APPEAL#" I PART C -Decision under Appeal Under appeal is the ministry's January 3, 2014 reconsideration decision finding the appellant ineligible for hardship assistance, pursuant to section 44 of the Employment and Assistance Regulation, which requires the family unit to include one or more dependent children. PART D -Relevant Legislation Section A.1 Employment and Assistance Regulation (EAR), Section 44 EAAT 003( 10106/01)
APPEAL# I PART E -Summary of Facts The ministry was not in attendance at the hearing. After confirming the ministry was notified, the hearing proceeded under Section 86(b) of the Employment and Assistance Regulation. The evidence before the ministry at reconsideration was • the appellant receives income assistance as a sole recipient • the appellant was not eligible for income assistance in January 2014, having in November 2013 earned employment income in excess of the legislated limit • on December 12, 2013 the appellant requested hardship assistance for the month of January, but was found by the ministry to be ineligible because the family unit does not include one or more dependent children • the appellant reported he had not worked since November 30,2013, used his last pay for his December rent, had no food, no money, and was to become a father of a child soon to be born in another city At the hearing the appellant said he received his last pay cheque on December 7, 2013, November 30, 2013 being his last day of work. He paid his December rent, the ministry having emphasized the importance of paying the rent. He said he did not receive income assistance for December or January. He did not request income assistance for December, but thinks he should have received it for January because he earned nothing in December. He said he last received income assistance in October. He was denied income assistance for January. He was also denied hardship assistance for January. He needed money for his January rent and food, and had hoped to travel to another city to visit his lady friend and the baby born to her on December 22, 2013. His lady friend lives permanently in the other city. The appellant said he has lived for five years at his current residence, but has now received a notice of eviction dated January 24, 2014, effective February 6, 2014, relating to rent due January 1, 2014. The appellant submitted as evidence a copy of a receipt for the December 2013 rent and the eviction notice. The panel found this evidence admissible as permitted by section 22(4) of the Employment and Assistance Act, being in support of information before the minister at the reconsideration decision that the appellant was in need of financial support. Although the appellant may be the father of the child born December 22, 2013, the mother and child do not live with the appellant, or in the same city, nor has the appellant indicated a family or dependency relationship. The panel therefore finds the appellant is a single person with no dependants. EAAT003(10106/01)
P A R T F R e a s o n s f o r P a n e l D e c i s i o n T h e i s s u e i s t h e r e a s o n a b l e n e s s o f t h e m i n i s t r y ' s d e c h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e f o r t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y 2 0 1 4 . R e l e v a n t L e g i s l a t i o n S e c t i o n A . 2 E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s ) F a m i l y u n i t s t h a t h a v e e x c e s s i n c o m e 4 4 T h e m i n i s t e r m a y p ro v i d e h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e t o a s s i s t a n c e b e c a u s e t h e i n c o m e o f t h e f a m i l y u n i t e x c i f ( a ) t h e m i n i s t e r c o n s i d e r s t h a t u n d u e h a r d s h i p w i l l o t h ( b ) t h e a p p l i c a n t p r o v i d e s t h e t y p e o f s e c u r i t y s p e c i f i e h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e , ( c ) t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s o n e o r m o r e d e p e n d e n t c h ( d ) t h e i n c o m e t h a t c a u s e s t h e f a m i l y u n i t t o b e i n e l i g m i n i s t e r ' s o p i n i o n , r e a s o n a b l y b e e x p e c t e d t o b e u s e A p p e l l a n t ' s P o s i t i o n T h e a p p e l l a n t s t a t e s h e i s w i t h o u t f u n d s , c a n n o t a f f o r h e c a n n o t p a y h i s r e n t . H e a r g u e s t h a t h e i s s u f f e r i n g a s s i s t a n c e . M i n i s t r y ' s P o s i t i o n T h e m i n i s t r y a r g u e s i t m a y p r o v i d e h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n b e c a u s e t h e i r i n c o m e e x c e e d s t h e l e g i s l a t e d l i m i t i f , i n T h e m i n i s t r y a r g u e s t h e a p p e l l a n t i s a s o l e r e c i p i e n t o d e p e n d e n t c h i l d , a n d i s t h e r e f o r e i n e l i g i b l e f o r h a r d s h P a n e l ' s D e c i s i o n T h e a p p e l l a n t w a s d e t e r m i n e d i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s b e c a u s e h e h a d e a r n e d m o r e t h a n t h e l e g i s l a t e d l i m i t a s s i s t a n c e f o r J a n u a r y , a n d w a s t u r n e d d o w n . S e c t i o R e g u l a t i o n a l l o w s t h e m i n i s t ry t o p r o v i d e h a r d s h i p a s s a s s i s t a n c e b e c a u s e i t s i n c o m e e x c e e d s t h e l e a i s l a t e d E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A L # I i s i o n t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s n o t e l i g i b l e f o r t a n c e R e g u l a t i o n a f a m i l y u n i t t h a t i s n o t e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e e e d s t h e l i m i t u n d e r s e c t i o n 1 0 [ li m i t s o n i n c o m e J e rw i s e o c c u r, d b y t h e m i n i s t e r fo r t h e r e p a y m e n t o f t h e i l d r e n , a n d i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e c o u l d n o t , i n t h e d t o m e e t t h e f a m i l y u n i t ' s b a s i c n e e d s . d f o o d a n d h a s r e c e i v e d a n o t i c e o f e v i c t i o n a s h a r d s h i p , a n d s h o u l d q u a l i f y f o r h a r d s h i p c e t o t h o s e i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e p a r t , t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s a d e p e n d e n t c h i l d . f i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e a n d d o e s n o t h a v e a i p a s s i s t a n c e . s i s t a n c e f o r t h e m o n t h o f J a n u a r y 2 0 1 4 . T h e a p p e l l a n t t h e n a p p l i e d f o r h a r d s h i p n 4 4 o f t h e E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e i s t a n c e i f a " f a m i l y u n i t " i s i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e l i m i t , s u b i e c t t o c e r t a i n c o n d i t i o n s . T h e
APPEAL# I condition upon which the ministry relied in denying hardship assistance to the appellant is that the . "family unit" must include one or more dependent children. Based on the evidence presented, the panel finds as the appellant is a single person with no dependants, the ministry's decision that he was ineligible to receive the requested benefit was reasonably supported by the evidence, and confirms the ministry's decision. EAAT003(10/06/01)
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.