The PiS Bureau of Intervention and Advice in Przemyśl is the parliamentary work zone of Sejm Speaker Marek Kuchciński. It is involved in solving the problems of Podkarpackie Voivodeship and regional policy.
The office provides assistance to anyone affected by injustice, incompetence or arrogance of public authorities and institutions, who needs guidance in exercising their rights. Regardless of nationality, political views or social status.
This assistance consists in providing free legal advice, preparing pleadings and administrative documents, and intervening in cases that require it.
Office hours: Tuesday through Friday, 12 p.m. to 4 p.m.
Contact:
Wybrzeże Józefa Piłsudskiego 1
37-700 Przemyśl
phone/fax 16 678 49 19
1.05.2016 r. - 31.05.2016 r.
From May 02 to 06, 2016, meetings were held on civil, criminal, administrative and labor and social security law. The advice included inheritance issues such as division of inheritance, matrimonial matters or evictions. Criminal cases concerned crimes of fraud, abuse, and theft; persons who came forward were wronged and sought means to protect their rights through criminal proceedings. A social insurance case concerned an appeal against a decision of the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) on sickness benefit. According to the party, the Social Insurance Institution incorrectly held that the inability to work on the basis of which he was claiming this benefit was marked by the same disease unit as the conditions on the basis of which he had previously received sickness benefit. Accordingly, a model appeal was drafted to be effective and the party was instructed to consult a physician to correctly identify the disease units in the appeal as this requires expertise.
A significant issue that is likely to require intervention was that of attendance allowance. As the party had a certificate of disability issued by the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Administration, he applied for a nursing allowance. However, due to a misinterpretation of the contents of the Act by the staff, the said certificate was treated as a certificate of major disability and a decision was issued granting the party such a benefit. Because of this error, the head of the municipality applied to the Self-Government Board of Appeals for the annulment of the decision he had issued. The next step will be to issue a decision calling for the return of the unduly drawn benefit. The party was not guilty of collecting the benefit because it was misled into thinking that it could receive such a benefit and there can be no question of any deliberate action to the detriment of the municipality. It is possible to file a motion for remission of these claims, especially that the granting of the attendance allowance was caused by an error on the part of the municipality's employees and not the party. The party should be supported in this action.
The second week of May was dominated by civil cases. Among other things, assistance was provided in the case of a tender which had been won, but in which a contract was not concluded due to the fault of the tender organizer. The party was informed that as a result, it is entitled to claim compensation, and the case is currently at the stage of out-of-court settlement attempt. As far as civil law is concerned, the advice also concerned the procedure for the establishment of a necessary road, and assistance was provided in the preparation of a motion to initiate execution proceedings.
Another issue involved a pending child surrender proceeding, combined with a custody termination case. The party is fighting for custodial rights over the granddaughter, the case is pending, the opinions of both former family diagnostic and consultation centers agree that the party meets the conditions for custody, however, the parental rights of the father cannot be disregarded in this. The party seeks assistance from any institutions that could issue her with opinions confirming the legitimacy of her custody. Due to the profile of the MPs' offices, including the Office of Legal Intervention and Advice, the party was advised that the Office does not have the competence or qualifications to go to her place of residence and draw up such an opinion. The party was advised to write a letter to the Ombudsman for Children, as the body appointed to intervene on behalf of the child to ensure its full and harmonious development, with respect for its dignity and subjectivity. The party has also received information from the Chancellery of the Prime Minister, Department of Civil Affairs, that the case has been referred to the Ministry of Justice, in order to look into the case and possibly to take it under supervision, the party is waiting for information whether this supervision will be introduced.
Between May 16 and 20, 2016, 15 meetings were held with the parties, covering issues ranging from civil, administrative or labor and social security law.
