Sophie received bad news from CAF after perceiving her mother’s transfers.
It is a incredible story, as the French administration likes to create it. Sophie (assumed first name) has been, at the heart of an administrative MICMAC who came to put it in financial difficulties for over a year. A tangle of rules which has led to a misunderstanding whose consequences it pays today. And not just a little, since it is a ticket of almost 10,000 euros that it must go out to return it to the Caisse des Allocations Familiales (CAF).
Currently unemployed and living in active solidarity income (RSA), Sophie is accused by the organization of having perceived an RSA too high for several months. In question of the money in return which she did not declare, in particular the transfers made by her mother on her bank account. But not that, as indicated by the decision of the administrative court of Nîmes that Liner was able to consult.
It all started in April 2023 for this resident of Vaucluse. The CAF claims to reimburse 10,193.55 euros, which would have been unduly paid. It would be several RSA overwhelmingly for almost two years. But how can the RSA be too high for an unemployed person who is no longer entitled to unemployment?
In her argument, CAF affirms that Sophie should have said, in her quarterly statements, that she had received money from her mother. Since September 2021, the latter had paid him nearly 7,000 euros. Sophie said it was advanced (reimbursed since) for the payment of training and various purchasing refunds. However, for the administrative court of Nîmes, seized of the case, this money should have been declared as financial resources.
But that’s not all. In almost two years, Sophie has sold various cases and personal objects on resale sites, such as Vinted, Momox, Mango Pay or Gibert Joseph Interactive. Result: she received € 3,450. Here again, the CAF and the administrative court said that the sums should have been declared, even if these income did not exceed 20 transactions or 3000 euros per year.
These various money returns, as well as others more marginal, should have been signified to the CAF by the thirties to be taken into account in the calculation of the RSA. The allowance would have been lower. It is therefore the gap asked him to reimburse.
For her part, Sophie said he had never benefited from personalized support in understanding and monitoring her RSA rights and that she has always made her statements in good faith. However, neither his defense, nor his argument on the sums collected, convinced the CAF or the administrative court.
The latter confirmed that she should reimburse an overpayment at CAF. The final amount was reduced by the Vaucluse department, to 9053.33 euros.