• You are here:
• Home /
• Archived /
• Agriculture Case Summaries (Annual Report 1996)

Agriculture Case Summaries (Annual Report 1996)

Agriculture Case Summaries (Annual Report 1996)

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, FOOD & FORESTRY

5 June 1997 In 1996 the Ombudsman received 220 complaints within jurisdiction against the Department of Agriculture, Food & Forestry which amounted to 18% of the total number of complaints against government Departments. In 1995 a total of 192 complaints within jurisdiction were received so the 1996 figure represents an increase of 15% in complaints against the Department of Agriculture, Food & Forestry. The total number of complaints against the Department on hand in 1996 was 310 as 90 complaints had been carried over from 1995. During 1996 an examination of 172 of these was completed. The total number of complaints withdrawn or discontinued was 48. Of the remaining 124 cases, 79 were not upheld, 23 were resolved and in 22 cases assistance was provided.

In the 1996 report the Ombudsman reports on the following cases involving the Department of Agriculture, Food & Forestry.

Delay in Processing Beef Premium Application

It took the Department of Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry 17 months to notify a farmer of the result of his application under a Beef Premium Scheme. The Department then advised him that he would not be paid for 16 of the animals for which he had applied as they were ineligible on age grounds. This decision was correct. However, the Department's long delay in notifying the farmer effectively prevented him from making an application for the animals under the terms of another scheme in the intervening period.

The Ombudsman put it to the Department that its delay in notifying the decision on his application was a contributory factor in the failure of the farmer to claim for animals which were eligible for payment under a later scheme. The Department agreed and arranged for grants to be paid under the terms of the later scheme.

Processing Procedures for Grant Applications

The Ombudsman received a number of complaints from persons who had been refused payment under various Department of Agriculture, Food and Forestry grant schemes. The Department said it had not received the applications. Following an examination of the complaints, The Ombudsman concluded that, in accordance with the terms of the relevant schemes, and in the absence of specific evidence, e.g. a Certificate of Posting from An Post that the applications had actually been posted, he could not ask the Department to reconsider the decisions to refuse payment of the grants.

The Ombudsman acknowledges that, because of the number and range of schemes operated by the Department, there is an obligation on an applicant to retain some record to show that an application for a particular scheme was submitted. However, he is also aware that, in many cases, applications for schemes are delivered by hand to the Department via regional offices by, or on behalf of, applicants. In such instances proof of posting would not be available.

The problem could be overcome if the Department adopted the practice of acknowledging each application form received. However, this would involve considerable cost given the number of applications which might be received in any given year. The Ombudsman suggested to the Department that, as a possible alternative to the issuing of acknowledgements for each application received, it might consider the inclusion in its documentation of a note advising applicants that:

• any claim that a late or missing application was posted on time would not be accepted unless supported by a Certificate of Posting from An Post;
• applications are not acknowledged in the normal course;
• if an applicant wishes to have an application form acknowledged, a stamped addressed envelope should be included with the completed application.

In response, the Department said that it would examine the possibility of putting a receipt system for applications in place and, in the interim, consider including a note on the lines suggested above in the help-sheets and in the terms and conditions issued in conjunction with schemes.