Meetings on civil matters concerned, among others, the inheritance of a child out of wedlock, during which the rules and order of inheritance were explained to the party with the information that parentage out of wedlock is irrelevant in inheritance matters, as long as paternity has been acknowledged or established, paulina action, i.e. a lawsuit for declaring a legal act ineffective, where the debtor disposed of property causing harm to creditors. The lawsuit for declaring a legal action ineffective, where the debtor has disposed of his property, causing harm to creditors, compensation for the harm suffered by the insurer in connection with a traffic accident. There were also two cases of counselling on alimony issues in the matter of maintenance from a former spouse, except that in the first case the claimant came forward and in the second the defendant. From family law matters, assistance was provided in drafting a paternity denial suit. The party initially came in to establish it, but due to the fact that the child was born during the marriage and even though it did not come from the spouse, there is a presumption that he is the father and it needs to be rebutted.
The advice also related to out-of-court matters. On May 16, 2016, a party came forward with the bailiff's order suspending the enforcement proceedings at the creditor's request and wanted information on what to do next in the case at hand. In view of the expiration of the one-year period from the effective date of the order of suspension, the party was instructed on the contents of Article 823 of the Code of Civil Procedure, according to which the enforcement proceedings are discontinued by operation of law if the creditor has not, within one year, performed an act necessary to continue the proceedings or has not requested that the suspended proceedings be resumed. The party was assisted in drafting a letter to the judicial officer to obtain information on whether the proceedings had been discontinued and, if not, why not, given that, in principle, the enforcement authority is not required to issue a decision declaring the proceedings discontinued by operation of law, but it does issue a certificate of discontinuance at the request of the creditor or the debtor.
On May 17, 2016, on the other hand, the meeting concerned the issue of imposing a penalty by the Agency for Restructuring and Modernisation of Agriculture in connection with the application for subsidy of a real property which is not used. In these proceedings, the party was the owner of the plot of land, while it was not its user (the user is the person against whom proceedings for infringement of possession and surrender of the property in question are pending, who, without legal title, submitted the property for subsidy). The party expressed its intention to appeal against the penalty charged to it on the grounds that it had applied for a stay of the proceedings before ARMA for the duration of the court proceedings, which did not grant it. The party was advised on how to formulate a fair appeal, on what to base the objections to these proceedings and to which authority to address them.
From the field of criminal matters, the party repeatedly appeared on a misdemeanor judgment convicting her of a misdemeanor under Article 10(2) in connection with Article 5(1)(3b) of the Act of 13 September 1996 on the maintenance of activities and order in municipalities in connection with the depositing of garbage in her yard. In view of the rejection of the party's request for an ex officio lawyer, the party was assisted in drafting an appeal, the grounds of which primarily concerned the erroneous finding that the items on the party's property constituted municipal waste. The party was advised that if she lost the case, (which the party was advised of due to the unfavorable evidence against her) she could be ordered to pay the costs of the infraction proceedings.
This week also saw the continuation of the case regarding the issue of the winning tender in the absence of a contract due to the organizer's fault. After the party consulted with the Municipality, it was suggested that it file a motion for a settlement attempt with the Court, and such a motion was drawn up in the last week of May.
Of the issues between the citizen and the municipality, another issue concerned the lease agreement and the tender for it. The party who had previously been leasing the property in question had seen his lease agreement expire and the office had issued a tender. The party was advised to apply for a possible buyout of the property if the Municipality was interested because if the sale were to go ahead, the tenant would have the right of first refusal, given that the lease agreement had been concluded in writing with a definite date and had been executed for at least 3 years, and the property to be purchased was part of the tenant's family farm. However, in the absence of interest from the Municipality, the party must proceed to tender. At a later date, the party called with thanks as the Municipality dropped the tender and re-entered into a lease agreement with the party.
From May 23 to May 31, 2016, both advice was given on new issues and parties who had already received assistance from the office came forward.
