asked the Minister for Social Welfare if he will state in respect of the disability benefit claim of a person (name supplied) (a) the original date of claim, (b) the benefit payments made, (c) the date of examination by medical referee, (d) the date of medical referee's report, (e) the date from which benefit payments were discontinued, (f) the date on which notification of insured person's dissatisfaction with decision reached his Department, (g) the date on which appeals form was sent to the insured person, (h) the date on which completed form was received in his Department, (i) the date on which receipt of appeal form was acknowledged to claimant, (j) the date on which second acknowledgement for same appeal issued from his Department, (k) the date on which it is anticipated oral hearing on the matter will be held, and (l) the date on which it is anticipated final determination of the appeal will issue.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Disability Benefit Claimant.
The following is the information required by the Deputy: (a) 1st June, 1966, (b) 40/- weekly from 4th June, 1966 (fourth day of incapacity) to 12th July, 1966, (c), (d) and (e) 13th July, 1966, (f) 22nd July, 1966, (g) 15th August, 1966, (h) 18th August, 1966, (i) and (j) the appeal form was not formally acknowledged but on 14th September, 1966 a notification that it had been submitted to an Appeals Officer was sent to the claimant, (k) in the week commencing 7th November, 1966 and (l) in the week following the oral hearing unless further investigation or medical examination is required.
Would the Minister give me the reason for the delay between the date on which the insured person expressed her dissatisfaction and was invited to lodge an appeal, and did so on 15th July——
August.
She did not receive the appeals form from the Minister's Department until 17th August—a delay of a month and two days. Having completed it and returned it to the Department on 17th August she got no acknowledgment until 19th September. Having had her appeal acknowledged, she waited for some action. The next document she received—I have all of the documents here—was a further acknowledgment on the same type of form dated 27th September, the second being exactly the same as the first. This woman has not benefited over all that project. Can the Minister explain the delay of a month and two days in the sending out of an appeals form and the position as regards the acknowledgment sent out on 19th September and the further acknowledgment sent out on 27th September?
It is not correct to say that it took a month and two days to send out an appeals form. Notification that it was intended to appeal was received on 22nd July and the appeals form was sent out on 15th August. I am informed that this did not hold up the progress of the appeal because the second medical examination was carried out on 16th August. With regard to the acknowledgment, it is not the practice to acknowledge receipt of these forms. What the Deputy refers to as an acknowledgment was a communication sent to the applicant as a result of a phone call to the local agent. Arrangement have been made for an oral hearing and there should be no great delay after that. It is not correct for the Deputy to say that the person concerned is entitled to this benefit: that has not yet been established. The position at the moment is that it has been ruled by a deciding officer that benefit is not payable and the question is now on appeal.
Would the Minister not think he would give a more appropriate and satisfactory answer if he admitted to me now and to the unfortunate insured person that his Department fell down completely on this job? The Minister must be convinced of that and he would do a service to this House if he admitted it. Owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the Minister's reply I propose, with the permission of the Chair, to raise this matter on the Adjournment.
I shall communicate with the Deputy in the course of the afternoon.
There is one point which I should like the Minister to clarify. I think he said it was not the practice to acknowledge appeal forms. Am I not right in thinking that there is a time limit within which an applicant must appeal? If they do not get an acknowledgment of receipt of their form, could the position not arise that, if the form went astray, the person concerned would not know he or she was out of time for appealing?
I shall look into that. The position is that it is not the practice.
I think it should be the practice.
Possibly it would be better if they were——
Why does it take so long, in so many cases—as Deputy Casey said, from June to November— to decide a case on appeal of refusal to pay unemployment benefit or disability benefit? If people are entitled to benefit why are they kept out of benefit for as long as six months, especially if it is the only income they will have to live on?
It is not from June to November. This notification that it was intended to appeal took place on 22nd July. I agree it is an exceptionally long period. It is very seldom that there is such a long delay in deciding these appeals. The normal time is about four to six weeks.
What happens in a number of cases is that these people have to depend on assistance from charitable organisations such as the Society of St Vincent de Paul and that the funds of these charitable organisations are eaten up in giving out allowances when disability or whatever the benefit may be should be paid.
I suppose that does happen in some cases. I hope Deputy O'Higgins is not confusing this with initial claims for disability benefit. This is the case of a person the medical referee decided is not eligible for benefit, due to the fact that she has not been ruled as unfit for work. This is an appeal against that decision.
I understand that. I am speaking generally.
Is the Minister not aware that, on 14th September, his Department wrote to the insured person and said an oral hearing will be held at an early date? It has not been held yet, not even to this day.
It should not have taken that long.