113 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection further to Parliamentary Question No. 87 of 17 May 2012, the reason the basic information sought was not provided in the question, in view of the fact that the request was to indicate when it is intended to offer rent support either as a single person or in conjunction with their child given that they had repeatedly made applications and supplied the relevant information under both categories, that her Department does not seem to be aware of this, that reference to the effect that rent supplement can only exist when the rent sought has been reduced to the limit for a single person in self-contained accommodation, is irrelevant in the current situation in view of the fact that all possible requirements have been met in full and failure by her Department to address these matters have resulted in the most serious hardship been caused to the applicant with particular reference to their psychological well-being; if she will therefore as a matter of urgency have the case re-examined with a view to early payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26103/12]

Summary

113 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection further to Parliamentary Question No. 87 of 17 May 2012, the reason the basic information sought was not provided in the question, in view of the fact that the request was to indicate when it is intended to offer rent support either as a single person or in conjunction with their child given that they had repeatedly made applications and supplied the relevant information under both categories, that her Department does not seem to be aware of this, that reference to the effect that rent supplement can only exist when the rent sought has been reduced to the limit for a single person in self-contained accommodation, is irrelevant in the current situation in view of the fact that all possible requirements have been met in full and failure by her Department to address these matters have resulted in the most serious hardship been caused to the applicant with particular reference to their psychological well-being; if she will therefore as a matter of urgency have the case re-examined with a view to early payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26103/12]

This text is taken from the official record. PoliticalRepo does not editorialize.

Timeline

1. 24 May 2012

   Social Welfare Appeals

   113 Deputy Bernard J. Durkan asked the Minister for Social Protection further to Parliamentary Question No. 87 of 17 May 2012, the reason the basic information sought was not provided in the question, in view of the fact that the request was to indicate when it is intended to offer rent support either as a single person or in conjunction with their child given that they had repeatedly made applications and supplied the relevant information under both categories, that her Department does not seem to be aware of this, that reference to the effect that rent supplement can only exist when the rent sought has been reduced to the limit for a single person in self-contained accommodation, is irrelevant in the current situation in view of the fact that all possible requirements have been met in full and failure by her Department to address these matters have resulted in the most serious hardship been caused to the applicant with particular reference to their psychological well-being; if she will therefore as a matter of urgency have the case re-examined with a view to early payment; and if she will make a statement on the matter. [26103/12]

   Source: written

Votes

No vote records are attached yet.

Versions

No version snapshots stored. Document URLs remain at the source.

Documents

1 official file

• Social Welfare Appeals

  xml · EN · 24 May 2012

  ViewDownloadOpen at official source

Sponsors

• Durkan, Bernard J. · Asking member
• Minister for Social Protection · Minister for Social Protection · Addressed to

Related records

No cross-record relationships stored yet.