More than €2m spent on unusable reintegration unit

The Department of Justice spent over €2m on an adult offender reintegration unit at an apartment complex the State’s legal advisers failed to confirm could not be used due to red tape.

The unit was intended to house residents from a probation unit found to “pose a serious health, safety and fire risk”.

In Jun 2008, the department’s probation service leased a property on Wolfe Tone St in Dublin City for its Bridge Project group, as part of its move from older accommodation on Parnell St.

The Chief State Solicitors Office (CSSO) negotiated a 25-year lease for the unit in a complex previously earmarked for retail development. The CSSO asked the property owner to confirm “commencement notice” changes to the property could take place. It was told later that year this would be allowed.

However, during re-fitting work in early 2010 — and after concerns were raised by local residents — Dublin City Council’s planning enforcement office wrote to the department and the CSSO warning they could not use the area.

Specifically, the council said the State had no right to change the building area into a probation service as planning permission was granted for the period Jan 9, 2001, to Jan 8, 2006. This means the property could not be re-classified to a different use after this date.

While the State attempted to cancel the Wolfe Tone St deal, the company involved rejected the suggestion last year. The receivers now looking after the firm told the department it must honour the agreement.

As a result, the Comptroller and Auditor General& (C&AG) said the taxpayer has unwittingly spent over €2m on a unit it cannot use. The overall cost includes €309,000 a year on rent, €461,000 on Vat linked to the 25-year lease, €935,000 on re-fitting work, management fees, and insurance expenditure.

The ex-offenders are now in shared premises at Gardiner’s Row and Ballybough on short-term leases costing thousands of euro, and cannot return to Parnell St as the original unit is considered to be a serious health and safety risk.

While the CSSO has rejected claims it failed to adequately check the unit could be used, the C&AG insists independent double checks should have taken place considering the costs involved.