IRB Delays in Ireland: Causes, Your Rights and What You Can Do

Direct answer: The Injuries Resolution Board (IRB, formerly PIAB) took an average of 11.2 months to assess a personal injury claim in 2024 against a 9-month statutory target, with 49% of cases exceeding target. IRB delays are governed by Section 49 of the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003, as amended by the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022. Where the Board passes the extended 15-month ceiling without your written consent, you have the right to demand a court authorisation under Section 49(6).

Summary: If your claim is stuck, the law gives you specific rights under the Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003 (Updated March 2023) [1] and the amendments made by the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022 (Enacted December 2022) [2]. This guide explains what is really happening at the IRB (formerly PIAB), what you are entitled to demand, and how to escalate when your claim passes the 9-month mark.

Key facts about IRB delays (2024-2026)

• Average assessment time in 2024: 11.2 months (Source: IRB Annual Report 2024, July 2025).
• Statutory target under Section 49(2): 9 months from respondent consent.
• Proportion of cases exceeding target: 49% in 2024.
• Maximum hard ceiling (Section 49 plus 49(4) extension): 15 months.
• Section 49A prognosis deferral ceiling: Up to 24 additional months with dual written consent.
• Total IRB claim volume 2024: 20,837 claims (up 3% year-on-year).
• Respondent consent rate: Above 70% (2024).
• Mediation average resolution: Around 3 months where both parties consent.
• Mediation coverage: Employer Liability (since December 2023), Public Liability (since May 2024), Motor Liability (since December 2024).
• Court alternative: Litigated claims settle in 5.1 years on average with legal costs close to half the claim value, per the Central Bank NCID Report 7 (October 2025).

Educational information only. This page does not constitute legal advice. Every case turns on its own facts and awards vary under the Judicial Council Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021 (Updated April 2021) [5]. For advice on your situation, speak to a qualified solicitor.

Quick answers

How long? 2024 average was 11.2 months. 9 months is the statutory target under Section 49(2), not a fixed deadline.

Can you force release? Yes. After 15 months you may demand an authorisation under Section 49(6) unless you consented in writing to continuation.

Is there a faster route? Mediation resolves in ~3 months where both parties consent. Motor, employer and public liability are all live.

Can you complain? Yes. Use the IRB's internal complaints process first, then escalate to the Office of the Ombudsman.

Contents

2024 average: 11.2 months to assessment, not 9. Source: IRB Annual Report 2024

9-month target: Set by Section 49(2) of the PIAB Act 2003. Clock starts on respondent consent. Read s.49

Mediation speed: Around 3 months to resolution where both sides agree. IRB mediation

Hard ceiling: 15 months unless you consent in writing to a further extension under Section 49A. s.49A

How long is the IRB actually taking in 2026?

The honest answer is 11.2 months on average for a 2024 assessment, against a 9-month statutory target. That figure comes straight from IRB's own 2024 Annual Report (Published July 2025) [3]. The Board processed 20,837 applications, up 3% on 2023, and paid out €168 million in awards. Respondent consent rates rose above 70% and bilateral acceptance settled at 50%.

So when people ask "how long does PIAB take" or "how long does the Injuries Board take", the honest 2026 answer is 11.2 months on average, not nine. The PIAB 9 months rule in Section 49(2) is a statutory target, not a contract. Nearly half of injuries board assessments now exceed it. The 11.2-month figure is the most important number on this page because it reframes what "on time" even means. If your claim is six or seven months old and you have heard nothing, you are not behind the curve. If it is past nine months, you are in the majority, not the exception. The IRB publishes its yearly statistics every July and reviewed its overall strategy in the Strategic Plan 2025-2029 (Published October 2025) [6].

Why do IRB claims exceed the 9-month target? The eight real causes

According to the IRB Annual Report 2024 (Published July 2025) [3], nearly half of assessments ran past the 9-month statutory target last year. After guiding thousands of clients through this process, the delays cluster into a small number of recurring causes. Identifying which one applies to your file is the first diagnostic step.

The eight most common causes of IRB delay and typical added time, by stage

Cause	Stage	Typical extra time
Incomplete application (no Form B or wrong respondent)	Pre-validation	1-4 months and statute risk
Respondent uses the full 90-day consent window	Notification	0-3 months
Medical prognosis not yet stable	Assessment	3-6 months
Independent Medical Examination (IME) scheduling	Assessment	1-3 months
Multi-respondent claim (each must consent separately)	Notification	1-3 months
Foreign respondent or untraced driver (MIBI joined)	Notification	3-6 months
Dissolved or struck-off respondent company	Pre-validation	6-12 months
Prognosis deferral under Section 49A	Assessment	Up to 24 months

Two causes sit behind most of the frustration we hear on first calls. The first is a validation failure on the application itself, which we explain next. The second is medical evidence that is not yet sufficient to settle a prognosis, which triggers the Section 49A pathway.

