A woman has been spared from having to pay 7,458.49 euros in undue charges to Social Security, after the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia detected errors in the valuation of her assets. Apparently, Social Security counted the same home twice, in addition to charging him with homes that he did not yet own.
The sentence explains that the cohabitation unit was made up of her and her two children. When requesting the Minimum Vital Income, Social Security approved it in 2021, but in 2023 they took it away as he had an asset of 30,927.94 euros without counting his home of 51,892.20 euros. The woman went to court, but in the first instance the Social Court number 9 of Malaga ruled in favor of Social Security.
Aid for people over 60 who have not contributed in 2026
Social Security confirms it: if you were born between 1960 and 2002 you can receive aid of up to 1,600 euros even if you are working
To understand this ruling, remember that, according to the Social Security website, the assets requirements of the Minimum Living Income, the habitual residence is never computed and the valuation must refer to the corresponding fiscal year. Knowing this, the woman appealed, alleging a violation of article 20 of Law 19/2021, which regulates the Minimum Living Income.
The burden of proof falls on Social Security
The Superior Court of Justice agrees with the woman. It explains that, since it is assistance assistance already granted, it is Social Security and not the beneficiary that has to demonstrate that the requirements are no longer met. And that is precisely what was never fulfilled, since according to the asset report that was prepared unilaterally in 2023, on unverified data, and the communication from the Tax Agency did not even appear in the file.
With this story, the magistrates explain that when subtracting the value of the rural property (25,946.10 euros) from the imputed total (51,892.20 euros), the result was that same amount, so the same home had been valued twice.
The most serious mistake was for a rural property that the woman did not even have in 2020. Apparently she inherited it and accepted it in February 2021. It is true that, according to article 989 of the Civil Code, an inheritance counts as yours from the moment the family member dies, even if you sign the papers later. But the court clarifies that this applies to the Treasury, not to collect aid. In summary, the INSS added to the 2020 assets an inheritance that it did not receive until 2021.
Added to this was a third error and that is that Social Security added 100% of an asset of which it was only the owner of 25%. Applying the real cadastral value (24,101.82 euros) and that percentage, his computable assets barely reached 6,025.45 euros, well below the limit.
For this reason, the beneficiary does not exceed the equity limit in either 2020 or 2021, so the debt is voided and she can continue collecting the Minimum Living Income.