On May 24, 2016, a party came forward to issue a decision determining the pension. However, as the ZUS Rp7 forms issued by the employer had not been challenged in a separate court proceeding, ZUS correctly based its calculations on the forms in question, especially as ZUS called on the party to submit a statement as to whether it agreed with the calculations on them or with the discrepant insurance card, for which the party submitted a correction of the ZUS Rp7 made by one employer, and as to the other form did not refer to it at all. Prior to the issuance of the decision in question, the party had already benefited from the assistance of an office and had been instructed on the necessity to sue for the rectification of the ZUS Rp7 forms, however she did not take this course of action. With the issuance of the decision to determine the benefit, the party lost its legal interest in bringing such an action.
The other party who came in that day wanted to obtain information regarding a payment case, but at the outset she indicated that she had a professional attorney in the case. She was informed that for reasons of professional ethics, it was not possible for her to become actively involved in the case or to give an opinion on the actions of her attorney. Notwithstanding the above, the party wished to file a notice of possible criminal offence by the construction expert who was appointed in her case. The party was instructed that if it did not agree with the opinion of the expert, it should file objections to his opinion and request the admission of an additional opinion issued by another expert, which also resulted from the conversation that the professional attorney suggested, but due to the costs the party did not agree to it. Since the Court gave credence to the expert's opinion and found it exhaustive and reliable, there is a very high probability that the criminal proceedings in this case will not be initiated. The party was advised to wait for the outcome of the appeal proceedings (its attorney is in the process of writing the appeal).
A meeting was held between a citizen and the Social Security Administration regarding a pension supplement for forced labor in construction battalions. The party had received a certificate from the Military Complementary Headquarters and was waiting for the case to be resolved and wanted information on what remedies were available to her in the event of a decision by the Social Security Institution denying her this benefit. Accordingly, the party was advised of the avenue of appeal from the Social Security decision including the need to meet the time limit for filing an appeal which will be included in the instructions.
Other advice concerned, among others, the issue of withdrawal from the contract for telecommunication services, in which the party was explained the differences between termination and withdrawal and the effects of such actions, or the issue of eviction of a spouse, in which the party was informed that such eviction is possible only in exceptional situations in the case of domestic violence, or grossly reprehensible behavior making cohabitation impossible.
To sum up, the PIS Intervention and Counselling Bureau in the above-mentioned period enjoyed great interest, with more than 40 meetings held. Many of the advices concerned pending proceedings and most of the persons who came forward asked for further assistance as the case progressed. There were only a few cases in which the parties did not manage to get help and they concerned court proceedings that ended with a final and legally valid decision with a closed appeal route. Help provided by the office is needed in Przemyśl, most of the people who come to the office cannot afford professional help in their cases and they willingly use the help offered. The range of cases is wide, it includes civil, administrative, criminal and labor law and social insurance cases. In the vast majority of cases, the parties are able to receive legal aid without having to resort to extra-legal intervention, especially since many cases are still pending before the courts and the parties have appropriate legal remedies for the case. An exception is the case described above regarding the attendance allowance, however, as of today, no decision on reimbursement has been issued and therefore it is not yet required.
1.04.2016 r. - 30.04.2016 r.
On April 05, 2016, a party came in seeking advice regarding the right of first refusal in the purchase of a property owned by a local government unit. The problematic issue concerned the possibility of buying an apartment bypassing the spouse, with whom the party has statutory community of property, and then transferring it to a nephew.
The joint property of the spouses has been formed as a joint property. Unlike fractional joint ownership, joint ownership is closely related to a marriage. It is characterized by the lack of separate shares in the joint ownership. This feature makes it impossible to dispose of a share in the joint property or a share in a specific item of property during the time of joint ownership.
Due to the nature of the joint property, the party was informed that it was not possible to purchase the jointly rented apartment on its own, but she was advised of the possibilities of transferring the property to her nephew jointly with her husband.
Accordingly, the party decided to schedule another meeting, this time with the husband, to agree on a unified position.
