P A R T C D e c i s i o n u n d e r A p p e a l T h e d e c i s i o n u n d e r a p p e a l i s t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e M i n I n n o v a t i o n ( t h e m i n i s t r y ) d a t e d 2 0 J a n u a r y 2 0 1 4 t h a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a m i n i s t r y d e c i s i o n t h a t f o u n d t h a t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a s s i s t a n c e . T h e m i n i s t r y d e t e r m i n e d R e q u e s t f o r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n h a d e x p i r e d s i n c e h e w 7 1 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 f o r P e r s o n s w a b l e t o r e c o n s i d e r t h i s d e c i s i o n . P A R T D R e l e v a n t L e g i s l a t i o n E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e f o r P e r s o n s w i t h D i s a b E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e f o r P e r s o n s w i t h D i s a b E m p l o y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e A c t , s e c t i o n 2 4 . E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )i s t r y o f S o c i a l D e v e l o p m e n t a n d S o c i a l t d e n i e d t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r e q u e s t f o r t h e w a s n o t e l i g i b l e f o r n o n l o c a l m e d i c a l t h a t , a s t h e 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y t i m e l i m i t t o s u b m i t a a s a d v i s e d o f t h e o r i g i n a l d e c i s i o n , u n d e r s e c t i o n i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s R e g u l a t i o n , t h e m i n i s t e r w a s n o t i l i t i e s A c t ( E A P W D A ) , s e c t i o n 1 6 . i l i t i e s R e g u l a t i o n ( E A P W D R ) , s e c t i o n 7 1 .
PART E -Summary of Facts The evidence before the ministry included the following: • The appellant's Request for Non-Local Medical Transportation Assistance dated 12 November 2013. • The appellant's bank transaction statement f o r the period 28 October 2013 to 28 November 2013. • The appellant's Request for Reconsideration, signed by him on 03 January 2014. The section completed by the ministry shows that he was informed of the decision concerning the above transportation assistance request on 25 November 2013 and gives 23 December 2013 as the date he must submit the form. The appellant sets out his reasons for his request for reconsideration of the transportation assistance denial decision. The ministry worker completed the ministry section and signed the form on 31 December 2013. In his Notice of Appeal, dated 22 January 2014, the appellant writes: "I disagree with the decision because I did not receive the letter in the mail containing the decision & reconsideration brochure. [Name] my third-party ... did not receive the written decision either, which contains reconsideration deadline of 20 business days." (The balance of his Reasons for Appeal relate to issues concerning the denial of his medical transportation request.) At the hearing, the appellant acknowledged that his third-party contact notified him of the ministry decision denying him the requested travel assistance on or about 25 November 2013. He stated that at that time she said that the ministry would be sending him a written decision in the mail. He also stated that the third-party contact did not pass along anything about reconsideration rights or deadline. He described how he had been in receipt of disability assistance f o r about 10 years and decisions regarding other requests that he had made, including when he was not under third-party administration, were always in writing accompanied by the reconsideration brochure. He noted that the bank transaction record attached to the request for reconsideration form was date stamped by the bank on 28 November 2013, showing transactions up to that date, and questioned how the ministry could have made its decision before that date. The balance of the appellant's presentation, and that of his advocate, went to argument (see Part F, Reasons for Panel Decision, below). The ministry explained that there was a lot going on regarding the appellant's file al the lime when the travel assistance request was being considered and that the ministry had other information regarding the appellant's financial circumstances when ii made its decision on the maller. The ministry representative provided the following chronology and explanation: • Ministry records show the decision lo deny the appellant's transportation assistance request was actually made on 19 November 2013 and his third-party contact was advised of the decision on that dale. When the ministry worker was completing the ministry section of the Request for Reconsideration form, the worker checked with the third-party contact, who advised that she was not able to notify the appellant of the decision until 25 November 2013. Accordingly, that dale was used as the basis for determining the 23 December 2013 deadline for submitting a Request for Reconsideration. • The aooellant did not request a reconsideration packaqe (the form itself and reconsideration EAAT 003( 10106/01)
