You are here: Home >> Case Studies >> Pensions >> State Pension (Contributory) - Formerly Old Age Pension  

State Pension (Contributory) Case 1

Question At Issue:

Backdating claim and payment of Adult Dependant Allowance.

Background:

The appellant, who is in receipt of an Old Age Contributory pension, had not made a claim for that pension until some time after reaching the qualifying age (66 years), and sought to have the payment backdated. The Deciding Officer had determined that it was not appropriate to do so. In addition, he decided that the appellant was not entitled to an increase for a qualified adult in respect of his wife, on grounds that her income was deemed to exceed the limits provided for in legislation.

Oral Hearing:

The Deciding Officer, who attended at the request of the Appeals Officer, outlined the grounds for his decision in relation to both questions at issue in the case. The appellant stated that he had been unaware that he was entitled to claim an Old Age Contributory Pension on reaching age 66 years. He indicated that he had not been informed of his entitlements by the Department of Social and Family Affairs although he had continued to pay Pay-Related Social Insurance (PRSI) beyond pension age. He argued that there was an obligation on the Department to ensure that contributions were properly payable, that the Department should have been aware that he had reached pension age, and that he should have been advised accordingly. All aspects of the appellant’s case were discussed in detail, including the legislative provisions relating to backdating claims, illness, force majeure, and the provision of misleading information. The appellant advised the Appeals Officer that he suffered from major memory loss at times, and that he had been referred to a specialist a number of years earlier. Following initial consultation, however, he had not taken the matter further. He confirmed that he was not on medication. He acknowledged that he had not been given misleading information, and contended that it was his memory loss that he was relying on as his main grounds of appeal.

In relation to the qualified adult allowance, the position with regard to earnings/income limits was discussed. The appellant argued that the assessment of his wife’s shares was unrealistic, as they did not yield the income assessed by the Deciding Officer. He sought clarification as to the value of the shares assessed and asked if he could submit further, more up-to-date evidence in this regard. The Appeals Officer agreed and requested that the Deciding Officer provide him with a full report when the appellant had provided additional information. (The Deciding Officer subsequently issued a reminder but no additional evidence was submitted by the appellant.)

Consideration of the Appeals Officer:

The Appeals Officer concluded, on the weight of evidence, that the decision with regard to backdating the award of pension, and that concerning the qualified adult allowance were correct, fair and reasonable. In the circumstances, he considered that the appeal must fail.

Outcome:

Appeal disallowed.

End of Document