In 2019, half of the reduced social assistance claimants in Rotterdam partially lost their social assistance benefit. This was because they did not show up for appointments with the municipality. Another frequent reason for a sanction was that people did not cooperate in a plan of action. Municipalities may temporarily reduce the social assistance benefit in such situations. This can be completely or partially.
In a response, the municipality states that the figures for 2019 are outdated. According to Rotterdam, “only 727 measures” have been imposed in 2020; a third of the number in 2019. The municipality cites two reasons for the lower figure: the rules are now explained more clearly at the start of a benefit and corona measures led to conversations being temporarily halted.
The NOS inventory focuses on 2019, because not all municipalities already had figures for 2020. That was also a different year due to corona.
Deep in debt
Rotterdammer Ednal Curiel was recently cut on his benefit and was right when he objected. He was now deeply in debt. “I couldn’t afford my regular expenses anymore,” says Curiel. “And because I was already in debt before, I was immediately fined.”
The reason for the measure: Curiel would not have been available for a telephone appointment. But the municipality had not called at the agreed time. And when the municipality did call, Curiel missed the call. He called back within two minutes, but got no answer.
“Fortunately, I knew a lawyer. She immediately said that this was not correct,” says Curiel. It was clear from Curiel’s call records that he was reachable and that he also made an effort. Curiel will soon receive the withheld benefit back. But he will most likely not receive any compensation. “I was almost out of debt. But because of the municipality, my debt has increased by thousands of euros,” says Curiel.
‘People don’t find their way to a lawyer’
Curiel is not the only one who has been unfairly shortened. At least 800 people objected in the ten cities. About a third of those objections were (partially) upheld, according to the NOS call round. These objectors have therefore wrongly received no or less money.
“That’s a high percentage,” says Peter van Leeuwen of the National Client Council. “It makes me suspect that hundreds more people have been unfairly cut.”
Many welfare recipients do not object, because they often do not know how to do that, says lawyer Kim Hoesenie. “In addition, legal aid is not reimbursed as standard if it concerns less than 500 euros. While a few hundred euros less can ensure that people cannot pay their fixed costs.”
Hoesenie assists dozens of Rotterdam residents every year in these kinds of objection cases, just like her colleagues at the Je Goed Recht foundation. “Those are people who know the way to me,” says the lawyer. “But I am sure that there are also many people who do not know how to find a lawyer.”
The Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment is investigating whether the effects of the Participation Act are not too harsh. It also looks at the measures in this regard.
An independent investigation will also be carried out at the request of the House of Representatives.
–
