fact-ua.com

The Pension Fund overpaid a retiree by 6,532 hryvnias and is demanding repayment—what did the court decide?

ПФУ взыскал с пенсионера 6 532 гривны из-за переплаты. Какое решение принял суд по этому делу?

A man has been assigned a pension amounting to 9,007 hryvnias. During the pension assignment, the average monthly wage indicator for the previous three years (2020-2022) was mistakenly applied. He is being asked to return the pension overpayment of 6,532 hryvnias. This is stated in the decision of the Baltsky District Court of the Odessa region, published on January 13, 2025.

The man is registered with the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Odessa region, receiving an age pension since July 9, 2003. From May 20, 2009, to August 25, 2023, he received a disability pension from November 22, 1993, as well as a pension for the loss of a breadwinner. On August 25, 2023, the citizen applied to the Pension Fund of Ukraine with a request to switch from a pension for the loss of a breadwinner to an age pension. By order dated September 1, 2023, he was assigned a pension of 9,007 hryvnias. The average monthly wage indicator for the previous three years (2020-2022) was mistakenly used in the pension assignment. An inspection of the electronic pension case revealed that the average wage indicator in Ukraine, from which insurance contributions were paid, was used for calculating the age pension based on the three calendar years preceding the year of the pension recalculation request, which contradicts the provisions of part 3 of Article 45 of Law No. 1058-IV. After adjusting the pension case accordingly, the amount assigned for the age pension from August 25, 2023, was 5,537 hryvnias (order dated October 13, 2023). The applicable average monthly wage indicator for the previous three years was for 2014-2016. Consequently, he accrued a pension overpayment of 7,724 hryvnias for the period from August 25, 2023, to October 31, 2023. The pensioner was sent letter No. 1500-0502-8/154707 dated November 2, 2023, informing him of this overpayment. Based on the above, decision No. 3507 was issued on November 1, 2023, regarding the acceptance of the overpayment amount for accounting.

"On January 9, 2025, a statement was received from the plaintiff's representative at the court to reduce the claim amount from 7,724 hryvnias to 6,532 hryvnias, due to the deduction from the defendant's pension of 1,192 hryvnias at his request," the case materials state.

What did the court decide?

The court denied the claim. The case materials lack evidence that the man committed any abuses or provided false information to the Pension Fund of Ukraine when receiving and paying his pension.

"The pension calculation was performed by the plaintiff in this case. The obligation to calculate the pension and determine its amount lies within the discretionary powers of the plaintiff in this case. The defendant is not required to verify the accuracy of the calculation; therefore, bad faith in his actions is excluded. Based on the circumstances outlined above, the court concludes that the claim should be denied, as the court found that the plaintiff (the payer of funds) did not prove the fact of the defendant's (the recipient of funds) bad faith. The court also notes that the overpayment was not the fault of the defendant but, as stated by the plaintiff, was due to the mistakenly applied average monthly wage indicator for the previous three years (2020-2022), which led to the pension overpayment. The fact that the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in Odessa region did not take into account the legislation when transferring the defendant from one pension to another does not constitute grounds for recovering overpayments from the defendant in this case; hence, there is no arithmetic error in the plaintiff's calculation of the pension for the defendant. The court also notes that a software error cannot be considered a computational error, and the defendant has no actions indicating bad faith in receiving the pension. In light of the above, the claim for the recovery of 6,532 hryvnias from the man is not subject to satisfaction," the court emphasized.