On the same day, legal advice was given concerning the crime under Article 297 of the Criminal Code, i.e. the crime of extorting credit. Due to the lack of any documents pertaining to the case, lack of knowledge about the pending proceedings and the status of the party, the party was instructed (if he was a suspect in the proceedings, which could not be determined due to the lack of any documents) about the possibility of requesting a public defender if he duly proved that he was unable to bear the costs of the defence without detriment to the necessary subsistence of himself and his family, i.e. the so-called right of the poor. Such a solution is best suited to protect the rights of a person due to his/her inability to undertake an independent and at the same time effective defense.
The party expressed a willingness to schedule another meeting if documents related to this case are collected/found.
On April 06, 2016, counsel was provided in connection with a misdemeanor conviction. The party was denied a public defender advocate, so the party approached the Office of Intervention and Counsel for assistance with the appeal. A conversation with the party revealed that the appeal proceedings are not yet underway, a request for a statement of reasons for the judgment has been filed. The party was instructed to file an appeal against the judgment within 7 days from the date of its delivery. The party announced that he would come to the Office of Intervention and Counsel with the verdict and the case file in the future, in order to receive assistance in formalizing the criminal appeal.
On April 07, 2016, legal advice was provided regarding the matter of the claim against the owners of the premises to conclude an agreement to transfer the ownership of the land to them. The party was informed about the legal basis for the action of the Municipality, which filed such a claim before the District Court arising from Article 209a of the Act of 21 August 1997 on real estate management in connection with the lack of consent of the residents to the voluntary redemption of the property in question. The case is pending before the Court to compel the defendants to make a statement of intent regarding the above issue. In view of the lack of a statement of claim, in order to ascertain the exact claims of the Commune, the party decided, once it was found, to seek again the assistance of the Office for Intervention and Advice.
On that day the party also applied for execution of the decision of the Social Insurance Institution regarding recalculation of the pension. According to the party's statement, the Social Insurance Institution has not recalculated the old-age pension to which the party is entitled to date. Based on the incomplete documentation submitted, it has not been possible to help the party for the time being, as the submitted letters indicate that legal remedies enabling the case to be set aside have been exhausted.
On April 08, 2016, the Office of Intervention and Advice, was approached by members of one of the housing cooperatives in Podkarpacie, from whom funds were unduly collected. The documents submitted showed that the resolution of the cooperative was issued without legal basis. Therefore the Office helped to draft a letter calling the cooperative to voluntarily return the aforementioned funds. In case of non-payment, the members of the cooperative expressed their willingness to further consult with the Office on the matter.
On April 12, 2016, legal advice was given regarding the issue of debts from a deceased father-in-law. The party had concerns about their inheritance. She was informed that she was not among the statutory heirs. She was advised that in the absence of succession proceedings after the deceased, the banking institution could not claim payment from the testator's relatives.
On April 13, 2016, five parties came to the Office of Intervention and Advice. The first matter concerned assistance in drafting a formal letter to the Municipality to obtain information in the face of pending proceedings. The next matter concerned intervention in a tree cutting case. In this case, it is necessary to contact the competent authorities in order to obtain information whether a request for tree cutting has been submitted by the competent authority and at what stage the proceedings are. The third piece of advice concerned criminal proceedings. The party was explained the consequences of failing to appeal the prosecutor's decision, and was presented with the subjective changes that occurred in connection with the boundary changes of the land plot and the lack of grounds to restart the proceedings.
The party was then admitted to the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) with a letter about the discrepancies between the insurance card and the ZUS Rp7 certificate. The party was instructed to clarify the matter with the employer, and in the event of a refusal to clarify the discrepancies, to bring an action to the Labour Court to determine the amount of the remuneration paid within the meaning of Article 189 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
The last legal advice of the day concerned the issue of withholding the nursing allowance payment and the filing by the authority of an application for annulment of the decision. In view of the lack of legal justification for the authority's action, the party was advised to file a letter requesting the dismissal of the application for annulment of the decision, and assistance was provided in drafting such a letter.
