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 M i n i s t r y o f S o c i a l r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n d a t e d M a y 2 1 , 2 0 1 4 w h i c h m o v i n g s u p p l e m e n t t o p a y v a n r e n t a l c o s t s i n c u r r e d d e n i e d t h e a d d i t i o n a l s u p p l e m e n t o n t h e b a s i s t h a t r e q u i r e m e n t s o f s e c t i o n 5 5 o f t h e E m p l o y m e n t a n d R e g u l a t i o n ( E A P W D R ) . S p e c i f i c a l l y , w h i l e t h e M i n i s s a t i s f i e d o n e o f t h e r e a s o n s f o r m o v i n g a s s e t o u t i n n o t e l i g i b l e f o r t h e s u p p l e m e n t u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n 5 5 m i n i s t e r ' s p r e a p p r o v a l p r i o r t o i n c u r r i n g t h e r e n t a l v 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 AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )I A P P E A L D e v e l o p m e n t a n d S o c i a l I n n o v a t i o n ( M i n i s t r y ' s ) 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 a n a d d i t i o n a l i n F e b r u a r y a n d M a r c h 2 0 1 4 . T h e M i n i s t r y t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r e q u e s t d i d n o t m e e t t h e s t a t u t o r y 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 i l i t i e s t r y d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r e q u e s t s u b s e c t i o n 5 5 ( 2 ) , i t f o u n d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s ( 3 ) ( b ) b e c a u s e t h e a p p e l l a n t d i d n o t r e c e i v e t h e a n c o s t s . 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 5 5
I APPEAL PART E -Summarv of Facts The evidence before the Ministry at the time of the reconsideration decision consisted of: 1) The appellant's Request for Reconsideration signed on April 30, 2014 with attached submission dated May 7, 2014 in which he states that his recent move was due to an unexpected eviction from his previous residence a short time after the death of a close family member. The physical, emotional and financial stress of the move caused the appellant severe chest pains which his doctor confirmed were from stress. The appellant's advocate assisted him in preparing for the move but the tasks of moving on his own took a heavy toll. The appellant explained that the Ministry had already approved his request for storage pods for a 5-day period prior to his new place being ready to move into. Due to the appellant's disabilities, bad weather, and a sloped driveway at his new place, the appellant was unable to move his belongings out of the storage pod which had been deposited outside his new residence. He therefore booked a rental van to assist him to move items out of the pods and also out of storage at other locations. The appellant explained that he had never asked the Ministry for moving assistance in the past and after the Ministry approved his moving supplement for the storage pods there was a $105 credit which the Ministry "re-assigned" to the appellant's rental van balance. However, the appellant still owed a balance of $386.53 for the rental van and this is the amount he requested from the Ministry. The Ministry denied the request. 2) A letter from the appellant's advocate to the Ministry, dated May 7, 2014. The advocate stated that the appellant had to apply for additional moving funds (for the rental van) due to unforeseen circumstances and costs that arose during his move. His circumstances included mental and physical distress and it was imperative that he move for health reasons as verified by his doctor. He accrued the additional moving costs because due to his deteriorating health, he was unable to complete his move as planned within the confines of the pre-approved Ministry funds and he was not able to complete the move at all without the additional expenditure. 