A woman has lost the Minimum Living Income and must also return 5,169.23 euros to Social Security, for having exceeded the limit of assets allowed to access the benefit for having received an inheritance. The reason was that they counted as his assets a series of bank balances and properties (other than his habitual residence) that he had received as an inheritance, which placed him above the permitted limit. Now, the Superior Court of Justice of Madrid agrees with Social Security.
Social Security approved the Minimum Living Income for this woman in 2020 with an amount of 469.93 euros. The problem is that, months later, at the end of 2021, Social Security extinguished it when it considered that their cohabitation unit exceeded the asset limit. To be more exact, the organization cross-checked data with the Tax Agency and established a net worth computed in fiscal year 2020 of 79,119.83 euros, far exceeding the maximum threshold set at 43,196.40 euros.
Apparently, this estate included assets that the affected woman had received from her deceased mother, broken down into 75,209.84 euros in real estate and 3,910.02 euros in accounts. For the INSS, although his habitual residence (valued at more than 340,000 euros) was not taken into account, this new capital invalidated his situation of economic vulnerability. In addition, the managing entity proceeded to claim 5,169.23 euros for improper charges corresponding to the period between January 1 and November 30, 2021.
The beneficiary, as she was not satisfied, claimed and defended that she should not return the amounts because she considered that the payment had been the result of an “error by the competent authority itself” and that, when she requested the aid, the inheritance deed had not yet been signed. According to the ruling, the woman came to rely on a European Regulation on aid to farmers to try to get rid of the debt and argued that the Administration should have better verified its requirements from the beginning.
The Administration did not make an error and the beneficiary did not notify
Despite the allegations, the TSJ of Madrid agrees with Social Security, explaining that the debate was not in the composition of the inheritance that the woman accepted, but rather in determining whether Social Security failed to grant and maintain the benefit, something that the court flatly rejects.
At this point, the ruling indicates that “we do not appreciate any error committed by the Managing Entity, since the plaintiff’s tax data could not be verified by the Managing Entity until the following year, which is when the personal income tax return is made.” In fact, remember that article 15.2 of Law 19/2021 that regulates the Minimum Living Income requires any change that affects the maintenance of the benefit to be communicated within 30 calendar days.
The court also makes it clear that Social Security filed a claim as soon as it had the tax information from the Tax Agency. In fact, the Court warns that the acquired assets “could have been revealed to the Managing Entity by the plaintiff at the time when the inheritance award took place and there is no evidence that the plaintiff did so.” This lack of transparency and the objective exceeding of the legal limit prevented, in the opinion of the Chamber, from exempting it from the return under the umbrella of a state error.
Thus, Justice determines that the excuses presented by the beneficiary do not serve to invoke the doctrine that protects citizens against mistakes exclusive to the State. For all these reasons, it rejects the plaintiff’s appeal, confirms the resolution issued by Social Security and ratifies its obligation to reimburse the 5,169.23 euros improperly collected.