In its efforts to combat misuse of the basic student grant for students living independently, student finance provider DUO primarily targeted students with a migration background. This amounted to indirect discrimination.

This was revealed in 2023 by an investigation conducted by the Higher Education Press Agency (HOP) together with Investico, NOSop3, and the newspaper Trouw. The findings led to an apology from the government and the repayment of all fines and reclaimed basic student grants.

Now, an additional compensation scheme will be introduced, Minister Rianne Letschert writes in a letter to the House of Representatives. The government is liable for the damage students suffered as a result of the unjustified home visits.

Fraud crackdown

Students living with their parents receive a lower basic student grant than those living independently. The difference currently amounts to 2,300 euros per year. Some students take advantage of this by secretly continuing to live at home while reporting a different address to DUO.

DUO attempted to combat this type of fraud, but did so incorrectly. Using a “risk profile,” the student finance provider selected those most likely to commit fraud, followed by home visits from inspectors. Based on sometimes extremely weak and carelessly obtained “evidence,” DUO demanded repayments and imposed fines.

There was (indirect) discrimination from the outset, beginning with the risk profile, which disproportionately filtered out students with a migration background. At every stage of the process, the discrimination intensified. In court cases, 97 percent of the students involved had a migration background. DUO lost a quarter of these cases. All of this took place between 2012 and 2023.

The government could not ignore the issue, and the Rutte IV administration issued an apology. The Schoof administration initiated the repayment of reclaimed grants and fines. A compensation scheme will now also follow.

Choice

The damage may also include non-material harm, Minister Letschert writes to the House of Representatives. “Many (former) students indicate that the measures imposed on them caused mental health problems. DUO has already begun receiving requests for compensation.”

Students can choose either to accept the government’s proposed compensation or to have their individual damages assessed through a tailored process. The latter option is more time-consuming and intensive.

Around ten thousand students were fined or had their basic student grant reclaimed. The government is offering them 2,000 euros in compensation. Another twelve thousand students received visits from inspectors without financial consequences. They may receive 500 euros in compensation, as they were selected on improper grounds.

The government is also looking further back. Between 2009 and 2012, DUO conducted pilot programs involving these checks, which, according to Minister Letschert, were already flawed. Around four thousand students were subjected to home visits during that period. This is believed to have affected about one thousand students, who were subsequently classified as living at home and received a lower grant. This group is not well documented and must report to DUO themselves to be eligible for possible compensation.

Also for fraudsters

Some students did, in fact, commit fraud with the basic student grant. Letschert states: “With this approach, we accept that compensation will also be paid to (former) students who were not actually living independently and for whom measures were therefore justified.” However, due to the indirect discrimination, the evidence obtained is considered unlawful.

Due to the tailored procedures, the settlement process may take until 2030. A total of 80 million euros is involved, half of which will be used for implementation. Four million euros has been allocated for independent legal support for (former) students.

On the issue of indirect discrimination by DUO, Letschert writes: “The current administration also regrets that this could have happened and wants the government to be reliable and to take responsibility for its actions.”

Requests for compensation had already been submitted, prompting further reflection. Letschert concludes: “I have come to the conclusion that the State is liable for the damage these (former) students have suffered as a result of these decisions.”

This article was translated using AI-assisted tools and reviewed by an editor.