On April 14, 2016, two individuals came forward seeking assistance from the Office of Intervention and Counseling. The first case concerned the making of a declaration of intent under the influence of a threat. The party was advised that such a declaration is subject to a defect, resulting in its invalidity, and the party has the opportunity to evade its legal effects by declaring the declaration to the other person in writing within one year from the cessation of the state of fear. The party was further advised that a threat is not only unlawful when the conduct of the other party is contrary to law, but also when the conduct, although formally lawful, is intended to coerce a statement of intent.
The second issue involved a dispute with a housing cooperative. In view of the dispute regarding the window frames, the party refused to pay the charges to the cooperative. However, documents showed that the cooperative had a final court judgment ordering payment, which, according to the party, had never been served on it. The party was advised to seek the assistance of a professional attorney to examine the case file in order to avoid enforcement proceedings.
On April 15, 2016, a party came forward with a settled property right, but not disclosed in the land register. The party was assisted in completing the official form on which an application for registration of ownership rights is submitted to the Land Registry Department.
On April 18, 2016, a party came forward regarding the pre-retirement benefit. From her explanations, it emerged that on April 15, a judgment was rendered denying her right to the aforementioned benefit. The party was instructed on the necessity of filing an appeal after receiving the judgment with a statement of reasons and was given assistance in drafting a motion for the appointment of a legal representative ex officio.
On the same day, a non-binding legal opinion was drawn up on the prohibition provided for in Article 24f Paragraph 1 of the Act of 8 March 1990 on Municipal Self-Government, in the case of lease of agricultural land by the spouse of a councillor. On the basis of the current judicial decisions, the opinion was based on the statement that Article 24f Clause 1 of the Act on Municipal Self-Government cannot be assumed to cover the cases where the business activity using the property of the municipality where the councillor was elected is carried out by the councillor's spouse. The addressee of the provision of Article 24f.1 of the municipalities Act is only the councillor, and not his spouse, even if they were in a joint law partnership.
Three legal advice sessions were held on April 19. The first one concerned the issue of reimbursement of the costs of replacing window frames from a housing cooperative that has been evading payment for almost 10 years. In view of the 10-year statute of limitations, in order to interrupt the running of the statute of limitations, a statement of claim for payment of the amount due was drawn up and the claimant was instructed to pay a fee of PLN 100.00 due to the filing of a statement of claim in summary proceedings.
The next party came forward with a continuation of the case handled by my predecessor regarding RTV license arrears. In order to review the documentation, I asked the party to come in the following day in order to best assist in this case.
The last legal advice was about the alimony obligation to the other spouse as a result of the deterioration of financial circumstances as a result of the divorce. After speaking with the party, I asked her to bring all documents pertinent to this case and to consider witnesses who could testify to the deterioration of financial circumstances. In order to assist in drafting the letter, the party made an appointment for April 22, 2016.
On April 20, 2016, the Bureau was approached by a party regarding the continuation of a television set subscription arrearage issue. The party received a position letter from the Postal Service regarding the legitimacy of pursuing enforcement against the party. Due to the lack of proof of mailing of the letter regarding the establishment of the party's identification number, which is a requirement for the billing of the subscription, assistance was provided to the party in drafting a letter requiring the Polish Post to submit documentation confirming the mailing of the notice in question.
On April 22, 2016, a party came forward for alimony from the former spouse as previously agreed upon. Due to the lack of all documents, the next meeting date was set for April 26, 2016, to complete the draft lawsuit with the appropriate documents.
On that date, the party came forward again regarding discrepancies between the insurance card and the ZUS Rp7 certificate. The party's former employers found irregularities in the insurance card in favor of the ZUS Rp7. The party, disagrees with the number of hours worked. Therefore, the party was again advised that during the proceedings for determining the amount of pension by the pension authority, it has a legal interest in bringing an action in the Labor Court to determine the amount of wages paid within the meaning of Article 189 of the Civil Procedure Code, but because of the level of complexity of the case and the need to get acquainted with employee records, it was recommended to use the services of a professional attorney.
