– I feel that they hide behind the word “necessary” documentation, and that it is they who decide it, says Ritha Johansen from Skrova. She is employed in her own limited company. When she was sick, she sent a claim for sick pay to Nav and thought it would be a good thing. But then Nav demanded documentation of several things Johansen reacts to. Among other things, they wanted access to her private account statements. When Johansens sent these in to Nav, she chose to redact parts of the printout. This included daily expenses, and some large sums on car tyres, the sale and purchase of used cars. Nav believed this was insufficient documentation. Nav cannot point to a legal authority that states what type of information it is entitled to. They have also complained about similar demands in the past. At the same time, Nav itself decides what is necessary on a case-by-case basis. Department director at Nav Per Roger Samstad believes that this is how the practice should be. Department director at Nav, Per Roger Samstad believes that there was a basis for demanding access to medical records and Johansen’s private account statements. Photo: Anders Ulvolden / news Nav: – Strict requirements He stresses, however, that it is not usual to ask for detailed account statements. – In this case, we nevertheless believe, after a careful assessment, that there is a basis for obtaining or requesting bank statements, explains Samstad. He justifies this by the fact that Ritha Johansen is employed by his own company. At the same time, she had a significant increase in salary shortly before calling in sick. Nav therefore wants to check that the salary corresponds to what has been reported to Nav, Statistics Norway and the Norwegian Tax Agency, through the so-called A scheme. Among other things, to see that wages have not been returned to the company. – There are stricter requirements to look at information when the employee is employed in his own AS or employed by a close relative. This is because you have a greater opportunity to influence your own working and pay conditions, explains Samstad. Johansen believes this helps to make people who have started their own businesses suspicious. Here at the main office in Skrova, Ritha Johansen runs her own company, Malebarisk AS, which creates graphic design. Photo: John Inge Johansen / news It is easy for the information to be misused – I feel that I am trying to defraud my sick pay, she says. – I have documented that I have paid my tax and employer’s contribution, which is precisely the basis for sick pay. What I, or you, do with salary is irrelevant to Nav. Nav also asked for access to Ritha Johansen’s health record. Lawyer and legal assistant Ina Dølerud believes it is an unreasonable demand. Ina Dølerud has experienced the same thing as Ritha. She believes that Nav operates under too many powers. Photo: Therese Eskelund / Østlands-Posten Since 2017, she has helped the man in the street with similar cases through Legal Aid for Nav users. According to Dølerud, a great deal is needed to have grounds for obtaining, for example, an unedited health record. She herself works in her own AS and has been through the process of getting sick leave in connection with surgery. Dølerud explains that Nav’s practice is basically intended to ensure that the information can be checked. Nav then needs to know two things, according to Dølerud: That money has gone from the company into the person’s account. That the money has not been returned to the company. – Can it not be imagined that it is necessary for Nav to have the freedom to be able to check that things are going correctly? – No. It is so easy that it is misused, and they get far too much surplus information. Imagine how much information a bank statement shows. It simply goes to waste on privacy. Especially with unedited medical records from the doctor. She also believes that it is special that Nav can ask for the documentation that they themselves find necessary. – Too broad powers – They are allowed to do a lot. They have greater powers than the police, says Dølerud. According to Dølerud, the police must have authority and a court order to get as much access as Nav can demand. In cases involving social security fraud, it is natural that a lot of documentation is obtained, but it is doubtful whether they can demand as much when they are handling a claim, Dølerud believes. – There are far too broad powers in the legislation that allow Nav to collect an awful lot of information, she concludes. In the case of Ritha Johansen, Nav obtained her health records before she could react. After some time, they concluded that she was entitled to sickness benefits. Now the main question is how much she is entitled to. According to the Norwegian Data Protection Authority, such a case will typically be about how to interpret the special legislation in question. A lawyer in the Data Protection Authority, Susanne Lie, points out that she does not know the proceedings in the case, and explains that it is Nav itself that must make an assessment of what they strictly need. – If there are only parts of a journal or parts of an account statement, then it is Nav’s responsibility not to ask for more than you need, says Lie. Short period of high income After much back and forth, Nav decided to halve Johansen’s sick pay basis. Nav justifies this by the fact that Johansen has worked in her own company for a year when she was on sick leave. In the first months, she worked 10 percent, but her income gradually increased. Which led to the vacancy rate also increasing. In the last six months before she was sick, Johansen worked one hundred percent. – She has had varying reported income after she started her own AS, and only a short period of higher income. This period is too short for Nav to consider it a permanent change in income, says Per Roger Samstad in Nav. – Based on this, our assessment is that the average income for the last 12 months is most representative of her loss of income going forward. He emphasizes that Ritha Johansen can appeal the decision, which she has done. The processing time is between 12 and 15 months. Ritha Johansen has complained about this Ritha Johansen has complained about the discretionary basis that Nav has used. The law states: “When the sickness benefit basis is to be determined by judgement, the background for the discrepancy in income must be clarified. If the discrepancy in income is due to a change in the connection to working life, the sick pay basis must, as a general rule, be determined at the income after the change. This applies, for example, when the person: has changed jobs, has changed the job share in the same job, has had a transition from a temporary to a permanent position or has recently started working life.” – When Nav halves the sick pay base despite the fact that there has been a change in the job share for six months, it is not in accordance with the regulations, she says. Johansen had to send documentation of unredacted private expenses to Nav. Photo: John Inge Johansen / news
ttn-69
When Ritha applied for sick pay, Nav demanded full access to medical records and private account statements – news Nordland