3) A note from the appellant's doctor (Dr. C.) dated February 21, 2014 in which the doctor stated that the stress of the appellant's previous living situation was causing imminent danger to his health and safety and he should move out of the situation as soon as possible to reduce the risk of harm. 4) Two invoices for the rental van dated March 6, 2014 and April 6, 2014. The March invoice showed a balance of $372.83 payable by March 31, 2014 and the April invoice had a balance of $568.44 payable by April 30th. On both invoices, the appellant check marked the amounts that were due to his move, and the total of these amounts ($386.53) is what he requested from the Ministry. The appellant explained at the hearing that the charges not check marked on the invoices were administrative and other-use fees. He was not asking the Ministry to pay those charges. In its reconsideration decision, the Ministry noted that the appellant's rent increased due to the move, from $450 per month to $500 per month. It approved a moving supplement on February 21 2014 in the amount of $472.50 on the basis that the appellant was moving to avoid an imminent threat to his physical safety as confirmed by his doctor. The Ministry noted that the appellant's advocate requested an additional moving supplement on April 8, 2014 to cover a rental van invoice for trips made during February and March. The Ministry further noted that the appellant has a Person with Disabilities designation and his file was re-opened in 2007. EMT 003( 10/06/01)
A d d i t i o n a l e v i d e n c e 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 u b m i t t e d 3 n e w d o c u 1 ) A p h o t o g r a p h s h o w i n g a s l o p e d d r i v e w a y l e a d i n g T h e a p p e l l a n t n o t e d t h a t h i s n e w a d d r e s s i s p i c t u r e s h o w s t h e i n c l i n e h e h a d t o t r a n s p o r t h i s b e l o n g i n g s p o d , w h i c h h a d b e e n d e p o s i t e d o n t h e s t r e e t , i n t o a 2 ) A l e t t e r f r o m a d o c t o r ( D r . R . ) d a t e d J u n e 2 , 2 0 1 4 d o c t o r e x p l a i n e d t h a t i n F e b r u a r y 2 0 1 4 , t h e a p p e l l a p a i n r e l a t e d t o a n i m p e n d i n g m o v e t h a t w a s n o t o f h a p p e l l a n t h a s m e n t a l h e a l t h a n d m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n s e x a c e r b a t e h i s e x e c u t i v e f u n c t i o n w h e n h e i s s t r e s s i n M a r c h r e q u i r e d " l o g i s t i c a l p l a n n i n g " t h a t h e w a s u w a y . H i s m o v e w a s t h e r e f o r e p r o l o n g e d a n d h e c o n f r o m n o t b e i n g s e t t l e d i n h i s n e w r e s i d e n c e . T h e d o u p " f o r h e a r t d i s e a s e a n d a r e c e n t t e s t r e s u l t w a s a b 3 ) A r e n t a l a g r e e m e n t a n d i n v o i c e f o r a s t o r a g e p o d F e b r u a r y 2 5 M a r c h 2 4 , 2 0 1 4 f o r 3 p o d s w i t h t h e n I n a d d i t i o n , t h e a p p e l l a n t s t a t e d a t t h e h e a r i n g t h a t h p r i o r t o h i s m o v e a n d h e d i d n o t h a v e a l o t o f t i m e t o o c c u p i e d w i t h p a c k i n g , c l e a n i n g t h e c a r p e t i n h i s o l d p o d s a n d i n t o t e m p o r a r y s t o r a g e i n t h e p a r k i n g g a r a r e a d y u n t i l M a r c h 5 t h · H e s t a t e d t h a t h e c o u l d n o t m o d u e t o h i s p h y s i c a l d i s a b i l i t y , a n d a s p e l l o f s n o w y , r H e s t a t e d t h a t h e w a s r e s u r f a c i n g f r o m a m e n t a l b r o v e r a n d o v e r f o r t h e p a s t 1 4 -1 5 y e a r s " , a n d w a s w o d i d n ' t w a n t t o d i e l i k e h i s c l o s e r e l a t i v e h a d . H e w a s $ 5 0 0 a n d u t i l i t i e s w e r e n o l o n g e r i n c l u d e d ; h i s f i n a n c i n c o m e a n d t h e c o s t o f n a t u r a l r e m e d i e s a n d h e a l t h t h a t t h e p o d s c o u l d n o t b e m o v e d d o w n t h e r a m p a t n o t f i t t h r o u g h t h e s e c u r i t y g a t e . H e b o o k e d a s m a l l w i t h t h e r e n t a l c o m p a n y . I n r e s p o n s e t o a q u e s t i o n f r o m t h e M i n i s t r y , t h e a d v o i t t o p a y $ 3 8 6 . 