PART C -D eci sion under Ap peal T h e decisi on u nde r appeal i s the Mi nistry of Soci a l Developmen rec onsideration d ec ision dated Mar c h 28, 2 0 14 which d supplement to cover n ecessary funeral c osts . The ministry held that all of the re Se ction 65 of the Empl oyment and Assistance Regulation (EAR) that: • There is insu fficient evidence to establish that neither the estate nor has the re sou r ces availa ble to pay the co s ts when payable [Section • The funeral c osts were no t limited to necessa EAR]. • The funeral costs were not t h e low e st reasonab PAR T D -Relevan t Le gisla tion E mployment a nd As si stance R egulation (EAR), S e ction I AP P EAL # t and Socia l Innovatio n (the ministry) e nied the appellant's re q ue s t for a burial qu irements of were not met a s the mi nistr y foun d any responsibl e person 65(2) of the EAR ] ; and, ry fu neral costs [S e cti on 65(2) and (3) o f the le co st [Section 6 5 (3.1 ) of the EAR]. 65 a nd S c he d ule F
P A R T E S u m m a r v o f F a c t s T h e m i n i s t r y d i d n o t a t t e n d t h e h e a r i n g . A f t e r c o n f i p r o c e e d e d u n d e r S e c t i o n 8 6 ( b ) o f t h e E m p l o y m e n t O n e o f t h e p a n e l m e m b e r s d i s c l o s e d a d i s t a n t p r o f e y e a r s a g o , w h i c h h e h a d n o r e a s o n t o b e l i e v e w o u l t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s o r a l c o n s e n t , t h e p a n e l m e m b e r r e m T h e e v i d e n c e b e f o r e t h e M i n i s t r y a t t h e t i m e o f t h e 1 ) I n v o i c e d a t e d J a n u a r y 3 1 , 2 0 1 4 t o t h e e s t a t e f o r t h e s u m p a i d b y c h e q u e o f $ 1 , 2 3 2 f o r t h e 2 ) R e c e i p t d a t e d F e b r u a ry 3 , 2 0 1 4 i n t h e a p p e l a c e m e t e r y p l o t d o n a t i o n ; 3 ) I n v o i c e d a t e d F e b r u a r y 5 , 2 0 1 4 i n t h e a p p e l l $ 2 , 9 4 9 . 3 5 a s t h e c o s t o f l u n c h f o r 1 5 3 g u e s t 4 ) S t a t e m e n t o f A c c o u n t d a t e d F e b r u a r y 6 , 2 0 1 f o r t h e t o t a l s u m o f $ 5 , 8 0 4 . 7 3 p a i d a s t h e c o s e r v i c e s , t r a n s f e r s e r v i c e s , f u n e r a l v e h i c l e s , r e n t a l , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e f e e s , d e a t h c e r t i f i c a t e a 5 ) 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 R e a s o n s d a t e d I n h e r 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 , t h e a p p e l l a n t w • H e r d a u g h t e r , w h o p a s s e d i n J a n u a r y 2 0 1 4 , H e r d a u g h t e r l e f t n o m o n e y t o c o v e r f u n e r a l • W h e n t h e y w e r e m a k i n g f u n e r a l a r r a n g e m e n d a u g h t e r w a s e l i g i b l e f o r m o n e t a r y a s s i s t a n c o S h e h a s h a d t o e x t e n d h e r l i n e o f c r e d i t t o c o t h e f u n e r a l c h a p e l s e r v i c e f o r $ 5 , 8 0 4 , c a s k e t l u n c h f o r $ 2 , 9 4 9 . 3 5 , f o r a t o t a l o f $ 1 0 , 7 9 7 . 3 5 • T h e r e w i l l a l s o b e a c o s t f o r t h e g r a v e s t o n e a e t c . ) w h i c h s h e u n d e r s t a n d s t h e m i n i s t r y d o e • S h e w o u l d a p p r e c i a t e a s s i s t a n c e w i t h t h o s e I n h e r N o t i c e o f A p p e a l d a t e d A p r i l 5 , 2 0 1 4 , t h e a p p m i n i s t r y ' s r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n a n d w r o t e t h a t : • S h e w a s n o t i n f o r m e d t h a t t h e m i n i s t r y w i l l a s • S h e s h o u l d h a v e b e e n i n f o r m e d b y e i t h e r t h e g o v e r n m e n t . • S h e d i d w h a t s h e t h o u g h t w a s r i g h t b a s e d o n A t t h e h e a r i n g , t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s