Revised Decisions and their Date of Effect


Print page
  1. Overview
  2. Power to Revise a Deciding Officer (DO) Decision
  3. Power to revise a determination of a Designated Person (DP)
  4. Power to Revise an Appeals Officer (AO) Decision
    1. Change of Circumstances
    2. New Evidence
    3. Mistake in Law
  5. Communicating the decision to the Claimant
  6. Composition of Revised Decisions
  7. Date of Effect of Revised Decisions
    1. Decision under Section 302(a) of SWCA 2005 (as amended)
    2. Decision under Section 302(b) of SWCA 2005 (as amended)
    3. Decision under Section 302(c) of SWCA, 2005 (as amended)
  8. Example of Wording of Revised Decision
  9. Further Reading

Appendix 1: List of benefits within the meaning of Section 240 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended):

Appendix 2: Section 301 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) prior to the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013.


1. Overview

A DO may revise a previous decision of a DO. In deciding to revise the decision, the DO must determine and specify:

  1. the reason for the new decision and
  2. the date from which the revised decision should have effect.

IMPORTANT: Principles of Natural Justice (NJ):

DOs and Appeals Officers (AOs) are performing administrative functions but must act quasi judicially i.e. government officials, in their decision-making process, are subject to the rules of natural justice.

Every claimant is entitled to have their claim considered in accordance with the principles of NJ including:

  1. The right to know the information upon which a decision is being made,
  2. The opportunity to comment upon any reports or documents being used in reaching the decision and generally to present his or her case,
  3. The right to know the reasons for any adverse decision,
  4. The right to have all relevant evidence considered and irrelevant evidence not taken into account,
  5. To have the decision made by an impartial person and,
  6. Where it is necessary for a fair determination of the issues, an oral hearing.

NOTE: Failure to observe the principles of NJ leave the decision liable to be overturned.

Consistency in Decision Making:

DOs in exercise of their statutory decision making functions must determine each case on its own merits. DOs take all the relevant factors of a case into consideration and use their lawful discretion to determine the basis for the decision, including whether a revised decision is from a current or retrospective date. DOs should have due regard to Departmental guidelines and previous decisions of DOs/AOs and the Courts, in cases of a similar nature.

Composition of Decision

A decision should include reference to:

  1. The relevant provision in the legislation under which payment is being allowed, disallowed, reduced.
  2. The sub-section of Section 302 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) which the DO is applying in determining the effective date of the revised decision.

2. Power to Revise DO Decision

Legislation

The legislation on revised decisions and their date of effect is covered under Sections 301 and 302 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005 (as amended).

Section 301 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides as follows:

DO revising decision of DO

301 (1) A deciding officer may at any time –

(a) revise any decision of a Deciding Officer -

  1. where it appears to him or her that the decision was erroneous –
    1. in the light of new evidence or new facts which have been brought to his or her notice since the date on which the decision was given, or
    2. by reason of some mistake having been made in relation to the law or the facts
  2. or
  3. Where –
    1. the effect of the decision was to entitle a person to any benefit within the meaning of Section 240, and
    2. it appears to the Deciding Officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances which has come to notice since that decision was given.

Therefore a revision on the grounds of a change in circumstances only applies in relation to live claims or claims that had previously been in payment.

Where a claim was originally turned down, and there has been a change of circumstances, the customer can make a fresh claim.

Change of circumstances relates only to events after the initial decision.

Section 301(1)(a) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005 (as amended) deals with the power to revise the decision of a DO.

A DO may revise the decision of a DO if:

  • new evidence or new facts come to light or
  • a mistake was made in relation to the law or the facts
  • or
  • the effect of the decision was to entitle a person to any benefit listed under Appendix 1 and
  • there has been a relevant change of circumstances that occurred before or occurs on or after the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013 which commenced on 25th of December 2013.

Subsection 301(5) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

In subsections (1)(a)(ii)(II), (1(b)(ii) and (2A)(b)(ii), the reference to any relevant change of circumstances means any relevant change of circumstances that occurred before, or occurs on or after, the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No.2) Act 2013.

'Saver' Section 3(2) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013 provides:

Where, before the coming into operation of Section 3(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013, a request had been made under Section 301 of the Principal Act for a decision or a revised decision on the grounds that there had been any relevant change of circumstances and the request had not been determined, that request shall be determined in accordance with Section 301 of the Principal Act as if that Section had not been amended by Section 3(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013.

