I missed things out or didn’t understand.
3.12 My difficulty with going to unfamiliar places alone is consistent with what is explained about my condition in the letters from my support worker (p92) and has been confirmed by my psychiatrist (p96), both of whom know me well. I feel the specialist evidence of my psychiatrist is more reliable than the evidence of the nurse who conducted the PIP assessment, who did not know me and is not a specialist, particularly as I was unable to fully explain my situation during the assessment.
3.13 I consider I meet mobility descriptor 1(d) which attracts a score of 10 points. If the tribunal do not think I meet that descriptor, I ask in the alternative that it considers whether I meet descriptor 1(b) as, on the majority of days since my accident, I need prompting and encouragement to undertake any journey because of overwhelming psychological distress. Descriptor 1(b) attracts a score of 4 points.
4.1 For the reasons I have described I ask the tribunal to replace the DWP’s decision that I do not satisfy any of the descriptors for mobility activity 1 with a decision that I satisfy mobility descriptor 1(d) or, in the alternative, descriptor 1(b) and should therefore be awarded the enhanced rate of the mobility component from the date of my claim, 20 December 2024.
Signed:
Date:
After you send in your submission and any further evidence, the tribunal usually numbers these documents, including them as an addition to the appeal bundle. It sends a copy of the numbered pages to you and the DWP. The members of the tribunal are sent the appeal bundle and the additions before the hearing.
If your appeal is being decided on the papers (without a hearing), your appeal is then ready to be decided by the tribunal who will inform you of their decision.
If there is going to be a hearing of your appeal, you are notified of the date when one becomes available. You should be given at least 14 days' notice of the hearing, unless you have agreed to less, or there are urgent or exceptional circumstances that mean less notice can be given.5
If you’re late sending in your submission, you may be notified of the hearing date before you send it. If this happens, try to send your submission and any further evidence as soon as you can, so that there’s time for it to be sent to and read by the tribunal before the hearing.
If you’re having a face-to-face hearing, and you’ve either sent your submission or further evidence to the tribunal with less than two weeks to go until the hearing, or you haven’t sent it at all, take four copies of the information with you to the hearing. Give them to the tribunal clerk when you arrive. Be aware that the tribunal will have limited time to read additional information provided on the day of the hearing and may consider that you should have sent it earlier.