Respondent consent tactics we see in practice

Within the 90-day consent window, respondent insurers have developed recognisable patterns. None is improper. All push the effective start of the Section 49(2) clock towards the ceiling.

Four respondent consent patterns and their practical effect on the Section 49(2) clock

Pattern	What happens	Effect on timeline
Day-89 consent	Insurer holds consent until the last practical day of the Section 13 window	Adds ~3 months before 9-month clock even starts
Silent default	Insurer does not respond at all, triggering Section 14 deemed consent after 90 days	Similar delay to day-89, with procedural ambiguity
Bifurcated consent (multi-respondent)	One respondent consents early, another delays	Clock timing contested under Section 49(2)(b)
Conditional consent	Insurer queries application completeness or respondent identity to trigger further exchanges	Resets or delays consent date by weeks

Experience note. None of these patterns makes the claim invalid. They are tactical uses of time the statute permits. Understanding which pattern is in play on your file helps you anticipate the real 9-month start date.

Section 49: the 9-month rule and how extensions really work

Section 49(2) of the PIAB Act 2003 (also searched as "Section 49 PIAB" or the "PIAB 9 months rule") gives the Injuries Resolution Board nine months to complete an assessment, measured from the respondent's formal consent. Read the exact wording on the Irish Statute Book (Updated March 2023) [4]. Two details catch most claimants by surprise.

First, the clock does not start when you submit the application. It starts when the respondent consents, or when the 90-day non-response period in Section 13 has elapsed. So a file that feels "six months old" from the point of view of the claimant may only be two or three months into the Section 49 clock.

Second, Section 49(4) allows the Board to extend the assessment period by up to six further months. Although that extension is often treated as automatic, it is not. The Board must serve a written notice on both parties before the original nine-month period expires, and that notice must set out the specific reasons for the extension and a new target date. A commentary on the amended Act is available via Revised Acts (Updated December 2025) [7].

The combined legal maximum is therefore 15 months (9 plus up to 6), unless you agree in writing to something longer under Section 49A. Anything beyond 15 months without your written consent is outside the statutory framework, and your rights under Section 49(6) are activated. We cover that separately below.

Why early applicants can wait longer than late ones

A counter-intuitive rule worth knowing. A claimant who applies quickly can wait longer than one who applies later. The Section 49(2) clock starts on respondent consent, not on application date. Where an insurer uses the full 90-day Section 13 window, an early applicant has effectively added 3 months to the visible waiting period that the 9-month clock then begins. A claimant who applies closer to the 2-year statute deadline may experience the same 9-month assessment window starting from day one, because the insurer has less tactical reason to delay consent. The practical lesson: if you have the evidence to file a complete application, file it, but do not assume the headline 9 months measures from your application date.

When is a Section 49(4) extension notice actually valid?

Not every letter from the Board labelled "extension" counts as a valid Section 49(4) notice. A notice is only effective if it meets four elements. It must be in writing. It must be served on both the claimant and the respondent. It must be served before the original 9-month period expires. It must state the specific reasons for the extension and a new target date. A notice that is late, oral, sent only to one party, or gives no reasoned basis is not a valid Section 49(4) extension. Where the notice is invalid, the 15-month hard ceiling still applies from the 9-month mark onwards and your Section 49(6) rights run normally.

What happens when the respondent ignores the IRB claim? Section 13 deemed consent

Section 13 of the PIAB Act 2003 handles the common scenario where a named respondent does not respond at all. If the respondent fails to consent or object within 90 days of formal notification, they are deemed to have consented to the IRB assessment. The claim proceeds as if the insurer had said yes. This is where many 2024 files silently start the Section 49(2) clock. Because deemed consent is automatic rather than affirmative, the start date is the expiry of the 90-day window, which can surprise claimants who expect a clear consent letter. The Revised PIAB Act 2003 sets out the wording.

When can the IRB release a claim without assessing it? Section 17 discretion

Section 17 of the PIAB Act 2003 gives the Board discretion to release a claim rather than assess it, in specific circumstances. The main triggers are claims too complex for summary assessment, claims involving psychological injury that cannot be evaluated on paper, and claims where a genuine question of law needs court resolution. A Section 17 release produces an authorisation in the same form as a Section 49(6) release. For catastrophic injury claimants, the Section 17 route can be faster than waiting 15 months and then invoking Section 49(6). A solicitor can prepare a Section 17 application with supporting medical opinion.