f r i e n d s t a t e d t h a t : • T h e a p p e l l a n t w a s i n a v e r y d i f f i c u l t s i t u a t i o n J a n u a r y 2 0 1 4 a n d t h e n h e r d a u g h t e r c o m m i t t n o t t h i n k i n g t h r o u g h a l l t h e b u r e a u c r a c y a t t h e • E v e n t h o u g h t h e r e w e r e m a n y d i f f e r e n t p r o f e d a u q h t e r a f t e r t h e c h i l d w a s b o r n , n o o n e e v e A P P E A L # I � ------r m i n g t h a t t h e m i n i s t r y w a s n o t i f i e d , t h e h e a r i n g a n d A s s i s t a n c e R e g u l a t i o n . s s i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h t h e a p p e l l a n t f r o m m a n y d a f f e c t h i s a b i l i t y t o b e n e u t r a l a n d i m p a r t i a l . W i t h a i n e d o n t h e p a n e l . r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n i n c l u d e d : o f t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s d a u g h t e r , c a r e o f t h e a p p e l l a n t , c o s t o f a c a s k e t a n d c o v e r ; l a n t ' s n a m e f o r t h e s u m o f $ 8 1 2 p a i d a s t h e c o s t o f a n t ' s n a m e f o r t h e s u m p a i d b y c h e q u e f o r s a n d c e m e t e r y a t t e n d a n t s ; 4 f r o m t h e f u n e r a l c h a p e l i n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s n a m e s t f o r s e r v i c e s i n c l u d i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l a n d s t a f f f a c i l i t i e s , m e m o r i a l f o l d e r s , c e m e t e r y e q u i p m e n t n d o b i t u a r i e s ; a n d , M a r c h 1 4 , 2 0 1 4 . r o t e t h a t : h a d P e r s o n s W i t h D i s a b i l i t i e s ( P W D ) d e s i g n a t i o n . e x p e n s e s . t s , t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s n o t i n f o r m e d t h a t h e r e w i t h t h e f u n e r a l . v e r f u n e r a l c o s t s , w h i c h i n c l u d e d t h e a m o u n t t o a n d c o v e r f o r $ 1 , 2 3 2 , c e m e t e r y p l o t $ 8 1 2 a n d . n d o t h e r i n c i d e n t a l c o s t s ( f l o w e r s , n e w s p a p e r s , s n o t c o v e r . c o s t s t h a t a r e i n c l u d e d i n t h e p r o g r a m . e l l a n t e x p r e s s e d h e r d i s a g r e e m e n t w i t h t h e s i s t w i t h c o s t s f o r a p e r s o n w i t h a d i s a b i l i t y . f u n e r a l d i r e c t o r o r s o m e o n e f r o m t h e h e r k n o w l e d g e . w h e n h e r d a u g h t e r g a v e b i r t h t o a c h i l d i n e d s u i c i d e l a t e r t h a t m o n t h . T h e a p p e l l a n t w a s t i m e . s s i o n a l s i n v o l v e d w i t h t h e a p p e l l a n t a n d h e r r r a i s e d t h e i s s u e o f w h o w a s a o i n a t o p a y f o r t h e
daughter's funera l. T h er e we r e pro b ably a t le the appellant some advice about getting some of the costs paid. • A pr o pe r funeral is extremely important in the appe ri ght' by her daughter and g i ve her a proper bu • T he ap pellant's daughter was really a war d of control ove r her life th a n th e a ppellant. At the hearing, the appellant stated that: • H er da u ghter was ove r the age of 19 at the time of h in v o luntary p a tie nt i n a p sy ch i a t ric f acility a nd, p d aug hter had schizoph renia and, as she had a disab • Her daughter w as under e n ormous pre s sure as she gave birth in the facilit and, although she had aske d that the appellant be called when she went not done. • Man y dema nds were p laced on h er d aug hter s ee he r child f o r short peri ods a n d th r e ats w ere made no t c oop erate. She w as to ld she wo u l d be trans w as m or e than h er da ug hter could handl e an • Her daugh ter d ied i n British C o l umbi a. • The father of the child h a s no t