Favourable Appeal:

Legislation

Section 301(3) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

Subsection (1)(a) shall not apply to a decision relating to a matter which is on appeal or reference under section 303 or 311 unless the revised decision would be in favour of a claimant.

When a DO's decision is under appeal, Section 301(3) stipulates that the decision can be revised by a DO only if the revision would be in favour of the claimant. This means, for example, that additional grounds for disallowance or additional retrospection cannot be included.


3. Power to revise a determination of a Designated Person (DP)

Section 301(2A) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005 (as amended) deals with the power to revise any determination of a DP .

DO revising decision of a DP

(2A) A deciding officer may at any time revise any determination of a designated person -

  1. Where it appears to him or her that the determination was erroneous –
    1. in the light of new evidence or new facts which have been brought to his or her notice since the date on which the determination was made, or
    2. by reason of some mistake having been made in relation to the law or the facts

    or

  2. where-
    1. the effect of the determination was to entitle a person to supplementary welfare allowance, and
    2. it appears to the deciding officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances which has come to notice since that, determination was made,

    and the provisions of this Part as to appeals shall apply to a decision of a deciding officer under this subsection in the same manner as they apply to an original decision of a deciding officer.

Therefore a revision on the grounds of a change in circumstances only applies in relation to live claims or claims that had previously been in payment.

Change of circumstances relates only to events after the initial decision.

Change of circumstances does not imply that the original decision was wrong, but that it has been overtaken by some change.

A DO may revise the determination of a DP if:

  • new evidence or new facts come to light or
  • a mistake was made in relation to the law or the facts
  • or
  • the effect of the decision was to entitle a person to any benefit listed under Appendix 1 and
  • there has been a relevant change of circumstances that occurred before or occurs on or after the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013 which commenced on 25th of December 2013.

Subsection 301(5) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

(5) In subsections (1)(a)(ii)(II), (1(b)(ii) and (2A)(b)(ii), the reference to any relevant change of circumstances means any relevant change of circumstances that occurred before, or occurs on or after, the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No.2) Act 2013.

This commenced on 25th December 2013

'Saver' Section 2(2) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013 provides as follows:

'Saver'

Where, before the coming into operation of Section 3(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013, a request had been made under Section 301 of the Principal Act for a decision or a revised decision on the grounds that there had been any relevant change of circumstances and the request had not been determined, that request shall be determined in accordance with Section 301 of the Principal Act as if that Section had not been amended by Section 3(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013.

In favour of SWA entitlement

When a DP's decision is under appeal, Section 301(4) stipulates that the decision can be revised by a DO only if the revision would be in favour of the claimant. This means, for example, that additional grounds for disallowance or additional retrospection cannot be included.


4. Power to Revise Appeals Officer (AO) Decision

4(a) Change of Circumstances

Legislation
Section 301(1) (b) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005 (as amended) deals with the power to revise the decision of an AO where there has been a relevant change of circumstances since the AO's decision was given.

DO revising decision of AO

301 (1) A deciding officer may at any time –

(b) revise any decision of an Appeals Officer where -

  1. the effect of the decision of the appeals officer was to entitle a person to any benefit within the meaning of Section 240, and
  2. it appears to the Deciding Officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances which has come to notice since the decision of the appeals officer was given,

and the provisions of this Part as to appeals to a revised decision under this subsection in the same manner as they apply to an original decision of a deciding officer.

Therefore a revision on the grounds of a change in circumstances only applies in relation to live claims or claims that had previously been in payment.

Change of circumstances relates only to events after the initial decision.

It is confined to cases where there has been a relevant change of circumstances which has come to notice since the original AO decision was given.

An example of a change in circumstance is where a claimant got married.

4(b) New Evidence

Legislation:

AO revising decision of AO

Section 317 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

(1) An appeals officer may at any time revise any decision of an appeals officer –

  1. where it appears to him or her that the decision was erroneous in the light of new evidence or new facts which have been brought to his or her notice since the date on which it was given, or
  2. where –
    1. the effect of the decision was to entitle a person to any benefit within the meaning of section 240, and
    2. it appears to the appeals officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances which has come to notice since that decision was given.

(2) In subsection (1)(b)(ii), the reference to any relevant change of circumstances means any relevant change of circumstances that occurred before, or occurs on or after, the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013.

This commenced on 25th of December 2013.

