Nav will not reopen the case of the father who lost a large part of his father’s allotment. The civil ombudsman says he will get free legal aid if he goes to court.
– Nav now has a chance to correct what many have unjustly experienced. When they do not understand this, it is difficult to see that there is anything behind it other than greed.
Gunnar O. Horide says he was one of many fathers who lost all or part of their father.
After many scandals in Nav in recent years, I hoped they would have come further, he says.
Haridt ended up in a web of so-called father allotments: he applied too late to withdraw the father allotment. He applied for NAV’s deadline and missed 67 days of paid paternity leave.
This summer he got new hope.
Complaint against Civil Ombudsman – Confirmed
Herrit is a lawyer and has worked with management law throughout his life. He did not find a solution by dismissing a complaint to the Nav or Social Insurance Court. He finally complained to the Civil Ombudsman. This summer Civil Ombudsman Hannie Harlem asked Navi to reconsider her case.
Nav and Social Insurance Court have a long-standing practice, which is based on a different understanding of the law, which we believe is correct, he said.
Ombud believed that the deadline for the tongue was not recognized by law.
The Directorate of Labor and Welfare (Nov) has been given until September 1 to respond to the Civil Ombudsman Report. The deadline was later adjourned to October 15. But Nawin’s response did not come until Monday afternoon.
Nav says the case should not be reviewed and believes they have correctly explained the regulations.
This is how the Civil Ombudsman reacts. Ombud now goes a long way in recommending Hert to take this case to court.
– It is obvious that we recommend legal action if the complainant wishes, Harlem says.
The Civil Ombudsman says the complainant will then receive free legal aid. Thus he covers the legal costs.
The plaintiff, Gunnar O. Herit, tells Aftonbosten that he will carefully consider whether he will certainly sue Nav.
– This is me or someone else. Someone has to do it, he says.
It is not uncommon for someone to follow civil ombudsman reports
Harlem responded that Nav did not agree with the Civil Ombudsman’s statement. She reminds us that following Ombudin’s statements is a prerequisite for Sporting.
– Contrary to Sporting’s assumption, I record that this is one of many cases where one does not follow Ombudin’s statement, she says.
Harlem says he will refer to the Civil Ombudsman in his annual report for Sorting. He pointed out that Sporting believes that Ombud’s statements will be followed in situations where management does not agree with Ombud.
Nov: Our argument is in court
“We’re sorry we took so long to respond,” Nav writes in response to Ombutu.
The Directorate cannot see that “there is a basis for transferring the case to the complainant.”
Nav pointed out in the letter that the legal understanding of the Civil Ombudsman deviates from “the Social Insurance Court and our legal understanding on which the application of the law is based – and our conversation with the Ministry.”
Nav hopes their argument will last in court.
– Yes, I will say. We firmly believe it. Hogan Hertzberg, executive legal director of the Directorate of Labor and Welfare, says he hopes we have support in the legal and preparatory work.
He also says that Nav believes that Starting agreed to this interpretation by changing the practice and the entire law in June this year.
Hertzberg denies any involvement in the case.
– We have taken the case very seriously, are well aware of the civil ombudsman’s argument and have fully evaluated the allegations they make. We have come to the conclusion that we believe this is the intention of the legislature with the consequences for such individual cases.
– Isn’t it very common for management not to follow civil ombudsman reports?
– No, they are overweight. But there is still no relationship between the civil ombudsman and the change of administration.
– But did the Civil Ombudsman do a bad legal job?
– No, it has done a very good legal job, but he says we do not agree on what elements should be emphasized in the legal assessment.
The opposite result would be costly for the state
If Nav had come to a different conclusion, it would probably have repaid a large sum to the fathers of the country. Because there are many who have lost all or part of the paternal allotment. Last year alone, there were 772.
Herod et al. Have applied for paternity leave after their mother’s paid parental leave ended. According to the rules of the tongue, you must apply before the last day of the mother to withdraw parental benefits. Because the law says that leave must be taken regularly. If you do not wish to do so, you must apply to postpone the father’s allotment until the end of the mother’s paid leave.
Harid called where it was stated in the law that one should apply within this deadline. The Civil Ombudsman thus supported him, believing that this deadline was not recognized by law.
The Civil Ombudsman responds to Naveen’s argument
In its response letter, Nav wrote to their practice that “the words of the law, preparatory work, standard long-term training in the company and social insurance court …
In a letter to the Civil Ombudsman, Nav Sorting said, “Prof. 127L (2020-2021) joined the practice through review.” Here, Nav refers to the consideration of the bill to remove the entire father allocation trap. It was passed at the start in early June.
The Civil Ombudsman does not consider it reasonable to conclude that Starting agreed with such an explanation.
Harlem believes the ministry in the bill only describes what was in place.
If someone had described the practice to Starring as we believe it to be applicable law, it would have been sensational, he says.
Today’s practice dates back to 2007
Nav has been training in the area for a long time. The current practice dates back to 2007. Nav pointed out that the Supreme Court had previously ruled that “substantial and long-term social security practice should be given considerable weight”. Harlem says this is appropriate, but reminds them that they saw that side of the case as well.
– But we don’t think it weighs enough, she says.
She adds a sample (Harburg Group) Also assumes that the Civil Ombudsman will oversee the work of the Social Insurance Court.
– We cannot say that one should base the practice of the Social Insurance Court. We don’t do our job for starters, he says.
Haridt believes there is nothing new in Nav’s response and pointed out that all the arguments were reviewed by the Civil Ombudsman in their report.
– He says that all the articles in Aftonbosten and the amendment passed by Sorting to abolish the paternal allotment mechanism show that having such a trap was never a desired policy.
He now believes the newly appointed Minister for Children and Families can see the matter with new eyes.
“Music geek. Coffee lover. Devoted food scholar. Web buff. Passionate internet guru.”