a ckno wl e dged all in t he child's c a r e. The appell ant' s da ugh • A n investiga tion of he r dau ghter's circu mstanc questi o n ab le decisions made . • Sh e pai d the fun eral cos ts for h er dau ghter by credit is currentl y at abo u t $ 40,00 0, but it i s not at the • Sh e f e els she is b ein g pe naliz ed fo r b ein g re fun era l cos t s w hen th ey were du e. It was after t l ooking int o the gov ernm en t cont ribut ing to th ask du rin g the w h ole p roce ss. • Her da ug ht e r was lo okin g fo rwa rd to be i ng releas planne d to live with the app ellant. The appella and gra ndchild co uld liv e in her house, and t h • She is curr en tly on medical leave from her employment and has taken a 40% pay to look after her grand-child, and this has caused financial strain. process to adopt her gr a nd c hil d. • She submi t ted the bills, wh ich total approximately $ expecting that th e wh o le a m ount be paid; she just expects what she expects a reasonable contribution. • There were other costs for the funeral that were not included in the request, such as $640 for the hall rental and $200 towards having an MC [master of ceremonies], as well as incidental costs, such as flowers, and a gravestone. • Looking at the Statement of Account from the funeral chapel, she is surprised that $590 was charged for "transfer services" and finds it incredible how much they charged. • S he contacte d CPP, as recomm e nded by th e daughter had not contributed to CPP. She had been a student and only had summer jobs. • Her daughter had no money when she died and did not have a Will. A P PEAL# I a st a half a dozen people who cou ld have given llant' s cul ture. The appellant ha d to 'do r ial. th e state b ecause the government had more er d eath. H er dau ght er was an rio r to that, she lived with the app ellant . He r ili ty, was the ap pellant's dependa nt . y in Janua ry 2014 into labour, this was aft er the chi l d's birth. S he was o nly perm itt e d to th a t co ntact woul d be cut of f if s he d id fe r red to a f ac ility in a nother com munity a nd it d s he to ok he r own lif e. that h e is the father and has n ot b ee n i nvol ved a t t er was no t m arrie d. es is cu r rent ly und erway s i nce th ere wer e wr i ting c he qu e s on h er line of cred it. He r line o f maximum c red it l i mit. spo nsi ble and p a y in g t h e a m o un ts ow i ng fo r the h e bil ls were all p a i d tha t someo ne suggest ed e cost. She did n ot kn ow the r i ght quest ions to ed from treatmen t in Apri l 20 1 4 and she nt had put in a kit ch en s u ite so her daughter e a p pe llant wa s p repared t o he lp he r. reduction in her She has begun the 1 1,000, to the ministry but she is not is reasonable in t he situation, m ini stry, an d they were n o he l p because h e r
The or a l t estimony of t he appe llan t and h e r friend provided further det to the r eque st for th e bur ial supp l e men t. Th e re for e, in su pport of info rmation and recor ds that w ere be f o accord ance wit h s. 22 ( 4) of the E m ploy ment a n d Assis T he Mini s try relied on its recon si derati on decisi on. • On Fe bru a r y 27, 2 014 , th e appellant r equested on b eh alf o f her da u g ht er who passed awa y • T h e a ppellant i n dicated tha t s he had al r ea d y rec ently th a t she cou ld have a s k ed for a s si s A PP E AL # I ai l of the circu m s tance s relating the panel admitt ed t h is ne w i n for mati o n as be i n g re the minist ry at the time of r econ sider ation , i n tance Ac t. The Mi n i str y's evi d en c e include d: finan cial a ss i s tance fo r th e funer a l cos ts p a id in January 2014 . p aid the fu ner a l cost s b ut she did not r eali ze u ntil tance from th e mini stry.
