Dear X,
On 20 January 2000 you lodged a complaint with the European Ombudsman against the European Commission concerning the limit which the Commission had set for that part of the salary of its officials which may be impounded by third persons. On 31 January 2000, I forwarded the complaint to the Commission for its comments.
The Commission sent its opinion on your complaint on 15 May 2000. I forwarded this opinion to you on 17 May 2000 with an invitation to make observations, if you so wished. On 26 May 2000, you sent me your observations on the Commission's opinion.
I am writing now to let you know the result of the inquiries that have been made.

THE COMPLAINT

The complainant was the spouse of a civil servant working for the European Commission in Brussels. After the divorce of his marriage, the complainant tried to obtain payment for claims that he had against the former spouse. He therefore approached the Commission in order to impound his former wife's salary. It emerged, however, that only a small part of that salary could be impounded. This was due to the fact that the Commission had set the minimum amount that could not be impounded at more than € 1 900 per month. According to Belgian law, the amount that could not be impounded was € 961.82.
The complainant objected to the approach adopted by the Commission.

THE INQUIRY

The Commission's opinion
In its opinion, the Commission explained that it was due to a mistake that in the past it had set the minimum part of its civil servants' salary that could not be impounded at an amount that was higher than the amount set by national law. The Commission pointed out that the complainant had tried to enforce his claims in Belgium and that consequently Belgian law and the minimum amount set by this law were to be applied. It informed the Ombudsman that it would take the necessary measures following therefrom in relation to the complainant's case.
The complainant's observations
In his observations, the complainant thanked the Ombudsman for his efforts. He reserved the right, however, to turn to the Ombudsman again in case the Commission should fail to comply with the relevant rules of Belgian law.

THE DECISION

1 Failure to comply with national law
1.1 The complainant claimed that the Commission had set the minimum part of the salary of its civil servants working in Brussels that could not be impounded at more than € 1 900 per month whereas according to Belgian law, the amount that could not be impounded was € 961.82.
1.2 The Commission replied that it was due to a mistake that in the past it had set the minimum part of its civil servants' salary that could not be impounded at an amount that was higher than the amount set by national law. It further stated that it would take the necessary measures following therefrom in relation to the complainant's case.
1.3 It 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