'Saver' - Section 4(2) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013 provides as follows:

Where, before the coming into operation of Section 4(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013, a request had been made under Section 317 of the Principal Act for a revised decision on the grounds that there had been any relevant change of circumstances and the request had not been determined, that request shall be determined in accordance with Section 317 of the Principal Act as if that Section had not been amended by Section 4(1) of the Social Welfare and Pensions Act (No. 2) 2013.

A DO does NOT have power to revise an AO's decision where the decision is erroneous in the light of new evidence or of new facts.

An example of new evidence / facts would be details of a bank account.

Where new evidence comes to light that relates to a period covered by the AO's decision, the DO should refer the file back to the SWAO for a fresh decision to be made by an Appeals Officer (under Section 317 of the SWCA 2005 (as amended)).

Where new evidence comes to light that relates to a period not covered by the AO's decision, the DO should give a fresh decision (under Section 301 of the SWCA 2005 (as amended)).

4(c) Mistake in law

Review of AO decision by AO and Chief Appeals Officer (CAO):
A DO does NOT have power to revise an AO's decision where a mistake has been made in relation to the law or the facts.

Section 318 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

318.—The Chief Appeals Officer may, at any time, revise any decision of an appeals officer, where it appears to the Chief Appeals Officer that the decision was erroneous by reason of some mistake having been made in relation to the law or the facts.

Chief Appeals Officer Review

If an error has been made by an AO in relation to the law or the facts the CAO may revise the decision under Section 318 of the SWCA 2005 (as amended). If a DO considers that such an error has occurred s/he should make a submission to DSP management with a view to having a review carried out by the CAO.

See separate guideline – Appeals Office Section 318 CAO Reviews


5. Communicating the decision to the Claimant

The principles of Natural Justice (NJ) emphasise the importance of giving adequate information to the claimant.

Many letters of appeal are submitted where there is little or no prospect of the decision being overturned due to no valid grounds of appeal being included. These can be significantly reduced by giving clear consise information to the claimant regarding the grounds and reasons for refusal.

Each Section/Office should therefore constantly monitor the wording that is being used, feedback from claimant(s) showing what is misunderstood, and the types of decision that cause the most frequent problems in this regard.

Please ensure you are familiar with the guideline on "Decision Making and Natural Justice" at:
www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Decision-Making-and-Natural-Justice.aspx

In addition, some advice on drafting letters to customers (including a sample letter) can be found in the guideline on: "Reasons for Decisions" at:
www.welfare.ie/en/Pages/Reasons-for-Decisions.aspx


6. Composition of Revised Decisions

In order for a revised decision to be strong and well founded it should include reference to:

  • the relevant provision in the legislation under which payment is being allowed or disallowed.
  • the Sub-Section of Section 302 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, as amended which the DO is applying in determining the effective date of the revised decision.

This ensures that all parties i.e. client and possibly Appeals Officer are informed of the basis of the DO decision and there is no doubt as to the grounds on which the DO has based the decision.

See examples at 8.


7. Date of Effect of Revised Decisions

Section 302 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act, 2005, (as amended) sets out the date from which a revised decision should take effect. Section 302 is divided into three sub-sections 302(a), 302(b) and 302(c). It is for the DO to determine the appropriate date having regard to the legislation and the circumstances of the case.

The effective date may be the date of the original decision, the date of the new fact or new evidence or a current date. Where fraud is involved, the decision should always be retrospective i.e. Section 302(a) of the SWCA 2005, as amended.

In other cases, the general principle is that where the customer could reasonably have been expected to be aware of the relevant facts (e.g. a change of circumstances) and to have notified the Department about the position, the decision should have effect from a retrospective date i.e. Section 302(b) of the SWCA 2005, as amended. Otherwise the decision should normally apply from a current date i.e. Section 302(c) of the SWCA 2005, as amended.

In determining the effective date, the DO should relate the facts of the case to each of the 3 subsections of Section 302 of the SWCA 2005, as amended, in sequence- i.e.

  1. Is Section 302(a) appropriate?
  2. Then, is Section 302(b) appropriate?
  3. If neither of these subsections applies, then the decision should be revised in accordance with Section 302(c) of the SWCA 2005, as amended.

The legislation is now quoted, followed by examples of where the legislation may be applied.

