The bailiff acted in compliance with the statutory requirements when the foreclosure actions were taken, however, the seizure of allowances exempt from blocking after the prompt collection order had been issued caused an impropriety related to legal certainty and social security, as well as to the anti-discrimination principle, as was concluded by the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights in his report. 

In her petition submitted to the Office of the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights, the client complained of the forcible collection of the social allowance transferred to her salary account.

In his report on case No. AJB-879/2020, dr. Ákos Kozma disclosed that  the client’s salary account had only  been credited with the social allowances that are exempt from blocking pursuant to the provision set out in Section 74 of the Hungarian Foreclosure Act (“Vht”). As a result of the transfer order issued by the bailiff, these allowances were affected by foreclosure, so the funds that could be used for subsistence by the complainant and her severely disabled child of legal age were limited to HUF 28,500. The social allowances that the complainant and her child are entitled to are exempt from blocking, so these allowances are completely exempt from the effect of foreclosure, as long as they are delivered by post. However, the exemption from foreclosure is not applicable if these social allowances are transferred to a salary account.

In his inquiry, the Commissioner for Fundamental Rights established that during the foreclosure procedure, at the time of performing the foreclosure actions, the bailiff acted in compliance with the statutory requirements. At the same time, the seizure of allowances that are exempt from blocking and which the complainant and her child were eligible to after the prompt collection order had been issued caused an impropriety related to legal certainty and social security, and it also violated the anti-discrimination principle.

With regard to the fact that the established improprieties can be traced back to the inappropriate provisions of the relevant law, the Ombudsman asked the Minister of Justice to review the currently effective regulation with a view to remedying the impropriety.

For the respective report, please click on the following link: AJB- 879/2020.