The Section 50 validation trap (the statute risk nobody warns you about)

The most dangerous delay is the one you do not know about. Since 4 September 2023, under amendments made by the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022 (Enacted December 2022) [2], an incomplete IRB application is not just slow. It may be legally invalid, with consequences for your two-year limitation period.

Section 50 of the PIAB Act 2003 suspends the Statute of Limitations clock (see Citizens Information, Updated 2025) [8] while the IRB is dealing with the claim. The suspension is triggered by the Board issuing its acknowledgement letter. Before 2023, acknowledgement was often generous. Since the 2022 Act commenced, the acknowledgement is tied to a complete application, including Form B medical evidence, the correct respondent, and a valid PPSN match.

If your application is rejected, the Board sends a 28-day notice asking you to complete it. If you do not cure the gap, the file closes and your fee is returned. In the meantime, the limitation clock has continued to run. The IRB complaints policy (Updated 2024) [9] and the Citizens Information IRB page (Updated 2025) [10] both assume a valid application. Neither will save you if yours was not.

The 28-day cure window and the statute risk

When the Board rejects an incomplete application, it issues a short cure notice. The notice appears procedural, but it is in fact where most permanent statute losses happen. The trap has three moving parts. The cure notice gives you 28 days to supply the missing item, but the limitation clock is not paused during those 28 days. If the missing item (usually a compliant Form B) takes longer than 28 days to secure, the file closes by default rather than waiting for you. Once the file closes, you must re-apply, which resets the validation cycle and may take you past the two-year limitation deadline.

Five "stopped clock" myths we see weekly

The belief that submitting an IRB application reliably stops the Statute of Limitations clock is the single most common and most dangerous misconception. The reality is narrower.

Five common misconceptions about when the Section 50 acknowledgement actually stops the limitation clock

Myth	What the law actually does
"Submitting the application stops the clock."	Only a complete application that triggers a Section 50 acknowledgement stops the clock. An incomplete application does not.
"Paying the IRB fee stops the clock."	Payment is a procedural step. It is the Section 50 acknowledgement letter that stops the clock, not receipt of the fee.
"An email from the IRB is enough."	The suspension turns on the formal Section 50 acknowledgement. Informal correspondence from a case officer does not substitute.
"If I apply within 2 years I am safe no matter what."	Filing close to the deadline and then failing to cure a validation request inside 28 days can push you past the deadline by the time the next application is accepted.
"The clock stays stopped after authorisation."	Once an authorisation issues, the Section 50 suspension ends. You have 6 months to issue court proceedings under Section 50(3). If you do not, the limitation clock resumes where it paused.

Section 49A: the 2-year prognosis deferral and your veto right

According to Section 14 of the PIRB Act 2022 (Enacted December 2022) [11], which inserted Section 49A into the principal Act, the Board may defer assessment for up to two years beyond the standard window where a catastrophic or slow-stabilising injury makes a stable long-term prognosis impossible inside the 15-month ceiling.

The important part for claimants is that Section 49A does not give the Board unilateral power. The statute requires the Board to serve a notice asking both parties to confirm in writing whether they consent to it continuing. You retain a veto. If you refuse consent, or if you initially consent and then withdraw it in writing, the Board must issue an authorisation to court as soon as possible.

The veto on deferral is a strategic tool, not a procedural footnote. Remaining in the IRB keeps costs down and avoids litigation pressure. Forcing an authorisation moves you into Circuit Court or High Court case management, where a respondent can be compelled to engage but where legal costs rise sharply. The right call depends on the stability of your medical position and the behaviour of the respondent's insurer.

Section 51C: how delay can be weaponised against you

Not every delay is the Board's fault, and the cost consequences of a claimant-caused delay can be severe. According to the Law Reform Commission's consolidated text of Section 51C of the PIAB Act 2003 (Updated 2025) [12], the provision as strengthened by the 2022 reforms allows a judge in subsequent court proceedings to penalise a claimant who did not reasonably cooperate at the IRB stage.

Non-cooperation can mean missing an independent medical examination without a reasonable excuse, failing to provide receipts for special damages, or ignoring requests for information. If a claimant rejects the IRB assessment, goes to court, and wins a larger award, a judge may still refuse to order the defendant to pay the claimant's costs. In more serious cases, the judge may order the claimant to pay a portion of the defendant's costs.

Given typical personal injury litigation costs, a Section 51C penalty can wipe out or exceed a compensation award. The practical rule is simple. Treat every IRB deadline, document request and medical appointment as having the same weight as a court order. If you genuinely cannot comply on time, say so in writing and explain why.