7(a) Section 302(a) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

302.—A revised decision given by a deciding officer shall take effect as follows:
(a) where any benefit, assistance, child benefit, family income supplement or continued payment for qualified children will, by virtue of the revised decision be disallowed or reduced and the revised decision is given owing to the original decision or determination having been given, or having continued in effect, by reason of any statement or representation (whether written or verbal) which was to the knowledge of the person making it false or misleading in a material respect or by reason of the wilful concealment of any material fact, it shall take effect from the date on which the original decision or determination took effect, but the original decision or determination may, in the discretion of the deciding officer, continue to apply to any period covered by the original decision or determination to which the false or misleading statement or representation or the wilful concealment of any material fact does not relate;

Sub-section 302(a) applies where:

  1. There is evidence of deliberate false or misleading information
  2. It is established there was a deliberate failure to disclose relevant information

Therefore there must be evidence that the information was not just false, but deliberately so, and that any subsequent failure to disclose information was "deliberate".

Example of scheme cases which may be considered under 302(a):

  • A customer who made a false declaration at claim stage e.g.
    1. client didn't disclose full means or
    2. client claimed for an adult and or child dependant who was not residing with him/her or
    3. client failed to disclose that spouse/partner was working or getting a welfare payment from another country.
  • A customer in receipt of OFP or Widow(er)'s pension fails to notify the DSP of his/ her marriage or co-habitation and continues to receive his/ her welfare payment.
  • A customer who fails to notify the Department that his spouse/civil partner/co-habitant has taken up employment
  • A customer in receipt of an illness type payment e.g. Disability Allowance, Invalidity Pension, OIB or Illness Benefit who fails to notify the Department that s/he has taken up employment. One can take up employment in certain circumstances subject to notifying the relevant Section.
  • A customer in receipt of Carers Allowance who takes up employment and fails to notify the Department.
  • A customer in receipt of Carers Allowance continues to claim the payment where the caree is deceased or has moved to a nursing home.

Note: A criminal prosecution can be taken only where a revised decision is made under Section 302(a) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended)

SAMPLE CASES

Case 1 – Section 302(a) – retrospective

  • Ms E has been in receipt of One-Parent Family Payment (OFP) since 2008.
  • In October 2010 it is established following investigation that she had married in June 2010 and is residing with her spouse.
  • She alleges that she was not aware she was no longer entitled to OFP.
  • However, evidence is available that she had returned a declaration (OFP40) after she married to state she had no change in circumstances in relation to her claim for OFP.
  • Ms E should be disqualified for payment of OFP in accordance with Section 302(a) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended).

This is a case where a revised decision under Section 302(a) is appropriate, as the client in declaring on her OFP40 form that there was no change in circumstances provided firm evidence that there was wilful concealment of the fact that she had married and as such was no longer entitled to claim OFP.

Please note: Revised decisions under Section 302(a) are always retrospective.

7(b) Section 302(b) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

302 (b) where any benefit, assistance, child benefit, family income supplement or continued payment for qualified children will, by virtue of the revised decision be disallowed or reduced and the revised decision is given in the light of new evidence or new facts (relating to periods before and after the commencement of this Act) which have been brought to the notice of the deciding officer since the original decision or determination was given, it shall take effect from the date that the deciding officer shall determine having regard to the new facts or new evidence and the circumstances of the case;

Sub-section 302(b) applies where the DO is satisfied that the claimant did not wilfully conceal facts

or

deliberately give false or misleading information.

Note: Section 302(b) allows a DO, in making a revised decision in the light of new facts or new evidence, to decide that it shall take effect either from a current or from a retrospective date. This discretion should be utilised by a DO having taken all the circumstances of the case into consideration.

Section 302(b) may be applied with retrospective effect if:

  • new facts have occurred since the person claimed the social welfare payment in question, or
  • if new evidence has come to light which was not available at claim stage and the person was aware of the new facts or evidence but failed to report this information to the Department, or
  • it is not possible for the DO to establish that the person wilfully concealed the facts on a previous interview or enquiry but the DO is satisfied that the person could reasonably have been expected to be aware of the new facts (or evidence) and their relevance.

Section 302(b) may be applied with effect from current date if the DO is satisfied that:

  • the person could not reasonably have been expected to know the relevance of the new fact,
  • or
  • the person was not aware of the undisclosed evidence at the point when s/he made the claim or subsequently,

SAMPLE CASES

Case 2 – Section 302(b) - retrospective

Mr C, a single man, had been in receipt of full-rate SPNC since 2008 on the basis of nil means.