5 3 o f t h e r e n t a l v a n i n v o i c e a n d t h e M p a y $ 1 0 5 b u t d e c l i n e d t o p a y t h e f u l l b a l a n c e , a d v i s i o r d e r t o e x p l a i n h i s e x t e n u a t i n g r e a s o n s f o r a c c r u i n g t e s t i m o n y c o n f i r m e d t h a t i t h a d a t e l e p h o n e l o g r e g a c h e q u e f o r $ 1 0 5 t o t h e r e n t a l v a n c o m p a n y . E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )I A P P E A L m e n t s w h i c h t h e M i n i s t r y h a d n o o b j e c t i o n s t o : t o a p a r k i n g g a r a g e s e c u r i t y g a t e a t a r e s i d e n c e . d i n t h e p h o t o g r a p h a n d e x p l a i n e d t h a t t h e p i c t u r e d o w n i n o r d e r t o m o v e t h e m f r o m t h e s t o r a g e s t o r a g e l o c k e r i n s i d e t h e p a r k i n g g a r a g e . a d d r e s s e d " T o W h o m i t M a y C o n c e r n " . T h e n t e x p e r i e n c e d " e x t r e m e m e n t a l s t r e s s a n d c h e s t i s c h o o s i n g . " T h e d o c t o r a l s o r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e t h a t " i m p a c t h i s c l e a r t h i n k i n g a n d e n e r g y " a n d e d . T h e d o c t o r s t a t e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s m o v e n a b l e t o m a n a g e i n a n o r g a n i z e d a n d e f f i c i e n t t i n u e s t o e x p e r i e n c e o n g o i n g a n x i e t y a n d s t r e s s c t o r r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s b e i n g " w o r k e d n o r m a l . c o m p a n y s h o w i n g c h a r g e s o f $ 4 7 2 . 5 0 f r o m o t a t i o n " 3 r d u n i t f r e e s t o r a g e f o r p r e p a i d t e r m " . e h a d p o s s e s s i o n s s t o r e d i n 3 d i f f e r e n t p l a c e s p a r e d o w n h i s b e l o n g i n g s b e c a u s e h e w a s p l a c e , a n d m o v i n g h e a v y b e l o n g i n g s o u t o f t h e g e o f h i s n e w p l a c e a s h i s s u i t e w o u l d n o t b e v e e v e r y t h i n g w i t h h a n d h e l d d o l l i e s a n d c a r t s a i n y w e a t h e r . e a k d o w n i n 2 0 0 2 , h a d h a d a " c y c l e o f c o l l a p s e r r i e d a b o u t h i s h e a r t s y m p t o m s b e c a u s e h e a c c e p t e d i n s o c i a l h o u s i n g b u t h i s r e n t w e n t u p t o i a l s i t u a t i o n i s d i f f i c u l t d u e t o h i s l i m i t e d d i s a b i l i t y y f o o d f o r h i s m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n s . H e e x p l a i n e d h i s n e w r e s i d e n c e b e c a u s e a l a r g e r v a n w o u l d r e n t a l v a n b e c a u s e h e a l r e a d y h a d a m e m b e r s h i p c a t e e x p l a i n e d t h a t s h e c a l l e d t h e m i n i s t r y t o a s k i n i s t r y a g r e e d i n t h e t e l e p h o n e c o n v e r s a t i o n t o n g t h e a p p e l l a n t t o a p p l y f o r a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n t h e e x t r a c h a r g e . T h e M i n i s t r y i n i t s o r a l r d i n g t h i s c o n v e r s a t i o n a n d i t h a d i s s u e d a