Another legal advice concerned an act of vandalism committed against a petitioner. In connection with the commencement of the pre-trial proceedings, the party was instructed on the principles of the investigation procedure and its rights in such proceedings, as well as the possibility of extending its rights by becoming an auxiliary prosecutor, should an indictment be filed.
On April 25, 2016, a gentleman reported to the Bureau regarding the bailiff enforcement initiated against him. In the absence of any documents relating to the enforcement, he was instructed to contact the bailiff directly to obtain information regarding the enforcement titles under which the enforcement is pending and, after identifying the court references, to examine the files to determine whether the court proceedings were properly conducted and the party was duly notified of the pending proceedings.
On April 26, 2016, legal advice regarding alimony was provided as a follow-up to the April 19, 2016 advice. The party was assisted in drafting a lawsuit for alimony along with a request for legal counsel.
On April 27, 2016, several advisories were given. The first concerned the issue of a proceeding to declare the acquisition of property by acquisitive prescription. The party was denied a lawyer ex officio, so she was given assistance in drafting a complaint. She was also instructed on the necessity to identify the heirs of the current owners of the property as obligatory participants in the proceedings, which the Court also obliged her to do.
In addition, she had approached the party for an extension of her employment contract, which had been promised to her by the former director of the workplace. Before taking any steps, she was advised to first talk to the current management of the workplace.
A party receiving letters addressed to a registered addressee also approached the office. The party was instructed to go to the Polish Post Office to request that such letters not be delivered due to the fact that the person is not domiciled.
The last advice concerned the issue of enforcement proceedings. However, the party was unsuccessful due to a final judgment of the Court and a default in the payment of alimony. From the established facts, the party was not entitled to an anti-enforcement action.
Two meetings were held at the Office of Advice and Intervention on April 29, 2016. The first meeting concerned the issue of pension proceedings. A party had lost a case in the Tribunal and, aware of her inability to have those proceedings overturned, asked about the issue of changing the rules. She was advised to write to the Advice and Intervention Service to intervene in the case with a brief description of the facts.
The second consultation concerned family issues, namely the question of a father fighting for parental authority over his child. Due to the fact that the case had been filed with the court, the party was briefly presented with the procedure of such proceedings and the difference between a private psychologist's opinion and the opinion of the Court Specialist Panel. Due to having a professional attorney in the case and the facts presented, the party was advised to wait for the next hearing date.
To sum up this report, the majority of people have been helped, the Intervention and Counselling Bureau is very popular. Many parties decide to come back to the Office for further advice, others offer the possibility of repaying the help received, e.g. in the form of distributing leaflets, flags, or, in the case of organized visits to Przemyśl, showing the guests around the city's attractions.
January 18 - February 15, 2016.
On January 18-22, information was provided on the possibility of applying for an increase in alimony in the case of an increase in the needs of the child, on the institution of legal representation, and on the conditions necessary to meet in order to collect alimony. Another petitioner was informed about the institution of a complaint to the Regional Bar Council. In addition, an intervention was made regarding the establishment of an easement to secure the right to live in the premises, despite the drawing up of a donation agreement. The petitioner was also advised about the indebtedness of an apartment and the possibility to apply for cancellation of enforcement costs and litigation costs due to the fact that the petitioner's relatives concealed the existence of a debt.
During these days, there was also an intervention concerning the refusal of the Fredropol municipality to allow the lease of a pasture belonging to the municipality. A letter was also drafted to a parabank institution regarding rejection of an inheritance. The petitioner was informed about the meaning of the protocol of rejection of the inheritance and about the limitation period of the loan claim.
On January 25-29, a draft application to the court was drawn up for the liquidation of the association due to a decrease in the number of members. In addition, a draft letter was drawn up regarding the cancellation of the television licence arrears. Information was also provided on the possibility of selling a part in co-ownership.
