A woman was overpaid a subsidy and is required to return 15,485 hryvnias to the Pension Fund. Here's the court's decision on the matter.

A woman was granted a subsidy of 4,736 hryvnias. However, she is being asked to return an overpaid amount of assistance totaling 15,485 hryvnias, which accrued from January 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, due to the total area of real estate being 304.39 square meters. This information is stated in the decision of the Artsiz District Court of the Odessa Region, published on January 23, 2025.

The woman was awarded the subsidy in accordance with the resolution of the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine dated October 21, 1995, No. 848 "On Simplifying the Procedure for Providing Subsidies to the Population to Compensate for Housing and Utility Costs, Purchase of Liquefied Gas, and Solid and Liquid Fuel for Household Use" (with amendments) in the amount of 170 hryvnias from January 1, 2023, totaling 4,736 hryvnias. According to a certificate from the Documentation Processing Department No. 1 dated August 14, 2024, it was established that the overpaid subsidy amount of 15,485 hryvnias was accrued from January 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, due to the total area of real estate being 304.39 square meters. A letter was sent to her on August 16, 2024, regarding the voluntary return of the overpaid subsidy amount. As of December 1, 2024, the funds had not been returned.

Case Consideration

The court found that based on her application dated January 25, 2023, submitted along with a declaration of income dated January 25, 2023, and a certificate of registered persons at the address, the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Odessa Region granted her a subsidy to compensate for housing and utility expenses, as well as for the purchase of solid and liquid household fuel. In her declaration dated January 25, 2023, she indicated that the total area of her residential house is 630 square meters and that she owns a land share of 3.07 hectares in ODO "Komsomolets".

As noted in the decision regarding the overpaid housing subsidy amounts dated August 14, 2024, and the protocol for calculating the overpaid housing subsidy amount, the total overpaid housing subsidy amount of 15,485 hryvnias was accrued from January 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024, due to the total area of real estate being 304.39 square meters. A letter was sent to the woman on August 16, 2024, regarding the voluntary return of the excess subsidy amount; however, the overpaid funds had not been credited to the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine.

What did the court decide?

The court denied the claim. The woman provided all requested information in her declaration, and the authorized body granted the housing subsidy without verifying the accuracy of the information she submitted.

"The court established that when applying for a subsidy on January 25, 2023, the defendant provided only the information requested by the plaintiff, specifically noted in the 'General Information' section, the characteristics of the residential premises/house: the total area of the house is 630 square meters, the persons registered and residing at the specified address are listed, and it is also indicated that she owns a land share of 3.07 hectares in ODO 'Komsomolets'. Thus, the defendant provided all requested information in the declaration, and the authorized body granted the housing subsidy without conducting the verification required by the aforementioned Regulation. The verification of the accuracy of the information submitted by the defendant was conducted only on August 14, 2024. Therefore, the defendant provided all information in the declaration submitted along with the application for the housing subsidy. There is no element of bad faith in her actions. Consequently, the court concluded that the recovery of the 15,485 hryvnias subsidy, which was awarded and paid to the defendant as a means of subsistence, is not subject to return considering Article 1215 of the Civil Code of Ukraine. Furthermore, the recovery of this amount could impose an excessive burden on the defendant, placing her in an even more difficult financial situation," the court emphasized.