George Lee (Dublin South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 307: To ask the Minister for Social and Family Affairs if her attention has been drawn to the distress caused to a person (details supplied) in County Dublin by her Department's decision to replace their ten years of class A stamps with class D stamps; if her attention has further been drawn to the fact that this decision puts the person in a very unreasonable position because they are now too old to buy notional service and it is too late to start an added voluntary contribution; if she will agree that this is unreasonable in view of the fact that it places the person in a serious financial situation through no fault of their own; the implications for this person's pension as a result of this decision; if she will give the precise figure or percentage by which this person's pension will be reduced as a result of this decision; the amount of additional PRSI this person paid as a result of paying class A stamps; if this money will be refunded to the person with interest should their class A stamps be replaced with class D stamps; if she will intervene to reverse this decision; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [5460/10]

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

The person (details supplied) is a public servant and in December 2009 her employer requested Scope Section of the Department to examine and confirm the correct Class of PRSI for more than 100 of its employees, including the person concerned. The legislation governing the social insurance status of employees of a public authority is set out in Section 14 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 and in Article 83 of S.I. No. 312 of 1996. The legislation states, inter alia, that a person employed on or before 5 April 1995 in a capacity which was not permanent and pensionable will pay PRSI at Class A. If that person subsequently becomes employed under a public authority in a permanent and pensionable capacity, without having had a break in service, he/she will pay Class D PRSI from that date. The position in relation to the person (details supplied) is that she was employed in a capacity which was not permanent and pensionable on 5 April 1995 and her employer correctly deducted Class A PRSI. On 13 September 1999 she became employed in a permanent and pensionable capacity and her employer confirmed that she had not had a break in service in the interim period. Her employer incorrectly continued to deduct Class A PRSI.

Following the request from her employer, a Deciding Officer in Scope Section issued a formal decision on 13 January 2010 to the person and to her employer confirming that PRSI at Class D should apply from 13 September 1999 to date. On 29 January 2010 the person appealed the decision to the Social Welfare Appeals Office. As the decision has been appealed, the calculation and payment of a refund of the difference between Class A and Class D PRSI from 1999 will be deferred pending the conclusion of the appeal process. There is no provision in Social Welfare legislation for interest to be paid on refunds of PRSI.

The implications for any entitlement by the person to a state pension are not known as the Department does not provide forecasts on possible future pension entitlement. However, I have arranged for a copy of the person's PRSI contribution record to be issued to her home address. It should be noted that this document will show Class A PRSI paid since 1999 as it is Departmental practice not to update a person's contribution record until the appeal process is concluded. Copies of 'Working it Out' booklets, which explain how the State Pension Transition and State Pension Contributory are calculated, will also be posted to the person.