FOR PREVIEWING & TESTING PURPOSES ONLY.
This notification will disappear once the page will be published.
This link is available for less than 30 minutes.
  • Makkelijk te lezen
  • Tekstgrootte
Europese Ombudsman
Europese Ombudsman

Wilt u een klacht indienen tegen een instelling of orgaan van de EU?

Indienen van een klacht
Indienen van een klacht
Huidige taal: 
  • English
beschikbare talen: 
De vertaling van deze pagina zal over enkele minuten beschikbaar zijn. U krijgt bericht zodra deze klaar is. Houd er rekening mee dat dit vanwege intensief gebruik van de eTranslation-tool langer kan duren dan gewoonlijk.

Decision of the European Ombudsman on complaint 1124/2001/GG against the European Commission

Besluiten
Zaak 1124/2001/GG - Geopend op Woensdag | 22 augustus 2001 - Besluit over Donderdag | 17 januari 2002


Strasbourg, 17 January 2002

Dear Mrs P.,

On 30 July 2001 you lodged, on behalf of Eurovisionen e.V., a complaint with the European Ombudsman in which you alleged that the Commission had failed to pay the complainant a subsidy of € 7 142.85 due under an agreement concluded between the complainant and the Commission.

On 22 August 2001, I forwarded this complaint to the Commission for its comments.

The Commission sent its opinion on your complaint on 27 November 2001. I forwarded this opinion to you on 29 November 2001 with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished, by 31 December 2001 at the latest. No such observations were received by me. However, after my services had contacted you on 8 January 2002, you informed me that whilst you did not agree with all the comments made by the Commission in its opinion you were happy with the payment that had been made.

I am now writing to you to let you know the results of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

The complainant is a German association that had applied to the European Commission for a grant under the "A soul for Europe" programme. On 28 December 1999, the Commission informed the complainant that it had decided to grant it a subsidy of € 7 142.85 and asked it to sign the relevant agreement.

According to the complainant, it was asked to submit the final documentation relating to the project in June 2000. On 30 August 2000, the Commission asked the complainant to initial and return annexes I to III of the agreement. These documents were sent to the Commission on 18 October and 8 December 2000 by fax. The Commission acknowledged receipt on 11 December 2000 and asked for the originals to be sent by post. The originals were sent on 11 December 2000.

In its complaint to the Ombudsman lodged in July 2001, the complainant claimed that it still had not been paid.

THE INQUIRY

The opinion of the Commission

In its opinion, the Commission claimed that the final report that had been due by 31 July 2000 had only been submitted on 27 October 2000. Due to some errors and inconsistencies, further information had been necessary. This information only reached the Commission’s services in mid-December 2000. As a result, it had not been possible to make the final payment before the end of the year. For budgetary reasons the necessary amount had to be allocated anew before a payment could be made. Payment was finally made on 12 October 2001.

The Commission recalled that the complainant was entitled to ask for interest on account of late payment in accordance with the provisions of the agreement.

The complainant’s observations

No written observations from the complainant were received by the Ombudsman. However, the complainant informed the Ombudsman that whilst it did not agree with all the comments made by the Commission in its opinion, it was happy with the payment that had been made.

THE DECISION

1 Failure to pay grant

1.1 The complainant, a German association, claimed that the Commission had failed to pay the subsidy of € 7 142.85 that it had agreed to provide in an agreement concluded with the complainant.

1.2 In its opinion, the Commission explained that the final report had been handed in belatedly and that further information that it had subsequently required had only been received in mid-December 2000. As a result, it had not been possible to make the final payment before the end of the year. For budgetary reasons, the necessary amount had to be allocated anew before a payment could be made. Payment was finally made on 12 October 2001. The Commission recalled that the complainant was entitled to ask for interest on account of late payment in accordance with the provisions of the agreement.

1.3 No written observations from the complainant were received by the Ombudsman. However, the complainant informed the Ombudsman that whilst it did not agree with all the comments made by the Commission in its opinion, it was happy with the payment that had been made.

1.4 It thus appears that the Commission has taken steps to settle the matter and has thereby satisfied the complainant.

2 Conclusion

On the basis of the Ombudsman's inquiries into the present complaint, it appears that the Commission has taken steps to settle the matter and has thereby satisfied the complainant. The Ombudsman therefore closes the case.

The President of the European Commission will also be informed of this decision.

Yours sincerely,

 

Jacob SÖDERMAN