We need your help now
Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.
You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.
If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.
Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
By continuing, you are indicating that you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
A WOMAN WHOSE mentally ill mother died was subsequently hit with a bill for €105,000 by the Department of Social Protection.
The money was seen as an overpayment by the department to the woman whose case had been known to the department for over 15 years.
The case was brought to light today as the Ombudsman Peter Tyndall presented his report for 2014.
The bereaved woman in question was asked to repay the overpayment when she wrote to the department in 2012 to inform them of her mother’s death.
The woman referred her complaint regarding the overpayment to the Ombudsman who passed the issue onto Ireland’s Chief Appeals Officer (CAO), who upon investigation overturned the department’s ruling.
It seems the woman’s mother had not had her case reviewed since 2000, and did not have the mental capacity “to be fully aware of this complex situation”.
The overpayment arose as a result of the department not acting on information available to it, while the medical evidence on file “was sufficient to inform the department that the woman had been unwell for a number of years”.
Given Social Protection’s culpability in the situation the CAO said it was not appropriate for it to seek repayment from the woman’s daughter.
Cianan Brennan / TwitterPublic complaints to the Ombudsman Peter Tyndall were up 11% in 2014 #ombudsman #report pic.twitter.com/BCVbuZuIk0
— Cianan Brennan (@ciananbrennan) June 10, 2015
That case was one of a number of striking complaints mentioned by Tyndall that his department has dealt with over the course of the last year.
Others include:
Direct Provision
Tyndall, who was appointed Ombudsman in December 2013, said that public service complaints to his office increased by 11% to over 3,500 in 2014, mainly due to the additional 200 public bodies which came under his remit that year.
He specifically welcomed the decision by the Oireachtas Committee on Public Service Oversight and Petitions for his office to have full independent oversight of direct provision centres.
“It is time to bring an end to the anomaly that some of the most vulnerable people in the state can not have access to this office,” he said.
Tyndall said he was also hopeful that all private nursing homes will come under his jurisdiction in the future, just as public nursing homes already do.
There has also been significant reduction in the number of complaints to the Ombudsman that have been outstanding for more than one year, with the number now outstanding just over 1% of total complaints, “a great reduction on the backlog in the recent past”.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
A guy got 79k disability for a congenital arm condition even though he was here for just over a year??? WTF is that about??
This new Ombudsman is flathulagh with our money. Maybe there is a new Celtic Tiger cub out there.
@John @Dan The article does highlight a service that is available to all citizens many of whom may unaware of its existence. This is actually a very informative article.
FG continue to destroy the poor and ill. Medical Cards, USC, carers, disability benefits etc. goes on and on.
Yes. That’s exactly what this article proves.
Hmmmm.
Or you could look at it this way: 200 more public bodies now come under the remit of the Ombudsman.
MK76, what the article proves is that there is somewhere to take a complaint re social welfare. Somewhere that isn’t, but should be widely known about.
to be honest i never knew about them till now but it is a good thing to have a total well informed and impartial ombudsman. i do hope the private nursing homes come under his watch that behaviour in mayo would make you sick, i know there not all the same but could you really relax if you had someone in a nursing home after seeing that.
Thus article reminds me of a line from Dara O’Briain: “zombie attacks are at an all time low but fear of zombies is rising”. Slow news day? Woman gets asked to pay but when points out stupidity and unfairness the debt is wiped. Woman doesn’t get wrong procedure performed. Any other non stories for us today?
Man doesn’t get eaten alive by tiger in Leitrim.
news just in…. an idiot comments complaining about an article they did not want to read, but did!
Isn’t the point of the article that cases like these, which as you rightly point out are blatantly ridiculous, still had to be taken to the Ombudsman to be addressed? The Dept of Social Protection attempted to force the woman in the first case to pay a huge sum of money, when she went out of her way to contact them to inform them of her mothers death.
Some people would consider that kind of institutional callousness is a story, especially with a Department that specifically deals with the most vulnerable members of society.
Some people would consider that the Departments intent to make this poor woman pay for their oversight is a story.
Richard, you clearly didn’t read it either. I saw headline and thought, wow that’s disgraceful. Only to find when I actually read the article that it was a list of things that didn’t happen.
It didn’t happen, only because the Ombudsman was contacted. I wonder how you, John B, or Richard, would react if you got a bill like this from a Government department. I personally would be extremely concerned if I got a bill for €105,000 for overpayment.
What’s the difference between Joan Burton and Richard Bruton… A few letters
You remind me of a zombie, in that you’re obviously braindead. The article is newsworthy, because it highlights cases where the Ombudsman intervened before the occurrences. And perhaps highlights the bureaucracy that exists in some public sector departments. It also quite possibly exposes the carelessness of public sector workers that taxpayers’ money pays for. And shows that maybe, just MAYBE, the Ombudsman has a little bit of cop on.
Maybe perhaps you’d prefer these things to actually happen to people so you can cry over the milk that has been spilled, and lock the gate when the horse is away up the road?
It’s always a sign of failure when your adversary has to resort to name calling.
Of course I would be concerned, however they didn’t pay. This is an article about things that did not happen. Things don’t happen every single day of the week. I didn’t win the lotto at the weekend, nor as a previous poster suggested did I get eaten by a tiger.
name calling is never a sign of failure when it’s backed up by facts. You were also probably never in danger of winning the lotto or being eaten by a tiger. However, if you had been in a tigers cage, surrounded by tigers, and rescued by the Ombudsman, that probably would have been newsworthy.
If your on means tested payment you shouldn’t have 105,000 on death? By the sounds of things she must have been well over the limit and entitled to nothing? 105000 over 15 years would be all her social welfare payments. She wasn’t entitled to it. Whats the big deal? Why should the daughter keep the money
Were did MR “habitually resident” come from? Seen our generous rates and said I’ll have some of that?
Does scoliosis effect you writing ability? I’m sure plenty with it sat the written papers hence why the department refused perhaps?
the woman did not have 105.000 upon her death the department of social protection said she was overpaid, since 2000.
scoliosis can effect the limbs making them weaker some cases people end up in wheel chairs.
MR “habitually resident” he could have been irish living in canada for years who knows.
Of course they didn’t have €105,000. It was an accumulation of weekly or monthly payments this lady’s mother shouldn’t have received because her situation had changed and the Department hadn’t reviewed her case properly.
Why do you say they didn’t have 105,000? why do you think there is a sizable overpayment? Obviously she had substantial assets as she was entitled to zero or near zero welfare hence the overpayment. Why do you assume if she was sick that she was also poor? We already know she had substantial assets we just don’t know how much,she could have been a millionaire for all you know. .
can we report Joan burton to this guy for taking so many people off lone parents allowance?
What kind of a crappy countty are we living in so a lazy pen pushing civilservant in hse dosent do their job properly for years and waits for the poor wan to die to hit the daughter to pay for their mistake.no way no how not going to happen nope .how dare they
Does that work with being refused carers allowance as well. That would make you think???
have your say