PART C -D ecision under A ppea l The decision under appeal is the reco nsiderati on dec Social In novation's (the minist ry) date d May 5 , 2014 ap pellant is ineligible for disabili t y assi stanc e because he under section 38 0( 1 )(b )of th e Criminal Code a n d as a result is di sabili t y assistance under s ection 14(1) a nd ( 5) o f th Disabilities A c t ( E APWDA) P AR T D -Relevant Legi slati o n Em pl o y m ent and Assistance f o r Pers on s with Dis abili Employment and Assistance f o r Pers o ns with Disa b EMT 003(10/06/01) A PPEAi I is ion of the M inistry of So c ia l Development a nd i n wh i ch the mi nistry dete rmined th at the was convicted of fraud in excess of $5,000 sub je c t to a lifet i m e ban on r e ceiving e Employment and Assistance for Pe r so n s with t ies A c t (E A P WDA ) S e cti ons 1 and 1 4 il ities Reg ulation (EAPWDR) , Sect ion 31
P A R T E S u m m a r y o f F a c t s 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 r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n 1 ) T h e a p p e l l a n t ' 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 s t a t e s t h a t h e d o e s n o t h a v e a n y i n c o m e a n d i n j u r y m a k e s i t d i f f i c u l t a t t h e m o m e n t t o f i n d s h o r t t e r m m e m o r y c a u s i n g h i m t o f o r g e t t o h H e s t a t e s t h a t h e i s n o t a b u s i n g t h e s y s t e m , p r o b l e m s " ; 2 ) T e l e c o m m u n i c a t i o n d a t e d J u l y 1 6 , 2 0 1 3 f r o m " H a s r e a s o n a b l e a n d p r o b a b l e g r o u n d s t o b e 1 s t d a y o f A u g u s t 2 0 1 0 u n t i l t h e 3 0 t h d a y o f S f r a u d u l e n t m e a n s d e f r a u d t h e M i n i s t r y o f H o u e x c e s s o f $ 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 c o n t r a r y t o S e c t i o n 3 8 0 3 ) C o n d i t i o n a l S e n t e n c e O r d e r d a t e d M a r c h 1 7 , F r a u d i n e x c e s s o f $ 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 c o n t r a r y t o S e c g r a n t e d a c o n d i t i o n a l s e n t e n c e o f 6 m o n t h s t o o t h e r c o n d i t i o n s i n c l u d i n g a r e s t i t u t i o n o r d e r o 4 ) T h e P r o v i n c i a l C o u r t R e c o r d o f P r o c e e d i n g s 2 0 1 3 M a r c h 1 7 , 2 0 1 4 ; 5 ) T h e R e s t i t u t i o n O r d e r d a t e d M a r c h 1 7 , 2 0 1 4 t h e m i n i s t r y ; a n d 6 ) A l e t t e r f r o m t h e m i n i s t r y t o t h e a p p e l l a n t d a t e r e s u l t o f h i s c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n h e i s i n e l i g i b l e a p p e l l a n t t h a t h e m u s t r e p a y t h e b e n e f i t s w h i i n e l i g i b l e f o r a s s i s t a n c e d u e t o t h e a p p l i c a b l e a s s i s t a n c e . I n h i s N o t i c e o f A p p e a l , d a t e d M a y 3 0 , 2 0 1 4 t h e a p p d e c i s i o n b e c a u s e a l l t h e f a c t s w e r e n o t l o o k e d a t a n P r i o r t o t h e h e a r i n g , d a t e d J u n e 1 2 , 2 0 1 4 , t h e a p p e l b i r t h c e rt i f i c a t e o f h i s c h i l d i n d i c a t i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t i s T h e m i n i s t r y s t a t e d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s s o n w a s r e c o 2 1 , 2 0 1 0 t o M a y 2 7 , 2 0 1 0 b u t h a s n o t b e e n i n c l u d e d t h e a p p e l l a n t r e c e i v e d i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e a s a s i n g l e t h a t t i m e t h a t t h e r e w a s n o i n f o r m a t i o n s h o w i n g h e h 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 t a t e d t h a t n o t d e c l a r i n g p i e d g u i l t y t o t h e c r i m i n a l f r a u d c h a r g e b e c a u s e h e w s t i l l s e e h i s s o n . E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A i I . c o n s i s t e d o f : d a t e d A p r i l 2 5 , 2 0 1 4 ( R F R ) i n w h i c h t h e a p p e l l a n t h e h a s a c h i l d t o s u p p o rt . H e s t a t e s t h a t h i s b r a i n w o r k . H i s f r o n t a l l o b e b r a i n i n j u ry h a s a f f e c t e d h i s a n d i n h i s p a y s t u b s f r o m h i s f o r m e r w o r k p l a c e . " i t w a s a l l j u s t c o m p l i c a t i o n s a n d m e m o r y t h e M i n i s t r y I n v e s t i g a t o r ( M l ) s t a t i n g t h a t h e / s h e l i e v e a n d d o e s b e l i e v e t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t f r o m t h e e p t e m b e r 2 0 1 2 d i d b y d e c e i t , f a l s e h o o d o r o t h e r s i n g a n d S o c i a l D e v e l o p m e n t o f a v a l u e i n ( 1 ) ( a ) o f t h e C r i m i n a l C o d e " ; 2 0 1 4 s t a t i n g t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t w a s c o n v i c t e d o f t i o n 3 8 0 ( 1 ) ( a ) o f t h e C r i m i n a l C o d e ; a n d w a s b e s e rv e d i n t h e c o m m u n i t y a s w e l l a s t w e l v e f $ 1 1 , 8 8 3 . 