I propose to take Questions Nos. 117, 139, 146, 147 and 152 together.
Decisions on statutory social welfare schemes are made by statutorily appointed deciding officers. The rules of natural justice and fair procedures are applied by deciding officers when making decisions that could have an adverse effect on the person concerned. The deciding officer must satisfy him/herself that the person: is aware of all the information that could adversely affect his/her entitlement; was notified that his/her entitlement was under review; was given an opportunity to comment and to submit any facts or information to correct any inaccuracy or incompleteness in the information; and any comments made by the person are clearly and fully considered before a decision is made.
Deciding officers and others involved in the process will assist claimants as far as possible in making their applications but, as a matter of law, the burden of providing evidence to support a claim rests with claimants.
Disqualifications and disallowances are issued to the customer in writing and include an explanation of the reason/s for the decision. The disallowance/disqualification grounds, and reason/s for same, are outlined clearly and are sufficient to enable the appellant to lodge an appeal.
It is considered that issuing copies of claimants’ files or telephoning applicants prior to making a decision would place an unnecessary and unreasonable burden on resources in the Department and would impact on operating costs and processing times. Persons wishing to access their files are facilitated individually as requests are made.
Persons are advised, in decision letters, of their right to seek a Departmental review of the initial decision and are advised as to how to lodge an appeal to the Social Welfare Appeals Office (SWAO). Where a review is sought, the deciding officer re-examines the case and, taking account of any new facts or evidence, may revise his/ her decision. In 2011, 42% of favourable decisions made following lodgement of appeal applications, were as a result of deciding officers revising their original decisions, which obviated the need for claimants to go through the full appeals process. These revised decisions arose as a result, in most cases, of new facts or fresh evidence produced by the claimant after the original decision on his /her claim. The figures illustrate that the review process is well understood and utilised.
Decisions regarding the recoupment of overpayments are administrative in nature and do not fall within the remit of the SWAO. However, before a recovery plan is put in place, the views of the customer are sought and taken into consideration. The customer may also seek a review of the recovery plan.
Deciding officers are reminded through ongoing training, guidelines and circulars that the decision of the appeals officer should be implemented without delay. In a very small number of cases, changes in circumstances may come to light in the short period between the appeals officer making his/ her decision and its implementation, which would require revision of the appeals officer’s decision e.g. cases where evidence of fraud is discovered. There are also a very limited number of cases where the Chief Appeals Officer may be asked to review the appeals officer’s decision. The vast majority of appeals officers’ decisions are implemented on receipt of the decision.
