Charity Scope is calling for a fairer system to assess people for disability benefits

Charity Scope is calling on the Government to create a fairer system

The disability equality charity Scope says people have been let down for too long by the assessment process for disability benefits, and is calling on the Government to create a fairer system.

Personal Independence Payments, worth up to £148.85 a week, are meant to help with some of the extra costs of living with a disability or long-term health problem.

Those denied PIP, or who are awarded less than they expected, can ask for an internal review by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) , a process that takes 51 days on average across Britain.

If someone is still unhappy with the result of the reconsideration, they can appeal it at a tribunal.

New DWP data shows that 360 decisions made about people in Ashfield have been overturned in court between the launch of PIP in 2013 and the end of last year, 68 per cent of completed appeals.

This was just below the 66 per cent of appeals completed at a tribunal that went the claimant's way across Britain.

Across the East Midlands, the figure stood at 73 per cent.

Ceri Smith, head of policy, public affairs and campaigns at Scope, said PIP is vital to levelling the playing field for those who need it.

She said: “But for too long disabled people have been let down by assessments for this crucial lifeline.

“The fact that the number of appeals finding in favour of claimants remains so high year after year shows that major problems continue with the assessment process.

“Government needs to overhaul PIP to create a modern and fair system where everyone can get the support they need.”

Anna Stevenson, welfare benefits specialist at anti-poverty charity Turn2us, said: “What is most worrying is that there will be many claimants who are unable to navigate the appeals process and could lose out on what they are rightly entitled to as a result.

For claimants in Ashfield, the DWP also changed its decision in their favour after an appeal was lodged but before it reached a hearing on 70 occasions.