- Skip Navigation |
- Sitemap |
- Text Size: A |
- A |
- A
- Make a Complaint
- About Us
- FAQs
- Legislation
- Press Releases
- Speeches
- Publications
- Sample Cases
- Languages Act
- Disability Act 2005
The Office of the Ombudsman is open between 9.15 and 5.30 Monday to Thursday and 9.15 to 5.15 on Friday.
18 Lr. Leeson Street, Dublin 2.
Tel: +353-1-639 5600
Lo-call: 1890 223030
Fax: (01) 639 5674 Email: ombudsman@ombudsman.gov.ie
Annual Report of the Ombudsman 2003
Chapter 3 - Department of Agriculture and Food - Dispute over Repayment Procedures
Department of Agriculture and Food
Dispute over Repayment Procedures
A participant in the Scheme of Early Retirement from Farming (ERS)
complained that a computer error in the Department of Agriculture and
Food caused an overpayment of his early retirement pension to be made
to him and he was not happy about the way the Department sought the
repayments.
The ERS provides that early retirement pension payments made to
participants are reduced by the amount of national pension payments
which they receive. In this case, the Department failed to take account
of budgetary increases which were made to non-contributory pensions in
calculating the ERS payments. On discovering its mistake the Department
issued a standard letter which it used in cases where overpayments
occurred. By this stage the complainant had been overpaid for a period
of almost twelve months. The letter imposed a six month repayment
schedule on the complainant and he was not consulted about the proposed
schedule.
While I accept that mistakes can happen and, generally speaking,
public bodies are entitled to recover overpayments I hold the view that
where the fault lies with a public body it should adopt a flexible
approach in recovering overpayments. This is particularly the case
where there is no evidence that the person receiving the overpayment
had contributed in any way towards the error.
Following contact with my Office the Department agreed that it would revise the terms of the standard letter it issues in such cases to allow the participant an opportunity to discuss the terms under which the repayments can be made. I considered that this was a positive step taken by the Department which will benefit others in a similar position in future.
