Pension lost due to official error Will IV pensioner get her 20,000 francs after all?
An unrecorded divorce cost IV pensioner Sandra F. around CHF 20,000. This was reported by the "Kassensturz" newspaper. blue News shows whether such a case can be prevented in future and what hope there still is.
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- Sandra F. received too little pension for almost ten years due to an unrecorded divorce. According to "Kassensturz", she lost around CHF 20,000 due to the limitation period.
- blue News answers whether the case can be repeated.
- There are also voices suggesting that the woman from Thurgau can still defend herself.
The story of Thurgau IV pensioner Sandra F. outraged Switzerland this week: because her divorce was not recorded correctly in the files, she received too little money for almost ten years. When the mistake came to light, the disability insurance only paid out around half of it. Around 20,000 francs were simply left out, as "Kassensturz" was able to report following an investigation.
blue News wanted to know: How did it get this far? And what needs to change so that this never happens again?
Problem 1 solved: change of marital status is recognized automatically
The good news first: the 2024 AHV reform introduced an innovation at national level that should prevent similar cases in future. "Whenever AHV and IV pensions are adjusted in line with general inflation, there is a nationwide comparison with all civil status offices. This is usually the case every two years. Deviations are identified and reported to the compensation offices. The reports are checked and any necessary corrections or additions are made," says Daniela Aloisi. She is the spokesperson for the Social Insurance Institution of the Canton of Zurich.
In concrete terms, this means that anyone who gets divorced or gives birth to a child, for example, must still comply with the reporting obligation. However, if an IV pensioner forgets to notify the authorities or if the notification is lost by the authorities, as in this particular case, this will become apparent after two years at the latest when the data is compared.
Problem 2 remains: Citizens cannot reclaim money from the state forever
However, the other problem remains open: the IV pensioner loses around CHF 20,000 due to a mistake by the authorities - and no longer receives the money because the claim is time-barred. This is due to Article 24 of the Social Insurance Act. It states that claims for outstanding social security benefits expire after five years.
This short period is surprising: in tax law, authorities can assert claims for up to ten years. In the case of debt collection, claims from loss certificates even remain valid for 20 years.
Daniela Aloisi from SVA Zurich explains the background: "This is regulated by social insurance law." The law states that owed or outstanding benefits and amounts can be claimed for five years. "This is a so-called forfeiture period. This can neither be interrupted nor canceled," clarifies Aloisi. The consequence: regardless of who wants to assert claims, they only have five years to do so.
The spokeswoman for the Zurich authority regrets that a lot of money is at stake in this particular case: "The mistake was made at our compensation office. We would like to pay the customer back the money, but we are not allowed to. There is no legal basis for this. It would require an amendment to the law."
In an interview with blue News, Aloisi takes a lot of time to explain the authority's position as precisely as possible. "The internal error culture is crucial in such cases. As a company, we stand up publicly, explain exactly what happened and ask for an apology."
At least something is moving politically: a member of the National Council wants to take action on behalf of the citizen of his canton. Christian Lohr, a member of the National Council from the center, has announced that he will bring the issue to the next Question Time. "I want to give the Federal Council the opportunity to draw up proposals that will help those affected to achieve justice," says Lohr. The current regulation leads to citizens being punished - "this is not only unpleasant, but unjust and unfair". Other Thurgau National Councillors did not wish to comment or could not be reached.
«The current regulation penalizes citizens. This is not only unattractive, but unjust and unfair.»
Center National Councillor
Possible way out: action for damages?
Shortly before the editorial deadline, the Federal Social Insurance Office provided an indication of how Sandra F. from Thurgau could possibly get her money after all: She could file a claim for damages. The basis for this is provided by two provisions in social insurance law and the AHV Act on the liability and responsibility of authorities.
The Federal Office supervises the cantonal authorities in the AHV/IV area. A spokeswoman comments: "The SVA Zurich has already admitted guilt in front of the camera."
However, it is unclear whether this option will really help Sandra F. receive the full amount. None of the experts asked wanted to make a prediction. The reason: damages are very rarely awarded in the area of social insurance. An error is not enough for the state to have to pay. It must be possible to prove that employees of the authorities have clearly violated the rules - in a way that is expressly prohibited by law.
«The path would be feasible, but rocky.»
Insurance law expert
Liability and insurance law expert Kaspar Gehring, who has already appeared on "Kassensturz", therefore also told blue News: "The hurdles for liability are very high and the case law of the Federal Supreme Court is strict. This is particularly the case with the requirement of unlawfulness. The path would therefore be feasible, but rocky."
