The High Court has upheld a decision that a woman’s estate is liable to repay €51,700 for overpayments of the non-contributory pension.
A judge’s ruling outlined how the woman – a widow without children – was assessed in early 2006 as having a weekly income of €37 from her farming and a negative balance in her bank account.
However, her entitlement reduced from late 2006 and ceased from mid 2009.
The posthumous discovery of five other bank accounts showed she had €139,700 in savings around the time of her death in 2015, when she was about 90 years old. Cousins were her closest living relatives.
The means-tested old age pension is granted to people who, because of lack of means, need weekly payments to maintain a reasonable basic living standard.
The woman, who lived on a farm in the west, failed to inform social welfare authorities of her change in means, as is required, and continued to receive the pension until her death in 2015 by reference to her earlier assessed means.
Social welfare officials investigated when the executor discovered the accounts at probate stage. In 2016 an officer demanded her estate repay €72,100 for payments she incorrectly received from late 2006 until her death.
This was reduced to €51,700 when a social welfare appeals officer concluded the woman ceased to have sufficient mental capacity to advise authorities of her means change from July 2013.
The executor of the woman’s estate requested a revision of this appeal decision, contending “new medical evidence” showed the woman lacked mental capacity from 2009 and had Alzheimer’s disease since 2010.
The executor’s request for a review was made under section 317(1)(a) of the 2005 Social Welfare Consolidation Act, which permits revision of an appeal decision that appears erroneous in light of new evidence.
The appeals officer decided the new material, including a letter from the woman’s GP, did not demonstrate the earlier ruling was factually erroneous.
These details and background to the executor’s High Court appeal were set out in the judgment of Mr Justice Alexander Owens, who concluded the appeals officer did not err in law and was entitled to find as he did.
He noted the executor’s route of appeal to the High Court cannot challenge the lawfulness of the officer’s decision or usurp the officer’s fact-finding role.
The woman, whose name was not included in the judgment, physically collected her pension until April 2014 and on each occasion signed a confirmation that her financial circumstances had not changed, the judge said.
However, “substantial” funds were lodged into her accounts, including credits for payments of EU farm subsidies, he said.
He said her accounts held “substantial credit balances” before there was any issue of cognitive impairment, while financial information shows her affairs were conducted in a “highly organised fashion up to her death”.
The judge said the appeals officer who reduced the estate’s liability found the woman failed to disclose her full means on review in 1997 and 2005 when in relatively good health but she had cognitive issues in her later years.
At the High Court the executor argued the appeals officer should have taken the opinion of a medical assessor, while medical documents obliged a view that the woman lacked capacity from 2010.
Mr Justice Owens said the officer was entitled to decide the new information submitted was not sufficient to demonstrate the earlier appeal decision was erroneous.
He said the woman’s “lack of entitlement to receive pension arose from increase in her means” and had “nothing to do with any medical condition”.
- Listen to our Inside Politics Podcast for the latest analysis and chat
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
