Within the framework of an investigation on financial aid, a committee carried out a video chat with the private citizen. The purpose of the investigation measure was to obtain documentation for assessment of whether or not the individual was living alone in their residence. During the video chat, the individual was asked to film their home, by among other things showing their hallway, closets, bathroom cabinet, some kitchen cabinets and the bedroom.
In his decision, JO establishes that he can recognize that he a social welfare committee may have a valid interest in carrying out a video chat in the way that it has done in this case. JO clarifies in the decision what considerations the committee must take before carrying out a video chat for the above mentioned purpose. JO also mentions how the committee should handle the matter of the individual’s consent to such an action.
In the case in question, the committee has not documented any considerations before taking this action. In addition, the comment letter did not indicate that the committee had made any considerations of the kind that is now in question. Nor did the committee handle the matter of the individual’s consent correctly. JO is therefore criticising the committee’s processing of this case.