Legal questions about benefits? Get free advice!

Questioner

The benefits agency that provides my statutory benefit (from April 2014) has extended the end date of the benefit to the AOW age without informing me in advance (in accordance with the CAO 2016). The end date was 30.04.2017, has become 23 May 2018. In an email with a question about vacation days 2017, which I sent to the benefits agency, her answer was that I still had 6 days to go (to be taken before May 1, 2017). This answer and also the end date of April 30, 2017 were the reason for me to apply for my pension with my pension fund. This pension has now been awarded (and is irrevocable). However, if I had known in advance that my statutory benefit had been extended, I would not have applied for a pension (pension is more than Euro 200.00 lower than benefit), Furthermore....the benefits agency gave the pension fund an incorrect end date, namely 31.05.2017. If the benefits agency had informed the pension fund that my statutory benefit had been extended (information and duty of care of the benefits agency and pension fund(?)), the pension fund would have rejected my application for a pension. Benefits agency rejects my request for financial compensation. In its response, benefits agency states: customers were not approached individually and customers should consult the latest collective labor agreement themselves. I plan to file a complaint with the complaints committee of a benefits agency...but is there any point in complaining? The National Ombudsman is not allowed to handle 'my case'...because the benefits agency is not an independent administrative body. Please note: I filed a complaint with the 'benefits team' on July 3, 2017 and also sent a reminder email on July 10, 2017. No response yet.

Lawyer

Usually, one is only entitled to an extra-statutory WW via the employer if one also receives an WW benefit from the UWV. The UWV determines how long your WW benefit lasts (depending on employment history). However, it may be that the collective labor agreement determines that the 'extra-statutory WW' is paid up to a certain period. This does not say anything about your WW benefit because you are entitled to it for the period as determined by the UWV. Because the AOW age has been raised, the collective labor agreement and employers are also responding to this. So a person can now be entitled to an WW benefit up to the AOW entitlement age. Otherwise, it could be that if a person were still entitled to an WW (because the right has not yet been used up), this would still stop at the age of 65. In itself favorable. Now your case. You should look at how many months from 2014 you would be entitled to unemployment benefits. However, the maximum duration is 38 months (based on the legislation that was applicable at the time). If you were entitled to unemployment benefits from April 2014, and entitled to the maximum (as established in a decision that you received at the time), then the 38 months expired on 31 May 2017 (3 years + 2 months). The end date of 31 May 2017 could therefore be correct, because then you were at the maximum duration of 38 months. So your WW entitlement is 'up' and your WW benefit stops, and most likely your extra-statutory benefit as well. Usually the rule of thumb is that the extra-statutory WW lasts for the duration of the entitlement to the WW benefit. So it may be that you are no longer entitled to unemployment benefits at all, and therefore no longer entitled to statutory unemployment benefits, and that you therefore now have to use your pension. It depends on the sector whether someone is entitled to a subsequent benefit, but that only comes into play after the end of the unemployment benefit period and only to the extent that you are still unemployed at that time. I cannot read from your story whether the collective labor agreement provided for this and whether you also met that condition. It has to do with the old waiting scheme or if there was a specific reason for dismissal. But not every sector provides for this. You can still check that. If this is not the case, then I think that everything went well and a complaint will indeed not achieve anything. Because your maximum unemployment benefit entitlement has simply 'used up' (38 months have elapsed since April 2014).

Questioner

Thanks for the answer. Unemployment benefit has ended and has been converted into a statutory benefit. In the award letter from the benefits agency for statutory benefits, an end date of XX YY ZZZZ is mentioned.....As of the end date, I have also applied for a company pension and this has now been (irrevocably) awarded. But........The 2016/2017 CAO for Secondary Education stipulates that statutory benefits for education staff on the date the CAO was concluded will be/have been extended to the AOW age of the persons concerned. This extension, in fact a benefit that must be re-applied for, has been extended by the benefits agency for statutory benefits on its own initiative, without notifying the persons concerned. The benefits agency has also not stated anything on its website. There are now two payment streams running parallel: pension and benefit.... Obviously not allowed.... However, the benefit is more than 30% higher than the pension. It seems to me that the benefits agency is responsible. It is a pity that the benefits agency is a private company and not an independent public-law administrative organisation (pzbo). If only the latter were true...then going to the pension ombudsman would be a 'logical' step. Now victims can only call in the complaints committee of the benefits agency, which seems 'less neutral' than the ombudsman to me.