↑ Back to top

Is IRB mediation faster than standard assessment?

Mediation is the most significant 2024 change to the IRB process and the single most effective way to cut delay where both sides will agree. According to the IRB mediation service page (Updated 2025) [13], the service was rolled out in three phases and now covers employer liability, public liability and motor liability claims as of December 2024. Unlike in England and Wales, where ADR is encouraged through costs pressure rather than a dedicated state body, in Ireland the IRB is a mandatory statutory step and its mediation service is a built-in feature of the claims process.

Two data points matter. Mediation resolves in around three months against the 11.2-month assessment average, a time saving of roughly 73%. And mediation can address issues the standard assessment cannot, including liability, negligence and contributory negligence. Coverage from the Law Society of Ireland (Published 2024) [14] sets out how the service operates.

Pathway comparison: standard IRB assessment vs IRB mediation vs authorisation to court

Pathway	Average resolution	Addresses liability?	Consent needed
Standard IRB assessment	11.2 months (2024)	No (quantum only)	Respondent consent to IRB jurisdiction
IRB mediation	~3 months	Yes	Both parties opt in to mediate
Authorisation to court	5.1 years (court-settled)	Yes	None once authorised

Mediation will not suit every case. It requires active respondent consent, and where liability is flatly denied or the insurer is stalling, mediation will not proceed. A mediated agreement also triggers a 10-day cooling-off window. If the parties still agree at the end of that window, the IRB issues an Order to Pay with the same enforceability as a court order.

When should I opt into IRB mediation?

Opt in at the application stage (Section 7 of the claim form) when any of four conditions apply. First, the respondent insurer has a pattern of early engagement on similar claims. Second, your injuries and losses are documented and ready for discussion rather than still stabilising. Third, the dispute is primarily about quantum rather than outright liability denial. Fourth, you want an outcome faster than the 11.2-month standard-assessment average. If the case involves catastrophic injury, contested liability, or a slow-stabilising prognosis, the standard assessment or a Section 17 release usually serves you better.

How did the PIRB Act 2022 commencement schedule change IRB delay patterns?

The Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022 was commenced in four phases across nearly two years. Knowing which provisions applied when helps diagnose older claims still in the system.

Commencement phases of the Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022

Date	What commenced
13 February 2023 (Phase 1)	Renaming of the Board, Section 49A prognosis deferral framework, core mediation provisions
4 September 2023 (Phase 2)	Complete-application requirement for Section 50 acknowledgement, 28-day cure notice rule
14 December 2023 (Phase 3)	Employer liability claims added to the mediation service
8 May 2024 (Phase 4)	Public liability claims added to the mediation service
12 December 2024 (Phase 5)	Motor liability claims added to the mediation service (all three categories now live)

Claims submitted before 4 September 2023 do not face the strict complete-application Section 50 rule. Claims submitted after that date do. Older delayed files may sit under the earlier rules. Newer files face the stricter regime.

What does the IRB Strategic Plan 2025-2029 say about future delays?

The Strategic Plan 2025-2029 [6] sets three measurable commitments that will shape delay outcomes through 2029. The Board has committed to expand mediation uptake across all liability categories, to reduce the average assessment time toward the 9-month target through process automation, and to publish improved performance metrics in annual reports. The plan does not promise a statutory change to Section 49. It commits instead to operating inside the existing framework more efficiently. For a claimant today, the practical read is that delay will remain an issue through 2026 and 2027 while the reforms embed, with material improvement expected from 2028.

Section 49(6): your statutory right to an authorisation

This is one of the most important claimant rights under the Act. Under Section 49(6) of the PIAB Act 2003 (Updated March 2023) [4], if the Board has not completed the assessment within the extended period (nine months plus any valid six-month Section 49(4) extension), it must issue you an authorisation to court unless you consent in writing to the assessment continuing.

This right becomes active at the 15-month mark. You do not have to wait for the Board to act. You may write to the Board invoking Section 49(6), explain that no further assessment extension is consented to, and request the authorisation. Once issued, a PIAB authorisation (now called an IRB authorisation) gives you six months to start court proceedings under ordinary rules. The Revised PIAB Act 2003 [7] sets out the exact wording.

When exactly can I demand an IRB authorisation under Section 49(6)?

The Section 49(6) right activates at the 15-month mark after respondent consent, provided three conditions are met. First, the respondent has formally consented (or is deemed to have consented under Section 13). Second, the combined assessment period of 9 months plus any valid Section 49(4) six-month extension has now expired. Third, you have not given written Section 49A consent to further continuation. Where all three are satisfied, the Board is legally required to issue your authorisation on demand. If no valid Section 49(4) extension was served in time, the right may activate earlier, at the 9-month mark. This distinction is often missed and is worth checking before sending your demand letter.