brochure) until 20 December 2013, the Friday before the Monday deadline. Ministry standards are to respond to a request for a reconsideration package, including completing the ministry section of the form, within three business days. Because of the Christmas break and weekends, the ministry section of the form could only be completed by 31 December 2013, after the deadline had passed. The ministry representative explained that, for those decisions normally conveyed to a client verbally, it is ministry policy and practice to advise the client of his/her reconsideration rights and the deadline. The provision of such advice is normally, but not always, noted on the client's file. This would also be the case when a client is notified through a third-party contact, though in this case no such notation was made on the appellant's file. The ministry representative also stated that the client may also request a decision that was given verbally to be given in writing. The ministry representative acknowledged that occasionally the reconsideration deadline might be extended under extenuating circumstances, such as if the client were hospitalized. The appellant disputed the ministry's version of events concerning the time gap between when the decision was made and when he was notified: he stated that during that period, he was in touch daily with his third-party contact because he needed to know whether the costs of his travel would be covered. The panel finds that the information provided by the appellant in his Notice of Appeal and in his oral testimony and by the ministry at the hearing is in support of the evidence before the ministry when it made the decision under appeal, as it related to the chronology of events leading up to the ministry's decision. The panel therefore admits the information provided by both the appellant and the ministry as evidence under section 22(4) of the Employment and Assistance Act. Findings of fact The panel finds as fact that the appellant was notified on or before 25 November 2013 of the ministry's decision that denied his request for travel assistance. EAAT 003(10/06/01)
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 u n d e r a p p e a l i s w h e t h e r t h e m i n i s t r y w a s f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a m i n i s t r y d e c i s i o n t h a t f o u n d t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a s s i s t a n c e . M o r e s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e i s s m i n i s t e r i s n o t a b l e t o r e c o n s i d e r h i s r e q u e s t , a s t h e f o r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n u n d e r s e c t i o n 7 1 o f t h e E A P W D o r i g i n a l d e c i s i o n , i s r e a s o n a b l y s u p p o r t e d b y t h e e v l e g i s l a t i o n u n d e r t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e a p p e l l a n T h e a p p l i c a b l e l e g i s l a t i o n i s f r o m t h e E A P W D A : R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n a n d a p p e a l r i g h t s 1 6 ( 1 ) S u b j e c t t o s e c t i o n 1 7 , a p e r s o n m a y r e q u e s t m a d e u n d e r t h i s A c t : ( a ) a d e c i s i o n t h a t r e s u l t s i n a r e o r a s u p p l e m e n t t o o r f o r s o m e o ( b ) a d e c i s i o n t h a t r e s u l t s i n a d p r o v i d e d t o o r f o r s o m e o n e i n t h ( c ) a d e c i s i o n t h a t r e s u l t s i n a r e t o o r f o r s o m e o n e i n t h e p e r s o n ( d ) a d e c i s i o n i n r e s p e c t o f t h e a p e r s o n ' s f a m i l y u n i t i f t h a t a m o u ( i ) t h e m a x i m u m a m o u n ( i i ) t h e c o s t o f t h e l e a s t s u p p l e m e n t ; ( e ) a d e c i s i o n r e s p e c t i n g t h e c o n [ e m p l o y m e n t p l a n ]. ( 2 ) A r e q u e s t u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) m u s t b e m a a n d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h a n y r u l e s s p e c i f i e d b y r ( 3 ) S u b j e c t t o a r e g u l a t i o n u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 5 ) [ o v e r p a y m e n t s ] , a p e r s o n w h o i s d i s s a t i s f i e d w s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) ( a ) t o ( d ) m a y a p p e a l t h e d e c i s i o ( 4 ) A r i g h t o f a p p e a l g i v e n u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 3 ) o u t i n 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 A c t a n d ( 5 ) T h e L i e u t e n a n t G o v e r n o r i n C o u n c i l m a y d e ( a ) c a t e g o r i e s o f s u p p l e m e n t s t h ( b ) c i r c u m s t a n c e s i n w h i c h a d e c a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t i s n o F r o m t h e E A P W D R : H o w a r e q u e s t t o r e c o n s i d e r a d e c i s i o n i s m a d e 7 1 ( 1 ) A p e r s o n w h o w i s h e s t h e m i n i s t e r t o r e c o n { r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n _ a n d a p p e a l r i g h t s ] o f t h e A c t m s p e c i f i e d b y t h e m i n i s t e r t o t h e m i n i s t r y o f f i c e w E M T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )r e a s o n a b l e i n d e n y