4 9 ; a n d E n d o r s e m e n t o f I n f o r m a t i o n f r o m A u g u s t 1 5 , s t a t i n g t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s t o p a y $ 1 1 , 8 8 3 . 4 9 t o d A p r i l 1 , 2 0 1 4 a d v i s i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t t h a t a s a f o r a s s i s t a n c e . T h e l e t t e r a l s o a d v i s e s t h e c h h e w a s n o t e l i g i b l e t o r e c e i v e a n d t h a t i f h e i s s a n c t i o n h e m a y b e e l i g i b l e t o r e c e i v e h a r d s h i p e l l a n t s t a t e s t h a t h e d i s a g r e e s w i t h t h e m i n i s t ry ' s d h e n e e d s h e l p t o s u p p o r t h i m s e l f a n d h i s s o n . l a n t s u b m i t t e d t h e a d d i t i o n a l i n f o r m a t i o n o f t h e t h e f a t h e r o f t h e c h i l d . r d e d o n h i s i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e f i l e f r o m J a n u a r y o n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s f i l e s i n c e t h a t t i m e p e r i o d ; a n d r e c i p i e n t p r i o r t o h i s c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n a n d a t a d a d e p e n d e n t c h i l d . h i s i n c o m e w a s a m i s t a k e a n d h e a s t o l d h e w o u l d n o t s e r v e j a i l t i m e a n d h e w o u l d
APPEAL I At the hearing the appellant through his representative told the panel: 1) As a result of his brain injury he will need assistance forever; 2) He is currently working; 3) He sees his child on weekends only and when he is working he pays whatever he can for food and clothing for the child. At the hearing the appellant's mother testified as a witness for the appellant and stated: 1) The mother of the appellant's child "does not go after'' the appellant for money and there is no formal custody order; 2) When the appellant is working he gives gift certificates in the amount of $100.00-$150.00 a month to the mother of his child; 3) The mother of the appellant's child works full time and looks after daycare arrangements for the child. The ministry did not object to the appellant's new evidence. The panel has accepted the birth certificate and the oral testimony of the appellant and his mother into evidence as it is information in support of the information and records before the ministry at the time of reconsideration, in accordance with section 22(4) of the Employment and Assistance Act, as it relates to the appellant's criminal conviction. The ministry relied on the reconsideration decision. EMT 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 t o b e d e t e r m i n e d a t a p p e a l i s w h e t h e r t h t h e a p p e l l a n t i n 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 b e c a t h e m i n i s t ry i n e x c e s s o f $ 5 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 u n d e r s e c t i o n 3 s u b j e c t t o l i f e t i m e s a n c t i o n s p u r s u a n t t o S e c t i o n 1 4 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 a p p l i c a t c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h e r e l e v a n t l e g i s l a t i o n i s a s f o l l o w s : E A P W D A 1 ( 1 ) I n t h i s A c t : " d e p e n d e n t c h i l d " , w i t h r e s p e c t t o a p a r e n t , m e a n s i s a p e r s o n w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s , w h o r e s i d e s i n t h e p a r e n t ' s a n d r e l i e s o n t h a t p a r e n t f o r t h e n e c e s s i t i e s o f l i f e , a n d i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 2 ) ; C o n s e q u e n c e s f o r c o n v i c t i o n o r j u d g m e n t i n r e l a t i o n 1 4 ( 1 ) A f a m i l y u n i t t h a t i n c l u d e s a p e r s o n w h o i s c o n v i c r e l a t i o n t o o b t a i n i n g m o n e y , u n d e r t h i s A c t o r t h e E m p l o m i s l e a d i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i s s u b j e c t t o t h e c o n s e q u e n c e m a t c h e s t h e p e r s o n ' s f a m i l y u n i t f o r t h e l i f e t i m e o f t h e p e t h e d a t e o f t h e c o n v i c t i o n . ( 5 ) I f a f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s ( a ) o n l y p e r s o n s d e s c r i b e d i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) o r ( 2 ) , o r s u u n d e r t h a t s u b s e c t i o n , t h e f a m i l y u n i t i s n o t e l i g i b l e f o r d ( b ) o n e o r m o r e p e r s o n s d e s c r i b e d i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) o r ( d e c l a r a t i o n u n d e r t h a t s u b s e c t i o n , a n d a t l e a s t o n e o t h e 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 t o o r f o r t h e f a m i l y a p p l i c a b l e p e r i o d . E A P W D R C r i m i n a l C o d e c o n v i c t i o n s 3 1 F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f s e c t i o n 1 4 ( 5 ) ( b ) [ c o n s e q u e n c e p r o v i d e d f o r a c a l e n d a r m o n t h t o o r f o r a f a m i l y u n i t t h a t c o n v i c t e d u n d e r t h e C r i m i n a l C o d e i n r e l a t i o n t o o b t a i n i n A s s i s t a n c e A c t b y f r a u d o r f a l s e o r m i s l e a d i n g r e p r e s e n t ( a ) i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s a s o l e a p p l i c a n t , o r a s o l e r o n e o r m o r e d e p e n d e n t c h i l d r e n , b y $ 1 0 0 , ( b } i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s t w o a p p l i c a n t s o r r e c i p i e n t s a n d n o d e p e n d e n t c h i l d r e n , b y $ 3 0 0 , ( c ) i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s t w o a p p l i c a n t s o r r e c i p i e n t s a n d o n e o r m o r e d e p e n d e n t c h i l d r e n , b y $ 1 0 0 , a n d ( d ) i f t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n c l u d e s t w o a p p l i c a n t s o r r e c i p i e n t s o n e o r m o r e d e p e n d e n t c h i l d r e n , b y $ 2 0 0 . E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A ' I e 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 w h i c h f o u n d u s e h e h a s a c r i m i n a l c o n v i c t i o n f o r f r a u d a g a i n s t 8 0 ( 1 ) ( a ) o f t h e C r i m i n a l C o d e a n d a s a r e s u l t i s ( 1 ) a n d ( 5 ) o f t h e E A P W D A w a s r e a s o n a b l y i o n o f t h e l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s a c h i l d , o t h e r t h a n a c h i l d w h o i s 1 8 y e a r s o f a g e a n d p l a c e o f r e s i d e n c e f o r m o r e t h a n 5 0 % o f e a c h m o n t h c l u d e s a c h i l d i n c i r c u m s t a n c e s p r e s c r i b e d u n d e r t o A c t t e d o f a n o f f e n c e u n d e r t h e C r i m i n a l C o d e i n y m e n t a n d A s s i s t a n c e A c t , b y f r a u d o r f a l s e o r d e s c r i b e d i n s u b s e c t i o n ( 5 ) f o r a f a m i l y u n i t t h a t r s o n b e g i n n i n g w i t h t h e f i r s t c a l e n d a r m o n t h f o l l o w i n g b s e c t i o n ( 3 ) i f t h e m i n i s t e r h a s m a d e a d e c l a r a t i o n i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e f o r t h e a p p l i c a b l e p e r i o d , a n d 2 ) , o r s u b s e c t i o n ( 3 ) i f t h e m i n i s t e r h a s m a d e a r p e r s o n , t h e a m o u n t o f 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 u n i t m u s t b e r e d u c e d b y t h e p r e s c r i b e d a m o u n t f o r t h e s f o r c o n v i c t i o n o r j u d g m e n t ] o f t h e A c t , a s s i s t a n c e i n c l u d e s o n e o r m o r e p e r s o n s w h o h a v e b e e n g m o n e y u n d e r t h e A c t o r t h e E m p l o y m e n t a n d a t i o n m u s t b e r e d u c e d e c i p i e n t , w h o h a s b e e n c o n v i c t e d a s d e s c r i b e d , a n d , o n l y o n e o f w h o m h a s b e e n c o n v i c t e d a s d e s c r i b e d , , o n l y o n e o f w h o m h a s b e e n c o n v i c t e d a s d e s c r i b e d , b o t h o f w h o m h a v e b e e n c o n v i c t e d a s d e s c r i b e d , a n d