In r e s p onse to an ot he r que sti on fr om t he Mi nistry, th p ro vide d to th e M in is try for th e re nt al van; t he quo te o rigi nal plan, and 3 quo tes were forwa rded as required un ap pel lan t di d n ot know ab o ut t he w e at he r is su e or tha su it e on ce i t was r ead y for him to mo ve i nto . It w a s the Ministry to as k for pa ym en t o f t he r enta l van invoice. In r esponse to questi ons fr om th e pane l , the advocate clarified that $ 38 6. 53 for t h e re nta l van instead o f t he full in v o ice c osts whi c h he ag reed to co ver out of poc ket , and had al alre a d y pa id t oward th e r ent al v a n. When the M inistry a nd t he pod s e nde d up c ost ing $ 1 05 le ss, t h e M ini stry dire ct the r ema inin g $ 105 to w a rd t he c ost of the rent $ 105 credit because th e s t orage comp any moved only on a pp ellan t asked t he sto ra ge compa ny not to m ov e t no t be l oc ated close to the ent ranc e of the parking g t emp orar i ly u n t i l h is sui te was read y to m ov e in to. Th movin g on l y one of the pod s . The a ppellant adde d tha t the r enta l van com pany has fr paym e nt o f t h e outs ta nding balance. He di d n ot get a the van; h e ins tead got a n i nvo ice at the end of each mo the r ental van late at night when t he f ee i s lower. In its oral testi mo ny, the Minist ry st ated th at m oving to pay $ 1 05 to t he rental van c om pany b ec au s e the $105 had pre-a pproved fo r the appe l lant 's sto rage po ds. t r a nsfer an a m o unt from one c ompany to a not her b ut did so c h an ge in circ umst ances and had not u s e d the to tal pods. The panel finds that the 3 ne w documents and all of limitations in re lation to his move; the circumstanc es storage pods; and the charges for the rental van. The panel therefore admits the new evidence under se c tio n 22(4)(b) of the Employment and Ass ist a n ce Act as testi records that were befo re the Ministry at the time the decision being appealed was made. The panel makes the following findings of fact: 1. The appellant is design ated as a Person with Disabili health symptoms due to the stress of his move which took place on March 1, 2014. 2. The appellant arran ged to s tore his belongings in residence between March 1st-and 5th because his new suite was not ready to move into until the 5th. 3. Prior to his move, the appellant requested and the Ministry pre-approved temporary storage pods in the amount of $472.50. 4. The aooellant had a credit of $105 for the storaqe oods because he asked the storaqe companv EAA T003( 10/06/01) APPEA I e ad v oca te s tat ed tha t no quotes h ad b ee n s wer e for th e st ora ge po ds o nly as tha t was the de r t he EAPWDR. A t that poi nt the t t h e pod s co uld n ot be b roug ht clo se to h i s a f te r th e ch ange in logistics that they approached t he ap pellan t was r equest ing amount be cau se he had deducted admin istrative so de duc ted $10 5 whi ch th e Mi nis try ha d ha d ap pro ved $4 72. 5 0 for th e stor age p ods paid $36 7 . 50 fo r th e po ds an d ag reed to re  al van . Th e a ppe lla nt ex p lai ned th at h e ha d t he e o f t h e po ds to h is new r e s i de nce. T h e h e other 2 po d s once h e saw tha t t h e pod s coul d a rage where he w ould st o re his belo ngings e storage com pan y, in turn, c har ged him fo r o z e n his ac coun t because t hey are wait ing fo r sli p showing t h e charg e s each t ime he u sed nt h. The a ppellant also stated that he us ed su ppl e men ts requir e pr ior a pprova l a n d it a g r eed was par t of the $47 2.5 0 t h at the Ministr y T he Ministry st a t e d that it does not norm ally in th e appell ant' s ca se s in c e he had a amoun t t h at was pre-a pprov ed fo r the storage t he or al testimony r e late to the appellant's hea lt h of his move; the cost of the pre a pproved mony in support of information and ties and experienced physical and mental a locker in the parking garage at his new