The five elements of an effective demand letter

A Section 49(6) demand is only effective if the letter is drafted correctly. From practical experience, the Board treats a demand as properly served if it contains five specific elements, and as thin or defective if any one is missing.

1. Written form. The demand must be in writing, addressed to the Injuries Resolution Board, and retained with proof of service (delivery receipt or tracked email).
2. Claim identification. It must cite the IRB application reference number and the respondent(s) so the correct file is located.
3. Statutory citation. It must cite Section 49(6) of the PIAB Act 2003 specifically, not a generic request for authorisation.
4. Express withholding of Section 49A consent. It must confirm that no written consent to continuation under Section 49A has been given, or that any prior consent is hereby withdrawn.
5. Explicit request for authorisation. It must state that you require the Board to issue an authorisation to court as soon as possible under Section 49(6).

A letter that omits one of these elements can be treated by the Board as a status enquiry rather than a statutory demand. Where the limitation clock is tight, an ambiguously drafted demand is a real risk.

Can you complain about an IRB delay? The Ombudsman route

Searches for "injuries board complaint", "PIAB complaint" and "what to do if PIAB is too slow" all land on the same process. If the delay you are experiencing is administrative rather than legal (for example, repeated failures to return calls or letters) you can complain. The first step is the IRB's own internal complaints process, set out in the IRB Complaints Policy (Updated 2024) [9].

If that process does not resolve matters, you may escalate to the Office of the Ombudsman (Updated 2025) [15]. The Ombudsman can investigate maladministration by the IRB, such as failure to follow published procedures, unreasonable delay, or misleading information. Because of Section 53(3) of the PIAB Act 2003, the Ombudsman cannot overturn a specific compensation decision or change the law. Its role is procedural, not substantive.

A complaint to the Ombudsman is free. The office publishes its own factsheet at ombudsman.ie (Updated 2024) [16]. Very few claimant-facing guides mention this route, which is why we include it here.

Delaney v PIAB: why delay can cut your compensation

A delayed claim is not only frustrating. It can be worth less. Unlike in England and Wales, where the Judicial College Guidelines apply UK-wide, Irish claims are valued under the Judicial Council Personal Injuries Guidelines 2021 [5]. These replaced the earlier Book of Quantum and use significantly narrower ranges.

Delaney v Personal Injuries Assessment Board [2024] IESC 10

Holding: The Supreme Court confirmed by a 5-2 majority on 9 April 2024 that a personal injury claim is assessed under the Personal Injuries Guidelines in force at the date of assessment, not at the date of the accident. There is no vested right to an earlier valuation framework.

What it means in practice: A claim dragging across a Guidelines change or a later uplift can be worth materially less, or materially more, than a claim assessed promptly. In Delaney, the claimant would have expected roughly €18,000 to €34,000 under the old Book of Quantum and was assessed at around €3,000 under the 2021 Guidelines. For any delay decision, this means pure patience has a real cost.

Read the judgment directly via Courts Service of Ireland: Delaney [2024] IESC 10 PDF [17]. Professional body commentary: Law Society Gazette: Landmark decision on case of systemic importance (Published April 2024) [18].

The practical implication is that delay is not a neutral state. In a reform period it is a compensation risk. That risk is the strongest argument for using Section 49(6), mediation, or the Section 49A veto strategically rather than simply waiting the Board out.

Weighing delay against compensation risk

How do we decide, in practice, whether to invoke Section 49(6) or wait? The assessment turns on two variables. Variable one is months-of-remaining-delay, an estimate of how much longer the Board is likely to take based on the stage your file is at. Variable two is Guidelines-uplift-risk, an estimate of whether the Personal Injuries Guidelines are likely to change (upward or downward) between today and the likely assessment date.

Where remaining delay is short and uplift risk is negligible, waiting is rational. Where remaining delay is long and uplift risk is material (for example, during an active Judicial Council review period), invoking Section 49(6) transfers your claim to the courts where the applicable Guidelines version is fixed at the date of court assessment under the Delaney principle. The calculator is a tool for conversation with a solicitor, not a black-box output. Your medical stability, the respondent's posture, and the costs differential are all modifiers.

Court instead of IRB? What the data actually says

The perception that litigation is faster than the IRB is widespread and wrong. The Central Bank National Claims Information Database (Published October 2025) [19] tracks every settled personal injury claim in the private motor sector and is the most authoritative Irish dataset available.

