The Limited Times

Now you can see non-English news...

Fight of a fake "born under X": the State and the department condemned to pay him 20,000 euros


The sexagenarian has never been able to meet his mother because of an administrative error. He has already announced his intention to appeal.

After three years of proceedings, the State and the Departmental Council of Cantal were ordered to pay 15,000 and 5,000 euros respectively to Jean-Pierre Vidal for the damage suffered for having believed, all his life, to be born under X, when that was not the case.

An administrative error cost him his childhood and he was never able to meet his mother.

At 65, Jean-Pierre Vidal sued the State and the civil department to obtain 400,000 euros in compensation.

“It is a satisfaction for the condemnation, but a dissatisfaction for the reparation.

It is not up to the damage of a lifetime, ”reacted his lawyer Jacques Verdier shortly after the announcement of the decision Monday evening.

Read also“I could have known my mother”: born under X by mistake 65 years ago, Jean-Pierre asks for compensation

Born on September 4, 1956 in Saint-Flour (Cantal), Jean-Pierre Vidal was abandoned by his mother, in the grip of financial difficulties, then placed with a nanny.

Around the age of 8, he discovers that this nanny is not his biological mother.

He then multiplies the passages in foster families, before being moved from home to home and then ending up on the street from the age of 16.

He tries several times to find out the identity of his parents, but his interlocutors at the Ddass, ancestor of the ASE (Childhood social assistance), assure him that he was born under X and has no therefore not have the right to access his file.

His mother died of cancer

In 2019, an inspector intrigued by her file seized the National Council for Access to Origins (CNAOP) and the answer fell: the identity of her biological mother is not covered by secrecy.

But it's too late.

Her mother died of cancer years earlier, in 1996.

At the hearing in early February, his lawyer had denounced a "fault", pointed to the "maliciousness of a certain number of people in the administration", and evoked "an extraordinary prejudice".

The defenders of the State and the department - which recovered in the 80s the competence of the protection of children - had recognized a responsibility but rejected any malice, calling to assess this damage precisely.

On leaving the Aurillac court, the plaintiff announced his intention to appeal: “I am not losing my energy.

The state had already acknowledged its responsibility.

I can not accept.

There is still damage…”.

Source: leparis

All tech articles on 2022-04-05

Trends 24h


© Communities 2019 - Privacy

The information on this site is from external sources that are not under our control.
The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.