Latest decision summaries

  • Date of Decision:11/20/2017 Reg.No:3283-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards Skärholmen City District Board in Stockholm municipality for handing out a certificate to a parent that the parent was going to refer to, in a passport case

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:11/17/2017 Reg.No:1089-2016

    Enquiry initiated by the Parliamentary Ombudsmen regarding inmates with accompanied children, as well as pregnant inmates in prison

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:11/15/2017 Reg.No:7750-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs severe criticism towards the Enforcement Authority for failures in the authority’s asset management

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:11/9/2017 Reg.No:2623-2017

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Social Welfare Board in Ekerö municipality for reading a report due to concern to a child in its entirety

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:11/9/2017 Reg.No:3522-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Social Welfare Board in Örkelljunga municipality for not giving out certain information to a legal representative

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:11/7/2017 Reg.No:2998-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards the Migration Agency for stating the wrong date of birth on a certificate for residence permit

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:10/26/2017 Reg.No:7314-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards Försäkringskassan for not informing an individual, that a decision that the individual could take part of through Försäkringskassan’s personalised webpage [Mina sidor], was an interim decision and only

    Read more
  • Date of Decision:10/26/2017 Reg.No:2606-2016

    The Parliamentary Ombudsmen directs criticism towards Försäkringskassan for failures in the formation and grounds of a decision on modification and re-examination pursuant to chapter 113, section 3 and chapter 113, section 7 of the Social Insurance Code

    Hide information

    Summary

    Försäkringskassan took a decision to establish Y.Y.’s sickness benefit to a certain amount. Following upon Y.Y.’s request for a re-examination of the decision Försäkringskassan took a decision to, in connection to the request for re-examination, lower the sickness benefit pursuant to chapter 113, section 3 of the Social Insurance Code. The Parliamentary Ombudsmen holds that the decision on re-examination was not adequately formulated as it did not include information regarding the modification on which Försäkringskassan took an initiative, or to which extent the re-examination was based on Y.Y.’s request for a re-examination. In the decision, the Parliamentary Ombudsmen emphasize that an authority’s decision need to include adequate and well formulated grounds and moreover, the regulations that the decision is based upon.  

Search