In reform situations, especially when it comes to non -contributory pensions, small details in the calculation of income can have great consequences. Determining what it counts or not how family income may be decisive in maintaining or losing access to this support. This was precisely the central issue in a recent case in Castile and Leo in Spain, which involved the removal of a pension and the requirement to return thousands of euros to a reformed.
A value that should not count as income
A renovated woman from the region of Castile and Leo saw that the non-contributory reform pension was removed, and has been required to return 8,521.85 euros, a value considered as improperly received, says.
However, the Superior Court of this Spanish autonomous community has now given it reason, concluding that the calculation made by the Public Administration was incorrect.
The central issue, according to the above source, is in a salary complement that the retired daughter received at her workplace. The so -called “transport plus”, paid by the company where it worked as a packaging, was initially accounted for as part of the family unit income.
According to the Administration, this inclusion made the sum of the income exceed the legal limit for the attribution of the pension.
Judges, however, considered that this supplement has an extrasarial nature, that is, it only serves to compensate for an expense of the worker, and does not represent a real income. Thus, it should not have been included in the calculation of family income.
A pension of 367 euros per month
The woman received a pension of 367.90 euros a month, awarded by the management of social services of Castile and Leão, although the management of these benefits belongs to the National Institute of Social Security. Living with her husband and daughter, the three constituted a single economic unit, says the source mentioned above.
When her daughter started to work, she reported this change to the management entity. After further analysis of the economic situation of the family, the administration understood that the income exceeded the expected limit and proceeded to extinction the pension, also requiring the return of the amounts already paid.
We recommend:
Initial rejection and appeal to court
The reformed tried to contest the decision by administrative but to no avail. Faced with the refusal, he decided to take the case to court. The first trial took place in the Salamanca Social Court No. 1, which confirmed the decision of the Administration, considering that the pension had been improperly attributed.
Not satisfied, the reformed appealed to the Superior Court of Justice of Castile and Leo, requesting the revision of the case based on a revaluation of the type of income considered.
The decision that replenishes the pension
Work News that, after the detailed analysis of the situation, the Superior Court acknowledged that the transportation supplement paid to the daughter should not be accounted for as family income. Classified this amount as compensation for expenses and, therefore, excluded from the evaluation of economic capacity.
With this exclusion, the family income no longer exceeded the legal limit and, as such, the reformed maintained the right to non -contributory pension. In addition, there is no legal basis for the return of the previously received amount.
Administration obliged to return the value
The court also ordered the autonomous administration to return to the reformed the 8,521.85 euros that it had already reimbursed, a amount that had been considered as improper payment. The judgment thus reverses the initial decision and recognizes the beneficiary’s right to the pension.
This case brings to the public debate the difficulties faced by low -income pensioners, who sometimes see their rights posed by excessively rigid interpretations of the law. The decision of the Superior Court may serve as a reference for similar situations in the future.
Also read:
