The Jobcenter explained his refusal as follows: The 53-Year-old had made in the past towards the facility in question is information, as the court said in a statement. So the woman expressed clearly, where she lives. It was unclear whether they are companions in a house with your former life and his mother lives in or outside of the house on the property in a trailer lives.

The job center of Düsseldorf rejected the application on granting of the rule performance, having regard to the previous inconsistencies. Are you dissatisfied with your salary? (Display)

Now, it's free compare: As much other people earn in your Position

click Here for the Paycheck

The plaintiff argued in the trial that she pays no rent and therefore no accommodation costs makes. The rule requires you need urgently. Support from other people you not get. Financially, they hold the only bottle to collect water.

judge of the applicant in Hartz-IV-dispute legal

The 37. Chamber of the social court in Düsseldorf ruled last Wednesday in favor of the applicant. This was not to be expected after the negative ruling from the jobcenter used to it.

The chamber of the social court was convinced by the evidence that the applicant is living is homeless and more often on the property of the mother of her former life companions stayed in. Their need for assistance is from the point of view of the judge but.

The woman had neither income nor assets. You don't live in a community with another Person. To her, therefore, is as a rule necessary, as the judge. On the services, only the children may be money deducted from your for their daughter. (Display) child maintenance 2019 now Check your rights

Low Deposit-revenue may not be against

to be expected, The income from Deposit bottles to collect are the results of the taking of evidence so low that they have to stay in this individual case, credits have free. Because the position of the applicant will not be affected by the fact so cheap that in addition, benefits from the job centre is not justified, the judges said in their verdict (S 37 AS 3080/19, judgment of 08.01.2020 - not yet final).

Jan, 60 years, Hartz-IV-recipients: First he lost his Job, then his friends PCP Jan, 60 years, Hartz-IV-recipients: First he lost his Job, then his friends

More on the topic of "Controversial Jobcenter-decisions":

• The eleven main Hartz-IV-judgments

An unemployed person has filed a complaint against the reduction of his benefits, and won. The Federal constitutional court declared the current practice of the Hartz-IV-sanctions in the Parts to be unconstitutional. But not always the power to get the receiver right. These are the 11 most important judgments.

mbe Date Of Update: 17 January 2020, 01:01