I APPEA not to move all of the pods to his new residence once he realized the pods could not be dropped off near the garage entrance and would only fit on the street outside. The storage company moved one of the pods to the appellant's new residence. 5. The appellant booked a rental van to move his belongings from the other 2 pods, his other storage locations, and from the van into the temporary storage locker at his new residence. 6. After he received an invoice for the rental van, his advocate called the Ministry and requested payment of $386.53 toward the invoice. The Ministry issued a cheque for $105 to the rental van company but declined to pay the requested amount, $386.53. 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 b e i n g a p p e a l e d i s w h e t h e r t h e M i n i s t r y ' s m o v i n g s u p p l e m e n t f o r a r e n t a l v a n b e c a u s e h i s r e q s u b s e c t i o n 5 5 ( 3 ) ( b ) o f t h e E A P W D R w a s r e a s o n a b 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 l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e c i r c u m T h e r e l e v a n t s e c t i o n s o f t h e E A P W D R a r e a s f o l l o w S u p p l e m e n t s f o r m o v i n g , t r a n s p o r t a t i o n a n d l i v i 5 5 ( 1 ) I n t h i s s e c t i o n : " l i v i n g c o s t " m e a n s t h e c o s t o f a c c o m m o d a t i o n a n d " m o v i n g c o s t " m e a n s t h e c o s t o f m o v i n g a f a m i l y u n a n o t h e r ; " t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t " m e a n s t h e c o s t o f t r a v e l l i n g f r o ( 2 ) S u b j e c t t o s u b s e c t i o n s ( 3 ) a n d ( 4 ) , t h e m i n i s t e r m t h a t i s e l i g i b l e f o r d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e o r h a r d s h i p a f o l l o w i n g : ( a ) m o v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o m o v e a n y w h e r e i n C a n b u t h a s a r r a n g e d c o n f i r m e d e m p l o y m e n t t h a t w o u l d o f t h e f a m i l y u n i t a n d t h e r e c i p i e n t i s r e q u i r e d t o m o ( b ) m o v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o m o v e t o a n o t h e r p r o v i n m o v e t o i m p r o v e i t s l i v i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; ( c ) m o v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o m o v e w i t h i n a m u n i c i p a m u n i c i p a l i t y o r u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a b e c a u s e t h e f a m b e i n g s o l d o r d e m o l i s h e d a n d a n o t i c e t o v a c a t e h a s ( d ) m o v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o m o v e w i t h i n a m u n i c i p a m u n i c i p a l i t y o r u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t a r e s u l t o f t h e m o v e ; ( e ) m o v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o m o v e t o a n o t h e r a r e a i n t h e p h y s i c a l s a f e t y o f a n y p e r s o n i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t ; ( f ) t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s a n d l i v i n g c o s t s r e q u i r e d t o a p r o c e e d i n g u n d e r t h e C h i l d , F a m i l y a n d C o m m u n i t y h e a r i n g a n d i s a p a r t y t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g . ( g ) t r a n s p o r t a t i o n c o s t s , l i v i n g c o s t s , c h i l d c a r e c o s t s ( i ) t h e r e q u i r e d a t t e n d a n c e o f a r e c i p i e n t i n t h e f a m i l ( i i ) o t h e r r e q u i r e m e n t s a r e c i p i e n t i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t m m a i n t e n a n c e r i g h t a s s i g n e d t o t h e m i n i s t e r u n d e r s e m a i n t e n a n c e r i g h t s ] . ( B . C . R e g . 2 7 5 / 2 0 0 4 ) ( 3 ) A f a m i l y u n i t i s e l i g i b l e f o r a s u p p l e m e n t u n d e r t h ( a ) t h e r e a r e n o r e s o u r c e s a v a i l a b l e t o t h e f a m i l y u n m a y b e p r o v i d e d , a n d ( b ) a r e c i p i e n t i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t r e c e i v e s t h e m i n i s t e r ( 4 ) A s u p p l e m e n t m a y b e p r o v i d e d u n d e r t h i s s e c t i o n ( a ) t h e c o s t o f t h e l e a s t e x p e n s i v e a p p r o p r i a t e m o d e ( b ) i n t h e c a s e o f a s u p p l e m e n t u n d e r s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) c o s t s . / B . C . R e a . 