Following his death in September 2012 it came to light that he had received an inheritance of €55,000 in July 2009 which he had lodged to a bank account.

The bank account shows regular lodgements and withdrawals by him.

He had not notified the Department of this change in his circumstances.

  • Mr C's means should be reassessed having regard to the undisclosed capital from 2009.
  • As the claimant is deceased, it cannot be established that there was fraudulent intent or wilful concealment so section 302(a) is not appropriate.
  • The receipt of the inheritance is a new fact, so the decision should be made in accordance with Section 302(b).
  • The decision should be applied retrospectively with effect from 2009 on the basis of the available evidence that Mr C was aware of his increased means and should have notified the Department about the position.

Case 3 Section 302(b) - current

Ms. D is in receipt of full rate One Parent Family Payment (OFP) since March 2012.

Following a SWI investigation, it has been established that she is cohabiting with another person as husband and wife. Her partner is working and earning €45,000 per annum.

Ms D. has provided a signed statement/declaration that she is cohabiting since June 2014.

There is a report from local enquiries that she has been cohabiting since December 2013, however there is no evidence to substantiate this such as utility bills etc.

This decision should be applied under 302(b) from date of admission for the following reasons:

  • There is a new fact before the DO
  • Unless there is solid proof of the cohabitation prior to date of admission, a revised decision to terminate OFP from date of admission is appropriate. Hearsay evidence is not established proof.

7(c) Section 302(c) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides that:

302(c) in any other case, it shall take effect as from the date considered appropriate by the deciding officer having regard to the circumstances of the case.

The effective date may be

  • the date of the original decision,
  • the date of the new fact or new evidence or
  • a current date.

Section 302(c) of the SWCA 2005, as amended applies where a decision has to be revised but neither section 302(a) or section 302(b) is appropriate i.e. the reason for revising the decision is not because the customer deliberately gave false/misleading information or deliberately withheld relevant information and is not because new facts or new evidence have come to light, or the effect is to increase (not reduce) the entitlement.

Sub-section 302(c) applies where for example a DO originally made an error or information was given to the Department but not acted on.

Where a customer was underpaid because of

  • a wrong calculation by the DO or
  • a mis-interpretation of the guidelines or legislation by the DO or an oversight by the DO
  • the position must be rectified by way of a revised decision awarding the correct entitlement from a retrospective date.

S302(c) with retrospective effect

In cases where a person has been overpaid on foot of a decision which was wrong and the DO is satisfied that the person knew the decision was wrong but deliberately omitted to bring the matter to the attention of the Department, it may be appropriate to apply the decision with retrospective effect.

S 302(c) may be applied with effect from a current date if the DO feels this is appropriate having weighed up all the available evidence and circumstances.

SAMPLE CASES

Case 4 – Section 302(c) – retrospective

Mr. W was in receipt of Disability Allowance (DA) from August 2011 to August 2013;

He commenced work in July 2013.

He e-mailed DA Section notifying them that he had commenced work on the 01/07/2013, earning €900 per week.

The LO replied to Mr. W that payment was being stopped as he was no longer entitled to DA. However through internal error payment continued to be paid into his bank account until a Commencement of Employment (CoE) was received by DSP.

  • This decision should be applied under 302(c) retrospective as the Claimant was made aware that he was no longer entitled to DA and payment continued to be made to his bank account in error.
  • In this case, the DO is satisfied the claimant knew the payments into his account were issued in error and should have reported this.

Case 5 – Section 302(c) – current

Ms F has been in receipt of IB since February 2012.

Her claim was authorised for payment on the basis that she satisfied the contribution conditions.

It has now been discovered, however, that the DO misread the contribution record and that Ms F has only 37 (and not 39) contributions paid in the governing contribution year, 2010.

  • Payment of IB to Ms F should be disallowed on the grounds that she does not satisfy one of the qualifying conditions.
  • The need for a revised decision in this case arises from an error by the DO and the DO is satisfied that the person did not know the decision was wrong and there is no reason for believing that she was aware she was being paid IB in error.
  • Therefore, the revised decision should, in accordance with section 302(c), be applied with effect from a current date.

8. Examples of Wording of Revised Decision

1. If payment of an Increase for Qualified Adult is being discontinued because the spouse is in receipt of a specified Social Welfare payment in his/her own right and the DO considers that Section 302(b) is appropriate, the revised decision should include:

Disallowance: An increase of benefit is not payable in respect of (the claimant's spouse) from (date) because he or she is (state circumstances) and, therefore, is not a Qualified Adult within the meaning of the Social Welfare legislation.

