Bernard Durkan (Kildare North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

951. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection whether a full review can be undertaken into the case of a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1326/24]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The person concerned reached pension age on 13 July 2015. An application for State Pension (contributory) was received on 27 July 2015.

There are a number of payments and pensions paid by my Department to people over State Pension Age. One of these is the State Pension (Contributory), qualification for which is based on several criteria, including that of a minimum of 520 qualifying contributions. For those who have paid the required contributions at a reckonable rate – including Class S (self-employed) - these will be used in the calculation of their entitlement.

A self-employed contributor is not regarded as satisfying the qualifying conditions for State Pension (Contributory) unless the person has paid self-employment contributions in respect of at least one year prior to reaching age 66.

According to the records of my Department, the person concerned has a total of 226 full-rate contributions. The self-employment contributions were paid after the person concerned turned 66 and are therefore not reckonable for inclusion in the pension calculation. Since their reckonable contributions fall short of the requisite 520 paid full-rate contributions, they do not qualify for State pension (contributory).

The person concerned sought a review of the decision to disallow the State Pension (contributory) in December 2019. Following the completion of the review, the person concerned was advised in writing in March 2020 that the decision to disallow State Pension (contributory) was upheld.

In June 2020, the person appealed the decision to disallow their State Pension (contributory). The Appeals Officer issued their decision in July 2020 disallowing the appeal.

Where a person aged 66 or over does not satisfy the conditions to qualify for a SPC or qualifies for less than the maximum rate, they may instead qualify for one of the following:

• The means-tested State Pension (Non-Contributory) (SPNC) which is a means-tested payment (based on their share of household means) with a maximum payment of 95% of the SPC; or
• An increase for a qualified adult (based on their own means), amounting up to 90% of a full rate SPC pension where their spouse has a contributory pension.

Michael Healy-Rae (Kerry, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

952. To ask the Minister for Employment Affairs and Social Protection the status of a review in respect of a carer's allowance for a person (details supplied); and if she will make a statement on the matter. [1327/24]

Heather Humphreys (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Carer's Allowance (CA) is a means-tested social assistance payment made to persons who are providing full-time care and attention to a person who has such a disability that they require that level of care. An increased payment can be made where full-time care is being provided to two people.

The person concerned is in receipt of CA for one care recipient since 12 October 2023. A request for the back dating of this claim has been granted and the claim has been backdated to 13 April 2023. This includes an increase for a Qualified Child. Arrears from 13 April 2023 to 11 October 2023 issued on 9 January 2024. The person concerned was notified of this decision on 9 January 2024, the reason for it and of their right of review and appeal.

An application for CA for a second care recipient was received on 12 October 2023 also.

It is a condition for receipt of CA that the person being cared for must have such disability that they require full-time care and attention. This is defined as requiring from another person continual supervision and frequent assistance throughout the day in connection with normal bodily functions, or continual supervision in order to avoid danger to him or herself, and likely to require that level of care for at least twelve months.

The evidence submitted in support of the second application was examined and the Deciding Officer (DO) decided that this evidence did not indicate that the requirement for full-time care was satisfied for the care recipient.

The person concerned was notified of this decision, the reason for it and of their right of review and appeal.

The person concerned requested a review of this decision on 17 November 2023 and submitted additional evidence in support of their application. Following this review, the decision has remained unchanged. The person concerned was notified on 1 December 2023 of this decision, the reason for it and of their right of review and appeal.

A further review was initiated on foot of the last Parliamentary question received and the additional evidence received was examined.

In regard to the second care recipient, the decision remains unchanged. The person concerned was notified on 9 January 2024 of this decision, the reason for it and of their right of review and appeal.

A request for appeal was received on 19 December 2023. This is currently in progress and will be dealt with by the Social Welfare Appeals Office.

I hope this clarifies the position for the Deputy.