On that data, claims settled through the IRB or directly close in around 2.7 years from the date of accident. Claims that go through full litigation close in around 5.1 years. Legal costs absorb close to half of the total settlement cost when litigated claims under €100,000 are examined, against a small fraction of that in IRB and direct settlements. Those costs are borne in part by the compensation pool.

Litigation is not a shortcut. It is a legitimate route once the IRB process has been exhausted or an authorisation has been issued. However for most claimants most of the time, informed patience plus active use of Sections 49(6), 49A and the mediation service will move the claim faster than a premature exit to court.

Foreign drivers, Garda claims and GDPR cases

Three specific scenarios create their own delay dynamics.

Foreign respondents. Where the negligent party is based outside Ireland, international service conventions extend the 90-day consent window. The Motor Insurers' Bureau of Ireland (Updated 2025) [20] acts as Green Card Bureau and compensation body and will sometimes need to be joined. Sibling page: accident with foreign driver claim.

Garda Compensation Scheme. Since 2023, claims by injured members of An Garda Síochána fall under the IRB's remit instead of the old High Court route. The legacy route regularly took more than ten years. Under the IRB the average resolution for a Garda compensation claim in 2024 was around six months on fresh cases, as confirmed in the IRB Annual Report 2024 [3]. That is faster than most claimants expect.

GDPR distress claims. For several years before August 2025, the High Court position in Dillon v Irish Life Assurance meant that claims seeking damages for distress from a GDPR breach were treated as personal injury claims and required IRB authorisation before court proceedings could be issued. The Supreme Court overturned that position in August 2025 and held that section-117-only claims for distress, anxiety, or upset caused by a data breach do not require Injuries Resolution Board authorisation, although claims involving a medically recognised psychiatric injury still do. An overview is available from the Law Society Gazette (Published July 2025) [21]. If a recognised psychiatric injury is part of the claim, the IRB step remains mandatory.

Typical timelines by scenario

These ranges reflect our experience. They are not promises. Your facts, evidence and respondent behaviour drive the actual time.

Typical IRB timelines by claim scenario (indicative only, not promises)

Scenario	Typical range	Main delay driver
Straightforward motor claim, liability admitted	9-14 months	IME scheduling
Motor claim routed to IRB mediation	3-5 months	Respondent consent
Workplace injury with multi-respondent set	12-16 months	Each respondent must consent
Public liability where liability contested	9-15 months then authorisation	Liability cannot be assessed by IRB
Catastrophic injury with prognosis unclear	15-33 months (with Section 49A consent)	Long-term prognosis deferral
Foreign respondent or MIBI claim	13-18 months	International service and MIBI investigation

What mistakes extend IRB delay?

What to do right now if your claim is stuck

If you need to speed up PIAB or chase PIAB on a slow assessment, or your PIAB is too slow and you want to know what to do next, these are the seven steps that matter. Work through them in order. Most can be done by you without a solicitor, although a solicitor will usually handle them faster and lower the statute risk.

1. Confirm the clock. Ask the Board in writing for the date it received the respondent's consent. That sets your real Section 49(2) start.
2. Check for a Section 49(4) notice. If none has been served and you are past 9 months, record that in writing to the Board.
3. Diagnose the cause. Incomplete application, medical prognosis, IME delay, multi-respondent, or Section 49A request?
4. If past 15 months and no Section 49A consent has been given, invoke Section 49(6) in writing and request an authorisation.
5. Consider mediation. Ask the Board whether mediation is available for your claim type.
6. If the issue is administrative, file an internal complaint under the IRB Complaints Policy.
7. If the internal complaint fails, escalate to the Office of the Ombudsman.
8. Get advice before using Section 49(6) where your prognosis is still evolving.

Quick eligibility self-check: are your Section 49 rights active?

Educational guidance, not legal advice. This widget checks the dates you enter against the Section 49 timeline. It does nothing more. It does not store, transmit, or share any information you type. For advice specific to your case, speak with a qualified solicitor.

Enter what you know about your file

Application submitted When you lodged the IRB application Respondent consent date (if known) Leave blank if unknown. Section 13 deemed consent will be used: application date plus 90 days.

Notices you have received

Section 50 acknowledgement letter from IRB Written Section 49(4) extension notice, served before the 9-month mark I gave written Section 49A consent to continuation beyond 15 months

Show my status Reset

This widget runs entirely in your browser. No data leaves your device.

↑ Back to top

IRB delay diagnosis checklist (PDF, 2 pages): the five-question self-check, the eight-cause diagnostic table, and the essential requirements for a Section 49(6) demand letter, in a printable format.

