Access to care for the poorest persons.
The Defender of Rights, Jacques Toubon, takes note with satisfaction of the Judgment of the Court of Cassation dated June 21, 2018 which states that the granting of a social benefit or a social right can not be subordinated to the production of a bank account statement (RIB) and a bank account.
The Defender of Rights submitted observations to the Court of Appeal in 2015 and to the Court of Cassation in 2017 (decision no. 2007-217) following a referral to the impediments to insurance affiliation. illness – and therefore access to care – opposed by the Mayotte Social Security Fund to insured persons who do not have a bank account.
This decision came at a time when the Social Security Court (TASS) and the Court of Appeal had ruled in favor of the Mahoran Social Security Fund.
In his submissions, the Defender of Rights argued that:
- no text provides for an obligation to hold a bank account and a bank account in order to receive social benefits;
- holding a bank account is a right, not an obligation ; social organizations have other means – money orders, cash – to pay the benefits due;
- this illegal requirement further impedes the access of vulnerable persons to the social benefits to which they are entitled, especially as the system of the right to the account may be ineffective;
- these practices are finally likely to be discriminatory when the opening of bank accounts is refused more to foreigners whose administrative situation does not appear to be sufficiently solid;
- in the case in point, this requirement was tantamount to depriving a disabled child in great need (nursing care, medical transport) and thus undermined the best interests of the child as enshrined in Article 3.1 of the International Convention of the Rights of the Child.
If the Court of Cassation does not rule on the discriminatory aspect of such a practice, however, it settles the case on the merits by granting the Claimant’s application for affiliation to health insurance with retroactive effect to the April 4, 2014.
This decision may be opposed to the funds (Family Allowance Fund, Primary Health Insurance Fund, etc.) using such practices with regard to any user anywhere in France.