Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

123. To ask the Minister for Social Protection the amount of unclaimed DSP payments that have been returned to her Department by An Post in the years 2011, 2012 and 2013; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [31906/14]

Jack Wall (Kildare South, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

124. To ask the Minister for Social Protection if she will confirm that €65 million of unclaimed DSP payments was returned by An Post to her Department in 2013; the level of this that was subsequently paid out to claimants; and the amount of money reimbursed to her Department through unclaimed or contested claims through the EFT system over the same period; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [31907/14]

Joan Burton (Dublin West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I propose to take Questions Nos. 123 and 124 together.

The information requested by the Deputy in regard to unclaimed DSP payments is set out in the following table:

An Post unclaimed DSP payment issues

In accordance with long established government accounting rules and procedures, payments routed through An Post are brought to account by the Department for expenditure purposes upon encashment (i.e. when the customer presents at a Post Office to collect their payment). Where customers do not to collect the amounts due for payment within a specified period or where customer circumstances change and payments are individually stopped by the Department the payment authorisations go out of date and are regarded as lapsed issues. In 2013 the value of lapsed issues as provided by An Post was €65.6 m.

Where the authorisation has lapsed but entitlement remains the customer is entitled to a subsequent payment. The Department does not maintain a cumulative record of issues which have lapsed and are subsequently paid.

Payments made by EFT are paid directly from the Department’s bank account to designated customers bank accounts and are recorded as expenditure on the date of issue. By their nature they do not give rise to unclaimed or contested claims on the Department’s payment system. Occasionally however EFT payments are returned by the Department’s bank as having been unapplied for reasons such as customer account closure or error. These details are investigated and where entitlement remains the customer is entitled to a subsequent payment. The Department does not maintain a cumulative record of unapplied EFT credits which are subsequently paid.