Aengus Ó Snodaigh (Dublin South Central, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 855: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs the reason for the delay in having applicants' appeals in the cases of refusal of applications for various allowances administered by her Department dealt with in a timely fashion, including being examined or heard in the first instance and the time afterwards to inform the applicants of the decision; and the steps being taken to reduce the waiting time. [33069/09]

Mary Hanafin (Dún Laoghaire, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I am informed by the Social Welfare Appeals Office that during 2008 the average time taken to process all appeals (i.e. those decided summarily and by way of oral hearing) was 22 weeks. However, if allowance was made for the 25% most protracted cases, the average time fell to just over 14 weeks. Those processing times replicate those for 2007 notwithstanding the fact that there was an increase of 27% in the number of appeals received during 2008. I am advised that there has been a further increase of 39% in the number of appeals received for the first nine months of this year over the corresponding period in 2008 and, while average processing times for 2009 are not yet available, it is anticipated that they will have deteriorated on the 2008 position.

I should say that the processing time for appeals covers all phases of the appeal process including the submission by the Department of its comments on the grounds for the appeal, further examination by the Department's Medical Assessors in certain illness related cases and further investigation by Social Welfare Inspectors where required. Circumstances may also arise, normally outside of the control of the Social Welfare Appeals Office, which have the effect of unduly prolonging the time taken to process appeals. For example, delays can occur where the appellant submits new information or evidence, often at an advanced stage in the appeal proceedings. In addition, adjournments may be sought by the appellant or his/her representative which would have the effect of prolonging the appeal process.

In the vast majority of cases, decisions are made by Appeals Officers within four weeks of an oral hearing. However, a longer period may be required in more complex cases where further submissions may be awaited or complex issues of law may need to be researched.

I am anxious there should be no further deterioration in appeals processing times especially in the light of the 39% increase in the number of appeals received so far this year. In that connection, two additional Appeals Officers were appointed to the Social Welfare Appeals Office in January. Since then, however, four Appeals Officers have retired and I am advised that every effort is being made to have these vacancies filled as a matter of urgency. Furthermore, I am assured by the Chief Appeals Officer that he is keeping current processes under continuous review with a view to achieving a more effective throughput of appeals. Given the quasi-judicial nature of the social welfare appeals process, progress in that regard must be achieved in a manner which is not in conflict with due process in terms of the rights of appellants and adherence to the requirements of natural justice.