Legislation: [Part 1, Section 2(2)(a)(iii)]

Effective date: This decision is made in accordance with section 302(b) of Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, as amended and has effect from (date).

2. If JB claim is being discontinued because the client is no longer available for full-time work:

Disallowance: JB payment is not payable from (date) because he or she is not available for full-time work.

Legislation: Section 62(5)(a)(ii) of the SWCA 2005, as amended and Article 15(1) of S.I. 142 of 2007, as amended.

Effective date: This decision is made in accordance with section 302(b) of Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005, as amended and has effect from (date)


9. Further Reading

  • To access Scheme Guidelines on the Department's website proceed as follows:
    1. Type www.welfare.ie in your web browser (or click on the blue underlined link here);
    2. Place the cursor on the Guideline you wish to access and click to open it.
  • Control Guidelines:

Guidelines on Controls, Overpayments and Prosecutions can be accessed on www.welfare.ie as outlined above.


Appendix 1

Section 240 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provides as follows:
240. Except where otherwise provided, in this Part –
'benefit' means-

  1. Any benefit described in Section 39(1)
    1. (aa) the cost of medical care under section 86,
  2. Any assistance described in section 139(1)
  3. Child benefit,
  4. respite care grant,
  5. family income supplement,
  6. continued payment for qualified children, or
  7. EU payments within the meaning of Part 8.

Benefits described in Section 39(1) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) are as follows:

Illness Benefit;
Partial Capacity Benefit;
Maternity Benefit;
Health and Safety Benefit;
Adoptive Benefit;
Jobseeker's Benefit;
Occupational Injuries Benefit comprising injury benefit, disablement benefit and death benefit;
Carer's Benefit;
State Pension Contributory;
State Pension Transition;
Invalidity Pension;
Widow's, Widower's, Surviving Civil Partner's Contributory Pension;
Guardian's Payment Contributory;
Bereavement Grant;
Widowed or Surviving Civil Partner Grant paid by virtue of receipt of a benefit under Part 2
Treatment Benefit under Section 138 of the above Act;

Assistance described in Section 139(1) of the Act

Jobseeker's Allowance;
Pre-retirement Allowance;
State Pension (Non-Contributory);
Blind Pension;
Widow's, Widower's, Surviving Civil Partner's Non-Contributory Pension;
Guardian's Payment Non-Contributory;
Widowed or Surviving Civil Partner Grant paid by virtue of a one-parent family payment or a State Pension (Non-Contributory) as a Social Assistance measure;
One-Parent Family Payment;
Carer's Allowance;
Domiciliary Care Allowance;
Supplementary Welfare Allowance;
Disability Allowance and
Farm Assist


Appendix 2

Section 301 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) prior to the coming into operation of the Social Welfare and Pensions (No. 2) Act 2013.

Section 301 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended)

Section 301(1) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provided that:

"A deciding officer may, at any time-

(a) revise any decision of a deciding officer, where it appears to him or her that the decision was erroneous in the light of new evidence or of new facts which have been brought to the notice of the deciding officer since the date on which it was given or by reason of some mistake having been made in relation to the law or the facts, or where it appears to the deciding officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances since the decision was given,

 

Section 301(2A) of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provided that:

(2A) A deciding officer may at any time revise any determination of a designated person, where—

  1. it appears to the deciding officer that the determination was erroneous—
    1. in the light of new evidence or of new facts which have been brought to the notice of the deciding officer since the date on which it was made, or
    2. by reason of some mistake having been made in relation to the law or the facts, or
  2. where it appears to the deciding officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances since the determination was made,

and the provisions of this Part as to appeals shall apply to a decision of a deciding officer under this subsection in the same manner as they apply to an original decision of a deciding officer.

Section 317 of the Social Welfare Consolidation Act 2005 (as amended) provided that:

Revision by appeals officer of decision of appeals officer.

317.—An appeals officer may, at any time revise any decision of an appeals officer, where it appears to the appeals officer that the decision was erroneous in the light of new evidence or of new facts brought to his or her notice since the date on which it was given, or where it appears to the appeals officer that there has been any relevant change of circumstances since the decision was given.

Last modified:20/11/2014
 

 Application Forms