2 7 5 / 2 0 0 4 ) E A A T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A _P _ P _ E _ A _ L _ _ _ _ _ _ __, I I L d e c i s i o n t o d e n y t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s r e q u e s t f o r a u e s t w a s n o t p r e a p p r o v e d i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h l y s u p p o r t e d b y t h e e v i d e n c e o r a r e a s o n a b l e s t a n c e s o f t h e a p p e l l a n t . s : n g c o s t s m e a l s ; i t a n d i t s p e r s o n a l e f f e c t s f r o m o n e p l a c e t o m o n e p l a c e t o a n o t h e r . a y p r o v i d e a s u p p l e m e n t t o o r f o r a f a m i l y u n i t s s i s t a n c e t o a s s i s t w i t h o n e o r m o r e o f t h e a d a , i f a r e c i p i e n t i n t h e f a m i l y u n i t i s n o t w o r k i n g s i g n i f i c a n t l y p r o m o t e t h e f i n a n c i a l i n d e p e n d e n c e v e t o b e g i n t h a t e m p l o y m e n t ; c e o r c o u n t r y , i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t i s r e q u i r e d t o l i t y o r u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a o r t o a n a d j a c e n t i l y u n i t ' s r e n t e d r e s i d e n t i a l a c c o m m o d a t i o n i s b e e n g i v e n , o r h a s b e e n c o n d e m n e d ; l i t y o r u n i n c o r p o r a t e d a r e a o r t o a n a d j a c e n t ' s s h e l t e r c o s t s w o u l d b e s i g n i f i c a n t l y r e d u c e d a s B r i t i s h C o l u m b i a t o a v o i d a n i m m i n e n t t h r e a t t o t t e n d a h e a r i n g r e l a t i n g t o a c h i l d p r o t e c t i o n S e r v i c e A c t , i f a r e c i p i e n t i s g i v e n n o t i c e o f t h e a n d f e e s r e s u l t i n g f r o m y u n i t a t a h e a r i n g , o r u s t f u l f i l i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e e x e r c i s e o f a c t i o n 1 7 [ c a t e g o r i e s t h a t m u s t a s s i g n i s s e c t i o n o n l y i f i t t o c o v e r t h e c o s t s f o r w h i c h t h e s u p p l e m e n t ' s a p p r o v a l b e f o r e i n c u r r i n g t h o s e c o s t s . o n l y t o a s s i s t w i t h o f m o v i n g o r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , a n d ( I ) o r ( g ) , t h e l e a s t e x p e n s i v e a p p r o p r i a t e l i v i n g
Ap pe l lan t's positi on In his N o t ic e of Appeal dat e d June 9, 2 014 the appellant argu a pp r oval for re im b ursement f or m ovin g a s in rel a tio incu rred during a nd after the move. " Th e app ellant repo o ff in my lif e" and t h at w hen h e reali zed tha t th e logistics h i s n e w pla ce ju s t wer en't work ing, he could not see stress so he "switched p l ans a nd we nt for th e va n." Mi n istry fo r the rent a l v an be cause he w as "d ro w n ing in the unf ore seen and unexpect e d . He e x plained that the s hi m, but on l y d r o p them off at th e new lo ca t ion . The a p pellant ar g u e d that he wa s in "surv i v al mode, my logic tho ugh h is timin g in telli ng th e Mini st r y about th e r en h e told them as so on a s he got t he inv oi ce , at th e beg when the Minist ry a gree d to red i r e ct $10 5 to t he ren ha d ha d t o change cours e d ue to e x te rna l circu ms tances nece ssar y and "not ou t of the b lue" ; and the y told him they would request i ng when h e a pplied for reconsider ati on, but r e cons i deration. The appe llant a rgued that the re ason the M ini st ry's decision van w as not for a new mo ve ; it wa s part o f his o ri g ina the a ctua l cost o f the r e n tal van w as an unkn o wn expen mo v ing s uppl e m e nt fo r sto rag e only , e xpecting tha t appellant stated th at he " w as n ot t rying to c ircum v ent the u sed the van l at e at n ight t o save costs; h e sub tracte ap preciates t he Mini s tr y's assist a nce and goes