Michael Ring
Question:562 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the position in relation to an appeal by a person (details supplied) in County Mayo. [6964/03]
Written Answers - Social Welfare Appeals.
The continued entitlement to unemployment benefit of the person concerned was reviewed on 21 May 2002 when she was requested to provide details of her efforts to find full-time employment. In the light of the details provided, the deciding officer concluded that she had failed to show that she was genuinely seeking full-time work and disallowed her claim accordingly from 6 June 2002. She appealed this decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office in July 2002 and an oral hearing of her appeal was held on 8 October 2002. Having considered all of the available evidence, including that adduced at the oral hearing, the appeals officer was not satisfied that the person was genuinely seeking full-time employment and disallowed her appeal.
The person was notified of the decision of the appeals officer on 18 October 2002. The person recently submitted new evidence for consideration by the appeals officer regarding her efforts in seeking full-time employment. The departmental papers have now been requested from the local office and on receipt of these the matter will be referred to the appeals officer for early attention. Under social welfare legislation decisions in relation to claims must be made by deciding officers and appeals officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions.
Michael Ring
Question:563 Mr. Ring asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs when a disability allowance appeal will be heard for a person (details supplied) in County Mayo; and when the oral hearing will be scheduled in this case. [6965/03]
The person's claim for disability allowance was refused by a deciding officer following an examination by a medical assessor of the Department who expressed the view that he was not medically qualified for this payment. He appealed this decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office and in the context of his appeal he was examined by another medical assessor on 19 December 2002 who was also of the opinion that he did not satisfy the relevant medical eligibility criteria.
His case has now been considered by an appeals officer who is of the opinion that an oral hearing is required. This will be arranged for week commencing 31 March 2003. The person is currently in receipt of supplementary welfare allowance pending the outcome of his appeal. Under social welfare legislation, decisions on claims must be made by deciding officers and appeals officers. These officers are statutorily appointed and I have no role in regard to making such decisions.