Advice was also given on the possibility of the bailiff 60% collecting wages for past-due alimony. Advised the employer's intervention in reducing the amount collected by the bailiff. Also drafted a draft complaint to discontinue criminal proceedings, and a draft lawsuit for an alimony award.
Moreover, an intervention was undertaken in the case of failure to obtain a permit for the construction of a summer house on class II agricultural land. In this case, a letter was sent to the Minister of Agriculture and Rural Development with a proposal to amend the regulations.
Subsequently, information was provided on changing the boundary of the area of the property shown in the records. During these days, an intervention was also made as a result of the discontinuation of the proceedings in the murder case, a draft complaint and a notice of false testimony was drawn up. This case has been given priority. We monitored the case and were informed that the complaint will be reviewed by the court and steps have already been taken by the police to clarify the matter. The petitioner agreed to keep us informed of further actions taken by the prosecutor's office and the court.
Advice was also given on inheriting a debt in the form of a loan from a deceased husband. In this matter, a draft letter to the institution was drafted stating that the claim was time-barred as 3 years had passed since the death.
On February 1-5 advice was provided in a family case - increasing alimony and division of property after divorce. Moreover, the petitioner was informed that an apartment, which was purchased before marriage, is subject to division, whereas spouses are obliged to repay a loan after the dissolution of marriage if the loan agreement was concluded by both spouses. You have been advised on the enforcement of alimony, you have been informed that the judgment awarding alimony is immediately enforceable. In addition, information was provided about the Family 500 plus program, as well as about applying for a family allowance. She was also advised about demolition of a vestibule illegally placed on a balcony, a draft letter to PGM was prepared.
In addition, information was provided on the return of a housing deposit due to the sale of an apartment before the expiry of 5 years from the date of its acquisition, and also on the course of inheritance proceedings.
In addition, a draft of an application to the court to declare consumer bankruptcy was prepared, as well as a letter to the bank regarding the statute of limitations on the claim. A letter sent by a petitioner to the Agricultural Property Agency regarding a proposal to conclude a sale or lease agreement of real estate in order to create an access road to the property was analyzed. The problem of conflict between parents and consequently problems between children at school was also resolved. An amicable settlement of the matter was proposed.
On February 8-12, 2 draft divorce petitions were prepared. In addition, advice was given on the inheritance of an inheritance that is part of marital property. A draft lawsuit for increase in alimony was prepared. Intervention in the case of a nursing allowance for a disabled child and contact with the court administrator regarding poor technical condition of social premises and proceedings conducted by the building supervision inspectorate in this case. A draft lawsuit for payment was prepared.
Moreover, the petitioner was informed about the possibilities of accepting and rejecting an inheritance, establishing an easement to live in, the effectiveness of a deed drawn up in the form of a notarial deed, as well as about the costs of inheritance proceedings and a deed of certification of inheritance. In addition, we advised on the dissolution of marital joint property.
Advised on the wrongful termination of a lease by the association's board of directors and drafted a letter to the bailiff to reduce the amount deducted from wages.
In summary, the PiS Intervention and Advice Bureau provided advice to a large number of people during the period indicated in the introduction. The vast majority of these advices were beneficial. Only a few people could not be helped due to the use of legal remedies or lack of means to defend their rights, or due to the expiration of the time limit within which it was absolutely necessary to use the appropriate legal remedies provided by the relevant laws. In the period 18.01.2016. - 15.02.2016 approximately 60 persons were counseled at the Office. These were cases both in the field of broadly understood civil law, commercial law, labor law and social insurance, as well as administrative law. Advice was also given on criminal law, criminal fiscal law and criminal executive law.
December 7, 2015 - January 15, 2016.
On 7-10 December, an intervention was made regarding the cancellation of a donation, and the deadline for its cancellation was indicated. Advice was given on maternity leave, the changes that have been in force since 1 January in the Labour Code regarding this leave were indicated. The question was also raised whether the period of internship funded by the Labor Office counts towards the period of subsequent employment with the same employer, on which maternity benefit is dependent.