I APPEAL# PART F -Reasons for Panel Decision The issue on the appeal is whether the Ministry's decision, which denied the appellant's request for a burial supplement to cover necessary funeral costs because all of the requirements of Section 65 of the Employment and Assistance Regulation (EAR) were not met, was reasonably supported by the evidence or was a reasonable application of the applicable enactment in the appellant's circumstances. Section 65 of the EAR sets out the eligibility requirements which are at issue on this appeal for providing the burial or cremation supplement, as follows: Burial or cremation supplements 65 (1) In this section: "extraprovincial transportation", with respect to a person who dies in Canada but outside British Columbia, means transporting the deceased person's body within the province or territory in which death occurred for the purposes of providing a service described in paragraph (b) or (c) of the definition of "funeral costs"; "funeral costs" means the costs of the following items, as set out in Schedule F: (a) intraprovincial transportation costs; {b) services of a funeral provider, as defined in the Cremation, Interment and Funeral Services Act; (c) cremation or burial of a deceased person's body or remains, including the cost of a casket or urn; "interprovincial transportation" means preparing the deceased person's body for transport to British Columbia and transporting the body to British Columbia; "intraprovincial transportation" means transporting a deceased person's body within British Columbia for the purposes of providing a service described in paragraph (b) or (c) of the definition of "funeral costs"; "responsible person", with respect to a deceased person, means, (a) a spouse of the person, (b) in the case of a minor, a parent of the person, or (c) in the case of a person sponsored to immigrate to Canada under the Immigration Act (Canada) or the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (Canada), a sponsor or co-sponsor of the person, if the undertaking given or co-signed by the sponsor is still in effect. (2) If neither the estate of a deceased person nor any responsible person has the resources available to pay any of the following costs when payable, the minister may provide a supplement for those costs in the circumstances specified: (a) necessary funeral costs, if (i) the person died in British Columbia, and (ii) the burial or cremation is to take place or has taken place in British Columbia; (b) necessary funeral costs and, with the prior approval of the minister, the necessary interprovincial transportation costs, if (i) the person died in Canada but outside British Columbia, (ii) immediately before the death, the deceased person was a recipient of income assistance, disability assistance or hardship assistance, and (iii) the burial or cremation is to take place or has taken place in British Columbia; (c) with the prior approval of the minister, the necessary extraprovincial transportation costs and necessary
APPEAL# I funeral costs, if (i) the person died in Canada but outside British Columbia, (ii) immediately before the death, the deceased person was a recipient of income assistance, disability assistance or hardship assistance, and (iii) the burial or cremation is to take place in the province or territory in which the death occurred; (d) necessary funeral costs, if (i) the person died outside British Columbia, or in the case of a recipient of income assistance, disability assistance or hardship assistance, died outside Canada, (ii) immediately before the death, the person was ordinarily resident in British Columbia, and (iii) the burial or cremation is to take place or has taken place in British Columbia. (3) For the purposes of subsection (2), funeral costs, and interprovincial transportation and extraprovincial transportation costs are necessary if the minister determines that (a) the item or service in relation to which a supplement is requested is a necessary item or service, and (b) the item or service is or was appropriate. (c) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 63/2010, s. 3 (c).] (3.1) The amount of a supplement payable under subsection (2) is, (a) in respect of a funeral provider's fee for services, an amount that is, in the opinion of the minister, the lowest reasonable cost, (b) in respect of a particular item or service that is a funeral cost, other than a service included in a funeral provider's fee for services, (i) the cost for the item or service set out in Schedule F, or (ii) if there is no cost set out for the item or service in Schedule F, the cost that is, in the opinion of the minister, the lowest reasonable cost for that item or service, and (c) in respect of interprovincial transportation or extraprovincial transportation, the cost that is, in the opinion of the minister, the lowest reasonable cost. (4) The amount of a supplement paid under this section is a debt due to the government and may be recovered by it from the deceased's estate. Ministry's Position The ministry's position is that the provisions of Section 65 of the EAR allow for the ministry to provide a burial or cremation supplement for persons who die in British Columbia when no resources are available to the estate of the deceased person or from any of the