APPEAL I The ministry's reconsideration decision states that under section 14(1) of the EAPWDA, a person who is convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code in relation to obtaining money under the EAPWDA by fraud or false or misleading representation is subject to a lifetime consequence as outlined in EAPWDA section 14(5), beginning with the first calendar month following the date of the conviction. The ministry's position is that on March 17, 2014 the appellant was convicted of fraud in excess of $5,000 contrary to section 380(1 )(a) of the Criminal Code in relation to obtaining assistance under the EAPWDA. The ministry's position is that as the appellant is a single person with no dependants, he is ineligible for disability assistance for his lifetime beginning on April 1, 2014. At the hearing the ministry stated that from August 1, 2010 until September 30, 2012, the appellant earned an income working for a private company while receiving income assistance and did not report this earned income to the ministry as he was required to do by law. The ministry stated that as a result of the March 17, 2014 guilty plea and conviction of fraud in excess of $5,000.00 and in accordance with section 14(1) of the EAPWDA, a lifetime sanction was imposed on the appellant. The ministry stated that there is a Conditional Sentence Order with twelve conditions and one of the conditions is the payment of restitution in the amount of $11,883.49 to the Ministry. The ministry stated that while the appellant does have a child, the child is not a dependent child as defined in section (1) of the EAPWDA. The child does not live with the appellant 50% of the time and the child does not rely on the appellant for the necessities of life. The appellant's position is that he suffers from a brain injury that has affected executive functioning. This injury makes it difficult for him to hold down a job. The appellant admits that he pied guilty to the charge of fraud in excess of $5,000.00. He stated that he pied guilty because he was told that as a result of his guilty plea, he would "not serve jail time and would still see his son". The appellant's position is that although he and the mother of his child do not have a formal written custody agreement, he has joint custody of the child and he provides his child's mother financial support to assist with the basic needs of his child. Because of this, the appellant, through is representative, stated that he should be considered under section 31 (a) of the EAPWDR as the sole recipient, who has been convicted as described, and who has one dependent child thereby reducing the disability assistance by $100. The appellant states that he sees his child usually every weekend. The appellant and his mother stated that the mother of the appellant's child works full time and looks after the child. EAAT 003(10/06/01)
APPEAi I Panel Decision Under section 14(1) of the EAPWDA, a person who is convicted of an offence under the Criminal Code in relation to obtaining money under the EAPWDA by fraud or false or misleading representation is subject to a lifetime consequence as outlined in EAPWDA section 14(5), beginning with the first calendar month following the date of the conviction. The panel finds that as the appellant was convicted of fraud in excess of $5,000, contrary to section 380(1)(b) of the Criminal Code in relation to obtaining assistance under the EAPWDA on March 17, 2014, the ministry's decision that he was ineligible for disability assistance as a life time sanction due to a criminal conviction was reasonable based on the evidence. Although the appellant states that he has a child whom he supports and therefore he should be considered under section 31( a) of the EAPWDR, the panel finds that the appellant has not established that his child meets the definition of dependent child as set out in in section (1) of the EAPWDA. The appellant admitted that he sees his child on weekends and occasionally for longer periods, but did not provide the evidence that his child lives with him 50% of each month. While the appellant may support his child "as much as he can", the appellant's mother testified that the appellant's child lives with the child's mother and she works full time. The panel finds that the evidence does not establish that the appellant's child relies on the appellant for the necessities of life. Accordingly, the panel finds the ministry's reconsideration decision that the appellant is not eligible for disability assistance as a lifetime sanction pursuant to EAPWDA section 14 was reasonably supported by the evidence and a reasonable application of the legislation in the appellant's circumstances. The panel therefore confirms the ministry's reconsideration decision. EMT 003(10/06101)
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.