i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r e q u e s t h i m n o t e l i g i b l e f o r n o n l o c a l m e d i c a l u e i s w h e t h e r t h e m i n i s t r y d e t e r m i n a t i o n , t h a t t h e 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y t i m e l i m i t t o s u b m i t a R e q u e s t R h a s e x p i r e d s i n c e h e w a s a d v i s e d o f t h e i d e n c e o r i s a r e a s o n a b l e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e t . t h e m i n i s t e r t o r e c o n s i d e r a n y o f t h e f o l l o w i n g d e c i s i o n s . f u s a l t o p r o v i d e d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e , h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e n e i n t h e p e r s o n ' s f a m i l y u n i t ; i s c o n t i n u a n c e o f d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t e p e r s o n ' s f a m i l y u n i t ; d u c t i o n o f d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t p r o v i d e d ' s f a m i l y u n i t ; m o u n t o f a s u p p l e m e n t p r o v i d e d t o o r f o r s o m e o n e i n t h e n t i s l e s s t h a n t h e l e s s e r o f t o f t h e s u p p l e m e n t u n d e r t h e r e g u l a t i o n s , a n d e x p e n s i v e a n d a p p r o p r i a t e m a n n e r o f p r o v i d i n g t h e d i t i o n s o f a n e m p l o y m e n t p l a n u n d e r s e c t i o n 9 d e , a n d t h e d e c i s i o n r e c o n s i d e r e d , w i t h i n t h e t i m e l i m i t s e g u l a t i o n . a n d t o s e c t i o n s 9 ( 7 ) [ e m p l o y m e n t p l a n ] , 1 7 a n d 1 8 ( 2 ) i t h t h e o u t c o m e o f a r e q u e s t f o r a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n u n d e r n t h a t i s t h e o u t c o m e o f t h e r e q u e s t t o t h e t r i b u n a l . i s s u b j e c t t o t h e t i m e l i m i t s a n d o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s s e t t h e r e g u l a t i o n s u n d e r t h a t A c t . s i g n a t e b y r e g u l a t i o n a t a r e n o t a p p e a l a b l e t o t h e t r i b u n a l , a n d i s i o n t o r e f u s e t o p r o v i d e d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e , h a r d s h i p t a p p e a l a b l e t o t h e t r i b u n a l . s i d e r a d e c i s i o n r e f e r r e d t o i n s e c t i o n 1 6 ( 1 ) u s t d e l i v e r a r e q u e s t f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e f o r m h e r e t h e p e r s o n i s a p p l y i n g f o r o r r e c e i v i n g a s s i s t a n c e .
( 2 ) A r e q u e s t u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) m u s t b e d i s n o t i f i e d o f t h e d e c i s i o n r e f e r r e d t o i n s e c t i o n ( a ) l e a v i n g i t w i t h a n e m p l o y e e ( b ) b e i n g r e c e i v e d i h r o u g h t h e A n d f r o m 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 A c t ( E A A D e c i s i o n o f p a n e l 2 4 ( 1 ) A f t e r h o l d i n g t h e h e a r i n g r e q u i r e d u n d e r s e c p a n e l m u s t d e t e r m i n e w h e t h e r t h e d e c i s i o n b e ( a ) r e a s o n a b l y s u p p o r t e d b y t h e ( b ) a r e a s o n a b l e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t p e r s o n a p p e a l i n g t h e d e c i s i o n . ( 2 ) F o r a d e c i s i o n r e f e r r e d t o i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) , ( a ) c o n f i n n t h e d e c i s i o n i f t h e p a s u p p o r t e d b y t h e e v i d e n c e o r i s t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e p e r s o n ( b ) o t h e r w i s e , r e s c i n d t h e d e c i s i i m p l e m e n t e d w i t h o u t a f u r t h e r d m i n i s t e r . T h e p o s i t i o n o f t h e m i n i s t r y , a s s e t o u t i n t h e r e c o n s a m i n i s t r y w o r k e r i n f o r m e d t h e a p p e l l a n t o f t h e d e c i r e q u i r e s a p e r s o n s e e k i n g r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e m i R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n w i t h i n 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y s a f t e r t h e d d e c i s i o n . T h e d e a d l i n e f o r t h e a p p e l l a n t t o d e l i v e r h D e c e m b e r 2 0 1 3 . H i s R e q u e s t f o r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n w 2 0 1 4 , e x c e e d i n g t h e t i m e l i m i t p e r m i t t e d u n d e r t h e E t h i s m a t t e r i s c l o s e d a n d n o t s u b j e c t t o r e c o n s i d e r a t T h e a p p e l l a n t ' s p o s i t i o n i s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n d e n y i n g s u p p l e m e n t , a l o n g w i t h t h e n e c e s s a r y i n f o r m a t i o n r e d e a d l i n e , w e r e n o t c o n v e y e d t o h i m i n w r i t i n g , a s h e t h i r d p a r t y c o n t a c t a n d i s i n a n y e v e n t h i s r i g h t . A s a c o m m u n i c a t i o n b e t w e e n t h r e e p a r t i e s l e a v e s t o o m u m i s s i n g i n f o r m a t i o n . T h e a p p e l l a n t s u b m i t s t h a t t h e a n d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f a i r n e s s b y n o t p r o v i d i n g h i m w i t h n o t i f i c a t i o n o