responsible persons. The ministry argued that if there are sufficient resources available to either the responsible persons or the estate, the ministry will not pay the funeral supplement. The ministry argued that the appellant already paid for the services and, therefore, found the resources to meet the immediate need. The ministry argued that the funeral charges were more than just the necessary funeral costs, they were not the lowest reasonable costs in the ministry's opinion, and the appellant did not receive prior approval before incurring the costs. The appellant's position is that her daughter, who passed in January 2014, had PWD designation and she had no money when she died to cover funeral expenses. The appellant argued that when she was making funeral arrangements, she was not informed that her daughter was eligible for monetary assistance with the funeral. The appellant argued that she was in a very difficult situation when her dauqhter qave birth to a child in Januarv 2014 and then her dauqhter died later that month, and she
APPEAL# I was not thinking through all the bureaucracy at the time. The appellant argued that her daughter was a ward of the state, in that she was being detained for psychiatric treatment, and the responsible person is the government, not her. The appellant argued that her daughter left no money to cover funeral expenses and the appellant had to extend her line of credit to cover the costs, which included the amount to the funeral chapel service for $5,804, casket and cover for $1,232, cemetery plot at $812 and lunch for $2,949.35, for a total of $10,797.35. The appellant argued that a proper funeral is extremely important in her culture and she had to give her daughter a proper burial. Panel decision Section 65(2) of the EAR sets out that a burial supplement may be provided to pay for 'necessary funeral costs' if neither the estate of a deceased person nor any 'responsible person' has the resources available to pay any of the costs when payable. It is not disputed that the costs of the funeral for the appellant's daughter as submitted by the appellant, for a total of $10,797.35, were paid when they were payable. The appellant stated that she was being responsible and paying the accounts when they were due, but she was not the 'responsible person' for her daughter. The panel concurs with the appellant that she does not meet the definition of a 'responsible person' with respect to her daughter, as set out in Section 65(1) of the EAR as, while she is a parent, her daughter was over the age of 19 at the time of her death, had reached the age of majority in British Columbia, and was not a 'minor.' The appellant stated that her daughter was not married, and there was no evidence presented of another 'responsible person,' according to the prescribed definition, who may have paid any of the costs. The appellant stated that her daughter had no money when she died and, in the absence of any evidence that the estate of the appellant's daughter had resources, the panel finds that the ministry was not reasonable in concluding that there were resources available to either a responsible person or the estate of the appellant's daughter. Sections 65(1) of the EAR defines "funeral costs" as specified items further detailed in Schedule F of the EAR, namely: intra-provincial transportation costs, services of a funeral provider, and cremation or burial of a deceased person's body or remains, including the cost of a casket or urn. The panel finds that the ministry reasonably considered the definition of 'necessary' funeral costs to be further defined by Section 65(3) of the EAR to include those items or services that are both 'necessary' and 'appropriate.' The panel finds that the ministry reasonably determined that some of the items submitted to the ministry by the appellant are not included in this definition, in particular the invoice for the cost of a lunch for guests and cemetery attendants, while other of the costs, including the cost of a casket, may be covered to the extent permitted in Schedule F. The panel also finds that the ministry reasonably considered Section 65(3.1) as applying to the amount of the supplement payable under Section 65(2) and includes either the cost set out in Schedule F or, if there is no cost set out for the item or service in Schedule F, the cost that is the lowest reasonable cost in the ministry's opinion. While the ministry also pointed to the absence of prior approval before the appellant incurred the costs, the panel finds that the requirement for prior approval applies in situations where the person died outside of the province and, in this case, the appellant's daughter died in British Columbia and the provisions of Section 65(2)(b) and (c) of the EAR do not apply. Conclusion The panel finds that the ministry's reconsideration decision, which denied the appellant's request for a burial supplement for necessary funeral costs because the requirements of Section 65 of the EAR were not met, was not a reasonable application of the applicable enactment and the panel rescinds the ministry's decision. Therefore, the ministry decision is overturned and the panel decision is referred back to the ministry for a decision as to the amount.
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.