46 annual report 2012 In bad faith In the nature of things, withdrawal of social benefits can very significantly affect a citizen. The consequences are even greater if the citizen also has to repay benefits already received. Therefore, even more is required before an authority can demand that a citizen repay benefits. Clearly, it is a condition for demanding repayment of benefits that the recipient was not entitled to receive them, for instance because the citizen was not ill as assumed by the authority and therefore not entitled to sickness benefit. This is known as the objective condition. However, it is also a requirement that the citizen knew or should have known that he or she was not entitled to the benefit, i.e. in the above example that the citizen knew or should have known that he or she was not ‘sufficiently ill’ to be entitled to sickness benefit. This requirement, which is sometimes expressed as receiving benefits ‘in bad faith’, is referred to as the subjective condition. In the Greve Case, the Ombudsman considered this issue. His conclusion was that the authorities should be very aware that there are two conditions which must be met – and of what is required before a benefit can be said to have been received in bad faith. Correct case processing is worthwhile The above outline illustrates that the local authority is faced with many pitfalls when considering possible social benefit fraud cases. At the same time, these are errors of a nature that gives rise to doubt about the basis of the decision itself. Conversely, if such errors have not been made, this can be said to create a presumption that all relevant considerations (also in relation to the legal protection of the citizen) have been taken into account, resulting in an increased likelihood that the decision is therefore correct.