out o t housa nds of dolla rs o f ph arm ac e u tica ls for his healt w hich would h ave cost as m uch as $1,5 00. He submitt van was not u nre asonable , an d h e w as doi ng the be really scared him. The Ministry did not gui de h im so n o fam ily or friends to tur n to. He i s asking the Ministry to gra circumstances. Ministry's position In its reconsideration dec i sion, the Ministry was satisfied that the appellant was moving for one of the reasons listed in subsect i on 55(2) of the EAPWDR; how pre-approval for the rental van. The Ministry noted that the appellant requested an additio supp lement for the van o n April 8 , 2 0 14 yet he incurr Ministry's posit i on is that the appellant wa s th e refore under subsection 55(3) of the EAPWDR. At the hearing, the Ministry stated that it appreciates that "the appellant is going through a lot and acknowledges that his move was not a regular situation." approval prior to incurrinq movinq costs and "when usina oublic monev the Ministrv has to be EAAT 003(10/06/01) I A PP EAl ed t h at the Ministr y wa s "in cons istent i n n to u n foreseen e x tenuatin g c i rc umstanc es rt ed that " t h e m ove was ak in t o a bo m b going o f gett ing h is stuff f r om th e sto rage p o d s to cl earl y and logica lly due to his hea lth i ssues and He a r gue d t h at he di dn't know how t o ask t h e mov e" a nd the rental v an expense w as tora g e com p an y woul d n o t u n l o ad t h e pods for al c apac i ty was just n ot there" and tal v an "was not w h at th e Minis t r y would prefer' ' , i nnin g o f M a rch . Th e app e llant a rgued tha t tal van company, t h ey knew t h at t h e appellant ; they admitte d that th e ren t a l van cos t w as look into the f u ll amo u n t he was they then den i e d his request in th e w as i nc onsistent is becaus e the re n tal l mov e th at the Ministry ha d pr e-a p proved, and ditur e at t he tim e he initially app lie d for th e he w ould o n ly n eed to use the pods. T h e Ministry o r create ri di c u lo us am ount s." He d t h e a d ministr ative fee s to be fair; he f his way to s a ve the sys tem mo ney by refu s i n g h con di tions , and by not boo k i ng act u al mover s ed that the sm all am ount he r equested for th e st t hat he could in ligh t of s e ve re chest pains that he went to the ad vocate for a s sistanc e as he ha d nt a "comp assion ate requ es t " in h i s ever the appell a nt did not have the minister's nal moving e d the cost in Fe bru ary and March 2014. The not e ligible f or t h e a dditional mov ing supplement However, the EAPWDR requires preÂ
r esponsible and fol low the le gislatio n . " T he M i nistry that am ou nt was th e u n u sed p o rtion o f the pre-a pprove r ece iv e d. T h e Mi nistr y arg u e d t hat it su g ge s t ed that the app it can not a pp rov e an add it iona l movi ng su p pl em ent on needed to be ex plained to d ete rmi n e w het h e r the reque l eg i s l ation. Pa nel ' s de cision At is su e in this app e a l is s ubse ction 55 ( 3) ( b) o f the EA f o r a movi ng supp lemen t only if " (b) a re ci p ient in th be fore i nc urr i ng tho se costs." The panel n ote s that "c ost s" and not fo r the l o gistics of the move i t s e lf . The pane a nd appro ved amount and that su ch inte rpr et at i o n is which s tates that a m o v ing s uppl e ment ma y be provi expens iv e appropriate mo d e of tra nsportation ". Ag ai and a ppro ved amo unt. The p anel is o f the v i e w tha t without kno wing t h e co rental va n) i n advan c e of the m ove, t h e min ister would not b 3 (b) e ve n though s uch pre-approval mus t occur "b efore not disp ute that he did no t adv ise the M inistr y of the c invoice, but he arg u e d t hat he co u ld no t t e ll t he Mi nistry the st ress of t he mo ve which w as w o rsening h is h ealth not kn o w w h at the co st w ould be u n ti l h e rece ived the invoi month. W