When Mrs. Barbara of Gliwice began to charge 800 plus to her children, she believed that everything was legal. Although she divorced her husband in 2021, the Social Insurance Institution decided that a full benefit for each kid would affect her account. However, she did not realize that her husband had besides applied for support, which in time made it truly complicated.
RECLAMA
See video The thought of receiving benefits to the poorest children is mean
Payoffs 800 plus versus alternate care. The court supported the father
During the divorce, it was established that children would be staying with both their parent and their father. In an interview with the reporter of "Intervention", Barbara indicated that the court's decision determined the residence of the children on her, as well as regulating contacts with her father. However, alternate care has not been established, even though contact with Dad is very comparable. The woman, according to the decision of ZUS, so collects 800 plus in full amount. However, it turns out that her ex - husband besides applied for money.
From the beginning of the divorce, this benefit was granted to me, and at any phase of the proceedings, this issue was besides not taken up by my ex-husband. Then it turned out that my ex-husband was making the same conclusions, at the same time, after the divorce. I didn't know that. The case that ZUS has now verified dates back to 2022
- points to Mrs. Barbara. erstwhile officials refused to pay the man the benefit, the case went to the president of ZUS, who besides upheld the refusal decision. As a result, the man reported to the Provincial Administrative Court in Gliwice, which yet ruled in favour of the father of the children.
He acknowledged the right of the complainant, the father of the children. According to the administrative court, alternating care is not just about the fact that the periods of parental care are precisely the same, they are identical due to the fact that the legislature requires that the periods of care are comparable. This does not require that periods are precisely the same
- stated the justice of the Provincial Administrative Court in Gliwice. The woman, on the another hand, trusted the decisions of the Social safety Office and spent the funds granted to her.
I didn't hang up.
- said "Intervention" on the show.
800 plus. ZUS has the right to request reimbursement of part of the funds
Following the judgement of the court, ZUS decided to apply to a female for reimbursement of overpaid money. Although the court, as Mrs. Barbara's current husband claims, "did not order guilty persons to be found", the female is to pay about PLN 17,000.
The decision to return this is simply a peculiar overzealousness of officials who see no mistake in their home and effort to find it with the taxpayer
- says a man. Beata Kopczyńska, a regional press spokesperson for ZUS in the Silesian Voivodeship, points out that the benefit was paid to the parent in its entirety, as the application did not include information about alternate care.
In the judgment, which was attached to the application for an educational provision, there was no indication that alternate care was established, there was no specified wording, so we granted the witness to the mother. I realize Mrs. Barbara's hard situation, and I am not amazed that she is bitter, but we are governed by law. If the benefit has been reduced and thus an overpayment has arisen, we must request that the excess payment of the unduly collected benefit be paid
- explains. Mrs. Barbara is besides expecting further calls to return the money she's been given since the divorce.
The daughter did everything according to the law, according to what was granted by ZUS. It's very sad due to the fact that it's money for children, and it's going to be fighting windmills.
- commented Mrs. Barbara's mother. It is besides worth noting that ZUS continues to pay her 800 plus in full amount. As the spokesperson points out, the judgement has already reached the institution and the procedure for the change of benefits has been initiated. According to the current husband, the situation is absurd due to the fact that the regulations let the Social safety Office to request reimbursement at the same time and proceed to pay the benefit in full.
What led me to go on tv is simply a loophole in the law that de facto causes an avalanche of understatements. As a result, the consequences of the decision of the official, which were then sustained by the decision of the president of ZUS
- you summed up Barbara.
Source: intervention.polsatnews.pl
Thank you for reading our article.
Keep up with it! Watch us on Google News.
