It is an absurd situation that Oksana and Guy Shahar denounce, the parents of a young autistic. With The Guardian, they explain that they have a debt of more than 10,000 pounds (11,700 euros) with a social security organization in the United Kingdom.
In question? Too perceived from the couple paid to the care of their 15 -year -old autistic son. In an “important” letter marked, they received the following request: “He received an allocation allocation to the one he is entitled. Now he must reimburse this amount.” A shock for both parents.
“It did not seem real (…) we assumed that there must have been an error,” said Guy Shahar, a resident of western London.
But as the British media explain, the organization did not make mistakes. This amazing debt was assigned because the child’s mother, Oksana, won 1.92 pounds too much per week, accumulating with the care of her 15 -year -old son, son of two parts: Cantinière in a school and a contract in a brand of sports teams.
Except that. The British organization causes the slightest offense to leave expensive. Unpaid caregivers are authorized to work whenever their income does not exceed the weekly threshold strictly applied, established in 196 pounds. If your income is higher than this total, a penny, they must reverse the complete sum received. When exceeding, for example, 38 cents the maximum income threshold must reimburse 64 pounds.
“They never alerted us, not once”
“They never alerted us, not once,” said the father. “They let the situation get worse and, more than six years later, they inflict an exorbitant fine. I really feel disappointed by the system.” The family tried to appeal this fine, without the file being processed at this stage.
A ministry spokesman said: “We suspend the recovery of Mrs. Shahar overwhelmingly while we wait for the result of her call.”
The Guardian conducted an investigation in the United Kingdom. She revealed that Shahar’s case is far from isolated. According to them, dozens of caregivers end with five -digit debts, even prison sentences, for similar situations. A Parliamentary Investigation Commission was sponsored after media investigation, without changes at this stage.
Source: BFM TV