ith regard to not knowin g the cost u n til the i woul d l ogicall y k now tha t he was i ncu r ri ng a charge e basis of an hourly rat e or the k i l ome ters dri ven. Alth ough h e also arg u ed tha t the cost of the van was part o f o r the mo ving sup pl e ment for th e sto rage p ods, and tha of unforeseen circumstances, the Ministr y' s evi d e nc the cost of the storage pods only, in a set amount of $472.50. the rental van was the unused portio n of this pre-app The advocate explained that they provided 3 quotes for the storage pods and the Minist the mo v i n g supplement for t h e pods o n the b a sis o f t advocate did not submit any quotes for the rental van and the quote provid evide n ce was for the storage pods, not th e rental va rental van be c ause he already had a membe rship with the rent was small enough to fit t h r ough th e security gate at any quotes, the Ministry would be unable to determine whether the van met the criterion expensive mode of transportation pursuant to subsection 55(4)(a) of the EAPWDR. With regard to the appellant's health issues and stressful circumstances (which were confirmed by his advocate's letter and the information from Dr. C. and Dr. R.), both the Ministry and the panel are s m ath etic. Howev e r , the Minis! ar ued that it still has to follow the le EAA T003(10/06/01) I A PP EAL was a bl e to p ay $10 5 towa rd s the ren t al van as d m ovi ng su p pl em ent that the ap pel lant had e llant a p ply for r econsider ati o n b eca use the spot o v e r th e phon e. The circu m stances sted amount w as l egitim a te un d er the P W DR which s tates that a fami l y unit is el igi ble e famil y unit receiv es t he minis t er' s ap pr oval t he p re-ap pro v al requ i r ed und er th i s s ection is for l fu rt h er note s th at "cost s" impl ies a fix e d suppo rt e d by su b s ec tion 55(4) of the EAPWDR d ed to assi st wi t h "( a) th e cost o f the l e ast n, the w ord "cost" i n thi s se cti on imp l ies a kn own st of t he m ode of t r anspo rtat ion (in thi s case, the e able to grant a p pro v al u n d er paragrap h incu rri n g tho s e c o s ts. " The app e l lant does o s t of the rental v a n until he rec eive d t he soo n e r b eca use h e was overw helmed w i th and his ca pacity for clear thinking, and he d id ce w h ich o nl y c ame at the en d o f th e n v oice arr ived, th e p anel n otes tha t the appell ant very t ime h e used the rental van, ei ther o n the f the same m ov e for wh ich he ha d appl ied t h is ne ed for th e van c am e about as a re s ult e was that the initial moving su ppleme nt was for The $105 that the Ministry applied to r oved amount. r y approved h ese quotes. Howev er , the evidence is tha t the e d with the appellan t' s new n. R at he r , t he appell a nt b ooked th at parti c ular al van company which had a van that h i s p arking garage. The p an el n ot es t h at wit h ou t of the least islation in a
movin g suppl eme n t and the panel cannot find any provisions in the movin the EAPWDR that deal with ag gravating ci rcum stances for not getting Spe cif ica l ly, t here is no m en tion o f health conditions, or unforeseeable or mitigating circumstances such as the ap pellant chang i n g course and b oo ki ng There is also no section th at w ould a l low t h e M inist T h e panel finds that the Ministr y's decision to deny the supplement for the rental van wa s reaso n a bly supporte applicat i on of section 55 of the EA PWDR in t h e c ircum the Mi nistry' s reconsideration decision. EMT 003(10/06/01) I A PPEAL g supplement sections of moving costs pre-approved. t h e van wh en th e sto r a ge pods did not work out. ry to g r a nt a "compassiona te reques t." appel lant's requ est for an additional mo vin g d by the ev idence and w as a reas onable stances of t h e appell ant. The panel confirms
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.