Dear Editor,
I am looking at the two complaints in the dailies with respect to claims made to NIS for survivors’ benefits.
There are no material differences in the claims yet one is allegedly guaranteed payment by the GM, NIS, while the other has been disallowed by the same GM and by the Chairman of the Appeal Tribunal on an appeal made to him.
Both claims have been made late, both claimants were under 45 years of age at the time of the deaths of their husbands and both claimants had and have a child under 16 years of age at the time of deaths in issue.
The only difference in the claims, is the period of lateness where, a child of one of the claimants, is now 39 years of age.
These cases (claims) remind me of a friend who prefers to go home at 04:30hrs rather than 23:00hrs because regardless of “big late” or “little late”, he will be severely reprimanded by the guardian of his home.
It is the same with both claims, the late claim rule has to be applied and the claims must be paid from six months prior to the dates of their submission.
Therefore, Ms. Ismay Lake, who had satisfied all the conditions for the award of survivor’s pension at the time of her husband’s death must be afforded the same treatment promised to Shameeza Mohamed but with respect to her claim only.
The GM, NIS, I am advised, has the authority to review her own ruling and that of the Chairman of the NIS Tribunal and the Commissioner, National Insurance if she is satisfied that the decision was given in ignorance of, or was based on a mistake as to some material fact.
She must therefore, now correct her decision.
Yours faithfully,
Carlton Jacques