Section 49(6) demand letter template (DOCX, editable): a ready-to-adapt letter containing all five required elements. Replace the bracketed fields with your own details.

Both assets are educational resources, not legal advice. For case-specific guidance, arrange a consultation.

Fast Facts About Ireland (IRB Delays)

IRB volumes: 20,837 applications in 2024, up 3% on 2023. Motor claims make up roughly 60% of volume and 70% of awards. Source

Mediation coverage: Live for employer, public and motor liability across Ireland as of December 2024. Source

Law reform direction: The IRB Strategic Plan 2025-2029 signals a continued push to reduce assessment times and expand mediation. Source

Additional resources

Personal Injuries Assessment Board Act 2003

Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022

Citizens Information: Injuries Resolution Board

IRB Annual Report 2024

Further reading

IRB Mediation Service and how to opt in

Office of the Ombudsman: making a complaint

Judicial Council Personal Injuries Guidelines (2021)

Central Bank National Claims Information Database

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the IRB really have to finish in 9 months?

No. Section 49(2) of the PIAB Act 2003 sets 9 months as a statutory target, not an absolute deadline. The 2024 average was 11.2 months. The Board may extend by up to 6 more months under Section 49(4) if it gives formal written notice before the 9 months expire.

• Target is 9 months, not a deadline.
• Clock starts on respondent consent.
• Written extension notice required.

In short: Knowing the real rule lets you hold the Board to it.

Next step: Read Section 49 • IRB application page

What happens if my IRB claim passes 15 months?

Under Section 49(6) you may demand an authorisation to court, unless you consented in writing to a Section 49A continuation. Write to the Board invoking Section 49(6) and ask for the authorisation. You then have 6 months to issue proceedings.

• Write to the Board in writing.
• Reference Section 49(6).
• Issue proceedings within 6 months.

In short: This is the single most important claimant right in a delay situation.

Next step: What happens after IRB authorisation • Speak to a solicitor

Is IRB mediation really faster than standard assessment?

Yes. Mediation resolves in around 3 months where both sides opt in, against a 2024 assessment average of 11.2 months. Mediation also covers liability and negligence, which standard assessment cannot. It requires the respondent's active consent.

• Around 3 months to resolution.
• Covers liability and quantum.
• Both sides must opt in.

In short: Mediation is often the fastest legitimate shortcut.

Next step: IRB mediation page • Ask if mediation suits your case

Does submitting an IRB application stop the 2-year statute clock?

Only if the application is complete. Since 4 September 2023, an application missing Form B or the correct respondent is not a valid Section 50 trigger. The Board will issue a 28-day cure notice. The statute clock runs until the application is complete.

• Complete = Form B plus correct respondent.
• 28 days to cure gaps.
• Clock runs until complete.

In short: Assuming a defective application stopped the clock can lose the claim.

Next step: IRB time limits • IRB documents checklist

Can I chase the IRB for an update?

Yes, although the Board usually does not send interim updates unless asked. Write to the case officer and ask for three things: the date the respondent consented, whether a Section 49(4) extension has been served, and the target completion date on file.

• Ask for consent date.
• Ask about any s.49(4) notice.
• Ask for current target date.

In short: Those three answers diagnose the delay cause.

Next step: How to contact the IRB • Free case assessment

How do I know if the respondent has consented to my IRB claim?

Write to the IRB case officer and request confirmation of three dates: the date the respondent was formally notified under Section 12, the date of any consent or objection received, and whether Section 13 deemed consent has applied after the 90-day window.

• Formal notification date = Section 12.
• Explicit consent or objection = Section 13(1).
• Deemed consent = Section 13 at 90 days.

In short: Respondent consent is often silent. Insurers frequently let the 90-day deemed-consent window expire without active engagement, and that is when the Section 49(2) clock quietly starts.

Next step: Section 13 deemed consent explained • Respondent consent tactics

Can I get interim payments while waiting for the IRB assessment?

Not through the IRB itself. Unlike in England and Wales, where the Rehabilitation Code drives interim payments during case preparation, the IRB has no statutory power to make interim payments. Any interim payment has to be negotiated directly with the respondent insurer as a goodwill measure.

• IRB has no interim payment power.
• Direct negotiation with insurer possible.
• Linked to ongoing treatment costs.

In short: Insurers occasionally agree to interim payments where liability is admitted and treatment costs are substantial, especially in catastrophic injury cases. The lack of a formal mechanism means success rates are highly variable.

Next step: IRB awards and special damages • Discuss interim options

Can the IRB refuse to assess my claim?