At that time, advice was given on the issue of bankruptcy of the employer, and the order of satisfaction of claims owed to employees for back pay. A letter was drafted in this matter - a side intervention for one of the creditors. An evidentiary motion in the immission case was also drawn up.
In addition, a motion was drafted to the Presiding Judge of the district court regarding the court's tardiness in hearing the complaint. A draft of the charges in the disability pension case was also prepared.
On December 14-18, information was provided on persons who are entitled to represent the defendant in criminal proceedings. A draft letter was prepared - withdrawal of the appeal, information about the possibilities, consequences of ending the appeal proceedings in favor and against the person filing the appeal, as well as the amount of legal representation costs.
During these days, documents on the limitation of parental authority and the establishment of foster care were also accepted for analysis. Possible ways of proceeding were indicated. Requests for evidence to be submitted were discussed, as well as possible outcomes and permissible remedies in the event the proceedings were concluded to the detriment of the applicant.
On December 21-23, guidance was provided on how to proceed with service of a payment order when a claim is time-barred, as well as the deadline for drafting an objection. In addition, an objection to a criminal payment order and a request for public defender were drafted.
On December 28-31, documents were accepted for analysis regarding the Social Insurance Institution's refusal to credit 3 months to the pension. After the analysis, it was found that the Social Insurance Institution was justified in refusing to credit the above period, as it was a period of seeking work, non-contributory, which is not included in the provisions of the Act on retirement and pensions from the Social Insurance Fund. The insured wanted this period to be counted as farm work, but in this situation it is not possible to count such a period because farm work is added to the 25-year seniority period only when the insured does not have the required period, i.e. as a supplement, and in this case the insured has the required minimum 25-year seniority.
Also drafted a motion to waive debt enforcement and a consumer bankruptcy petition. Advised on the removal of a fiber optic cable in the basement that was placed there without obtaining prior written consent from the property owner.
On January 4-8, an intervention was made regarding the inheritance of a debt from a deceased brother. The statute of limitations on the debt inherited by the client was informed. In addition, a letter to the Court was drafted regarding a change of correspondence address, and advice was provided regarding an appeal against a decision of the Social Insurance Institution regarding a pension for work in special conditions. Information was provided about the possibility of claiming compensation for unfounded termination of employment contracts. In addition, an assessment was made of the sense of filing a claim for payment for damage to a car. It was indicated the evidence that must be presented to the court in order for the proceedings to end favorably for the injured party.
During 11-15 January advice was given on inheriting an apartment in case of marital property separation, a question was answered regarding the possibility of another person claiming part of an apartment. A motion to correct the decision on acquisition of property by inheritance was prepared. In addition, advice was given on the consolidation of real estate and applying to the court for acquiring ownership of real estate by acquisitive prescription, as well as the concept of good and bad faith, on which the period of need depends in order to apply for acquisitive prescription.
Information was also provided as to which institution should be contacted in the event that a building was constructed contrary to the provisions of the Construction Law. Moreover, an application for accelerated examination of a case due to special circumstances and an application for exemption from court costs were prepared. Information was provided on the institution of consumer bankruptcy, what is the matter of cancellation of interest and the whole debt. Apart from that, we intervened in the case of very bad technical condition of public utility premises, we provided information on the possibility to apply for an increase of alimony in the case of growing needs of a child and on the institution of statutory representation.
In summary, the PIS Intervention and Advice Bureau provided advice to a large number of people during the period indicated in the introduction. Many people inform us about the outcome of the cases in which we intervened. We have provided legal advice both in the field of broadly understood civil law, as well as criminal law, and we can also observe that there is a growing interest in legal advice concerning administrative law. Moreover, there is a growing interest in the institution of consumer bankruptcy. We can boast that the vast majority of advice is beneficial. Only a few people have not been helped due to the use of legal means or lack of means to defend their rights, or due to the expiry of the time limit within which it was absolutely necessary to use the appropriate legal means provided by the relevant acts.