f t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e a d l i n e a n d t h e n b e n e f i t o f r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . P a n e l f i n d i n g s T h e p a n e l n o t e s t h a t t h e l e g i s l a t i o n c l e a r l y s t a t e s t h d e l i v e r e d t o t h e m i n i s t r y w i t h i n 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y s a ft e H o w e v e r , u n d e r t h e l e a i s l a t i o n t h e r e i s n o r e a u i r e m e E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 1 0 6 1 0 1 )e l i v e r e d w i t h i n 2 0 b u s i n e s s d a y s a f t e r t h e d a t e t h e p e r s o n 1 6 ( 1 ) o f t h e A c t a n d m a y b e d e l i v e r e d b y i n t h e m i n i s t r y o f f i c e , o r m a i l a t t h a t o f f i c e . ) : t i o n 2 2 ( 3 ) [ p a n e l s o f t h e t r i b u n a l t o c o n d u c t a p p e a l s ] , t h e i n g a p p e a l e d i s , a s a p p l i c a b l e , e v i d e n c e , o r h e a p p l i c a b l e e n a c t m e n t i n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f t h e t h e p a n e l m u s t n e l f i n d s t h a t t h e d e c i s i o n b e i n g a p p e a l e d i s r e a s o n a b l y a r e a s o n a b l e a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e a p p l i c a b l e e n a c t m e n t i n a p p e a l i n g t h e d e c i s i o n , a n d o n , a n d i f t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e t r i b u n a l c a n n o t b e e c i s i o n a s t o a m o u n t , r e f e r t h e f u r t h e r d e c i s i o n b a c k t o t h e i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n , i s t h a t o n 2 5 N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 3 s i o n i n q u e s t i o n . S e c t i o n 7 1 o f t h e E A P W D R n i s t r y d e c i s i o n t o d e l i v e r h i s o r h e r R e q u e s t f o r a t e h e o r s h e w a s i n f o r m e d o f t h e m i n i s t r y ' s i s R e q u e s t fo r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n w a s 2 3 a s n o t d e l i v e r e d t o t h e m i n i s t r y u n t i l 0 6 J a n u a r y A P W D R . A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e m i n i s t r y f o u n d t h a t i o n . h i m h i s r e q u e s t f o r a m e d i c a l t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g a r d i n g h i s r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n r i g h t s a n d t h e w a s l e d t o b e l i e v e w o u l d b e t h e c a s e b y h i s p e r s o n u n d e r t h i r d p a r t y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , v e r b a l c h r o o m f o r c o n f u s i o n , m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n a n d m i n i s t r y v i o l a t e d t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f n a t u r a l j u s t i c e a w r i t t e n d e c i s i o n a n d t h e a s s o c i a t e d e n f o r c i n g t h e d e a d l i n e a n d n o t g i v i n g h i m t h e a t a R e q u e s t f o r R e c o n s i d e r a t i o n m u s t b e r t h e d a t e t h e p e r s o n i s n o t i f i e d o f t h e d e c i s i o n . n t f o r a m i n i s t r y d e c i s i o n , o t h e r t h a n a
reconsideration decision, to be conveyed to a client in writing. According to the testimony of the ministry representative at the hearing, while many ministry decisions are in writing, many others are not. This is especially the case where the request is made verbally in person in the office or by telephone. While the decision may not be conveyed in writing, the request and its outcome are noted in the client's file. In this appeal, the panel has found as fact that the appellant was notified on 25 November 2013 of the decision denying his request for medical transportation supplement. While the appellant argues that he was not informed .of his right of reconsideration, there is no legislative requirement f o r the ministry to advise the client of his/her reconsideration rights and the deadline, but the ministry states its policy and practice is to provide this information as a service to its dients. The panel notes rights of reconsideration and/or appeal, with time limits, are set out in the legislation. Section 16(3) of the EAPWDA provides that, subject to certain exceptions, a person who is dissatisfied with the "outcome of a request for reconsideration under subsection (1 )(a) to (d) may appeal the decision that is the outcome of the request to the Tribunal." In this case, the ministry's determination that there is no right of reconsideration was the "outcome" of the appellant's request. The panel finds that the ministry's determination that the appellant did not have a right to reconsideration is a reasonable application of the applicable enactment in the appellant's circumstances under section 24(1 )(b) of the EAA for the reasons outlined above. In view of this finding, the panel confirms under section 24(2)(a) of the EAA the ministry's decision that there is no right to reconsideration. It f o llows that the appellant is not entitled to have the request for reconsideration proceed to reconsideration. EAA T003( 10/06/01 I
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.