Allowance parents will hear about the 'expensive' method on Friday - Laurentien can continue. What preceded it?

Princess Laurentien talks to affected parents in Almere. Image: Harry Cock/de Volkskrant

Everyone was enthusiastic about the Laurentien method for compensating allowance parents, until the amounts paid out became known − An average of more than 120 thousand euros per victim. Friday should show how things will proceed.

Charlotte Huisman May 30, 2024, 5:00 AM

It seemed so nice and the first victims of the benefits affair who tried her are enthusiastic: a new, much easier method for dealing with their claims. Secretary of State Aukje de Vries (Allowances) also hoped that this route by the Equal Recovery Foundation would smooth the government's stalled damage repair operation.

But now, Princess Laurentien's foundation and the Ministry of Finance are diametrically opposed. The method pays much more money than other routes previously set up by the government itself − an average of more than 120 thousand euros per victim − and the convincing one would not be taxed enough. It would therefore not be possible to talk to the foundation. The question is whether they will come out or whether the new recovery route dies an early death. On Friday, the outgoing cabinet will speak out accordingly.

The government is unable to deal with the damage suffered by the now 35 thousand recognized victims, from whom the tax authorities unfairly recovered childcare allowance. In particular, the composition of the additional damage has completely stalled. Because of the surprises caused by the recoveries, many benefit parents were in trouble: they lost their jobs, were expelled from home or, for example, health problems.

Actual Damage Commission

The Commission on Actual Injury, which the government set up to handle similar claims, is still underwhelming after more than four years: there are more than 3,000 while the committee processes only a handful of applications per week. Benefit parents complain that they have to provide proof for every claim made. While it is almost impossible for them so many years later, there is a causal link between losing their job, for example, and the benefits affair.

Advert

Princess Laurentien, who was involved with the benefit victims, decided to jump into this gap that the government had allowed to create. She embraced an alternative method for dealing with this additional damage, which a number of benefit parents had developed themselves. The method focuses on the recorded story of the victims. Based on the events described by the allowance parent, personal injury experts calculate the damage: every claim, such as losing a job or having to terminate a course, involves an enormous amount of money.

With this plan, the farmer's princess went up. For her, the doors opened quickly. Many large companies, including insurers and automators, say their contributions, often free of charge. She then presented the method to the ministry. Secretary of State De Vries, who so far wanted to stick to the previously difficult method of the recovery operation, saw that change was necessary. And so they decided to give the “Laurentien method” a chance. From October 2023, the Equal Recovery Foundation was able to start a trial run, with a starting grant of 4.5 million euros.

5 billion euros extra

The trial started positively. Around 2,300 allowance parents, as well as around 1,900 volunteers, certainly seem to be writing down a story about an allowance parent. “No one has ever bothered to really listen to what happened to me,” one of the allowed allowance parents said visibly to de Volkskrant .

The tribe at the Ministry of Finance turned upside down when a first own evaluation by the foundation revealed the amounts paid out in March. This turned out to be more than three times higher per victim than the Actual Damage Commission. The case came into focus this month after a leak from the ministry to the NOS. The leaked note said that if this approach becomes regular, it could cost the state an additional 5 billion euros, plus the already large 9 billion euros for the recovery operation. After that, the discussion erupted whether the government did not go ahead with the replacement.

The explanation behind this amount is clear: it is the costs if all - estimated to be almost 40 thousand - recognized victims expect to receive the average amount of damage of more than 120 thousand euros at this foundation. Interestingly, it is still unclear how many victims want to sign up. But because of the generous benefits, the ministry feared a stampede.

That is why the ministry believes that things can be done a little less. A number of claims are easily awarded, it sounds out there behind the scenes. So probably even victims who have not suffered so much will be able to earn a substantial amount of money.

“Common quantities”

The Equal Recovery Foundation emphasizes that it does request additional documents to support the story. “The amounts paid out so far are based on the usual personal injury practice and do justice to what the parents have experienced,” says a successful one.

According to the conventional, the high above and average amount after around ninety agreements concluded shows that allowance parents participated in the trial “with a tough story”. She points out that the foundation has much lower implementation costs than the government. It has now lost almost a third of the money for the recovery operation on overhead.

What makes it extra difficult is that things are not going well between the Ministry of Finance and Princess Laurentien. The ministry is financial and therefore wants to help decide on implementation; it involves a lot of money. The princess does not want to be enforced by the law. They determine that it is precisely the independence of the foundation that appeals to the parents and therefore want them to be able to set its own course. That clashes.

If they do not work it out, the method risks having to stop, while the ministry would also initially assume that this recovery route would become regular. Stopping the Laurentien method would be a shame for much involved. Many allowance parents call the trust-based approach a breath of fresh air.

According to allowance parent Kristie Rongen, who is not involved with the foundation, the allowance parents are “back to square one” if the method were to be cut off now. “The government itself is unable to arrange the recovery humanely and quickly,” says Rongen. “The ministry now has to submit its own botch. The parents who have suffered a lot now finally want to be able to end this episode in a good way. '