Yes, in defined circumstances. Under Section 17 of the PIAB Act 2003, the Board may release a claim rather than assess it where the claim is too complex, involves psychological injury unsuitable for paper assessment, or raises a genuine question of law. A Section 17 release produces an authorisation to court.

• Section 17 discretion exists.
• Release = authorisation to court.
• Complex, psychiatric, or legal-question claims.

In short: Section 17 is underused. For some catastrophic injury claimants, requesting Section 17 release with supporting medical opinion is faster than waiting 15 months to invoke Section 49(6).

Next step: Section 17 release mechanism • Life after authorisation

Can I complain about IRB delays?

Yes. Start with the IRB's own complaints process under its published policy. If that does not resolve the issue, escalate to the Office of the Ombudsman, which can investigate maladministration. The Ombudsman cannot change a compensation amount or interpret law.

• IRB internal complaints first.
• Ombudsman handles maladministration.
• Ombudsman cannot change awards.

In short: A free external escalation route exists.

Next step: IRB complaints policy • ombudsman.ie

Will a long delay reduce my compensation?

It can. In Delaney v PIAB [2024] IESC 10, the Supreme Court held that a claim is assessed under the Personal Injuries Guidelines in force at the date of assessment, not at the date of the accident. A claim dragging across a Guidelines change can be valued differently.

• Guidelines at assessment date apply.
• No vested right to earlier framework.
• Delay is a valuation risk, not neutral.

In short: Pure patience may cost real money.

Next step: Read the Guidelines • IRB awards guide

The IRB has asked me to consent to a 2-year deferral. Do I have to?

No. Section 49A requires the written consent of both parties to continue beyond the standard window. If you refuse, the Board must issue an authorisation to court. The right decision depends on whether your medical condition is still changing and on the respondent's insurer behaviour.

• Written consent is your choice.
• Refusal forces authorisation.
• Get advice before deciding.

In short: You control whether the claim is frozen.

Next step: Read Section 49A • Speak to a solicitor

Would it be faster to skip the IRB and go straight to court?

Usually not. Central Bank data shows litigated motor claims take around 5.1 years from accident, against 2.7 years for IRB-settled claims. Legal costs in litigated sub-€100,000 claims approach half of the total settlement cost. Court can be faster in specific cases, but not as a general rule.

• IRB-settled ~2.7 years.
• Litigation ~5.1 years.
• Legal costs approach half of litigated sub-€100k settlements.

In short: Informed patience usually beats a premature exit.

Next step: Central Bank NCID • Life after authorisation

Do I need a solicitor to handle an IRB delay?

Not strictly. You can invoke Section 49(6) and use the complaints process yourself. Many people instruct a solicitor because the statute risks (especially Section 50 and Section 51C) are high, and delay diagnosis is faster with legal support.

• Self-representation is legal.
• Statute risk is the main pitfall.
• Solicitor adds speed and safety.

In short: A small mistake can end a valid claim.

Next step: Free case assessment • IRB hub

Related guides

What Happens After an IRB Authorisation: Your Next 6 Months Explained

Accept or Reject an IRB Assessment: The 21-Day Decision Window

IRB Time Limits and the Section 50 Clock-Stop Rule

Related internal guides: IRB hub • Time limits • Medical report • How to apply • Accept or reject assessment • After authorisation • IRB awards • Documents checklist • How long a claim takes

What to consider next

These questions commonly follow an IRB-delay enquiry. Each answer leads into a related page on this site.

If I force an authorisation under Section 49(6), does that help or hurt my compensation?

Forcing authorisation preserves your compensation as it stands under the current Guidelines. It moves your claim out of the IRB and into the courts, where litigation costs and timelines change substantially. The right call depends on whether your medical prognosis is stable, whether the respondent is likely to engage, and whether a further Guidelines change is expected. A solicitor can model both pathways before you decide.

Next step: What happens after IRB authorisation • How IRB awards compare

Once I get an authorisation, how long do I have to issue court proceedings?

Six months from the date of the authorisation letter. This is a hard deadline under the PIAB Act 2003. If you fail to issue within 6 months, the authorisation lapses and the Statute of Limitations resumes running (unless you requalify under specific rules). Most solicitors will issue within 8 weeks of authorisation to build in a margin.

Next step: Post-authorisation timeline • Section 50 and limitation rules

If I accept the IRB assessment, is the delay relevant anymore?

The delay itself is not reopened once you accept. However, if the delay caused specific losses (for example, interest on unpaid expenses or treatment you had to self-fund while waiting) those losses may be recoverable as special damages if properly documented. Keep every receipt and a dated symptom diary throughout the waiting period.

Next step: Accept or reject an IRB assessment • IRB awards guide

↑ Back to top

References