I APPEAL# PART C -Decision under Appeal The decision under appeal is the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation (the "ministry") reconsideration decision of June 20, 2014, wherein the ministry determined that the appellant was no longer eligible for income assistance in accordance with section 32(1) of the Employment and Assistance Regulation. The basis for the determination was that the appellant failed to comply with the ministry's direction to provide information as required under section 1 0 of the Employment and Assistance Act. PART D -Relevant Legislation Employment and Assistance Act ("EAA"), section 1 0 Employment and Assistance Regulation ("EAR"), section 32(1) EAA T003(10/06l01)
'.APPEAL# PART E -Summary of Facts The information before the ministry at the time of reconsideration included the following: • The appellant is a sole employable recipient of income assistance with no dependants. • A letter from the ministry to the appellant dated February 13, 2014 asking the appellant to provide information including: ► Rent receipts for the period November 2013 to February 2014, inclusive. ► Bank profile listing all asset and liability accounts, sole or joint, from all banks used by the appellant. ► Transaction statements for all bank accounts for the period September 1, 2013 to February 13, 2014. • Letters from the ministry to the appellant dated March 11 and March 24, 2014 asking the appellant to provide information including: ► Bank profile/customer account summary listing all asset and liability accounts, sole or joint, that the appellant had for each bank he used. ► Transaction statements for all bank accounts, sole or joint, for the period of January 1, 2012 to February 28, 2014. ► Documentation -vessel registration for the appellant's boat and the value of the boat. • Transaction statements for the appellant's bank account for the period September 6, 2013 to February 24, 2014. In his oral testimony on appeal, the appellant stated that he didn't understand the ministry's decision because he had provided all the information that the ministry had asked for. In response to questions from the ministry, the appellant responded that: • He had provided such registration information as he had for his boat, but acknowledged that he had provided no supporting information as to its value. He stated that he paid about $500 for the boat, and that it required work. • The bank transaction statements that he had provided did not cover the entire period requested by the ministry. In his oral testimony the ministry representative stated that the appellant had subsequently provided the requested bank profile/customer account summary so that documentation was no longer at issue. In response to a question from the panel as to what would constitute acceptable evidence of valuation for the boat, the ministry responded that a bill of sale or a written assessment from a boat dealer are potential routes for valuation. Admissibilitv of Additional Information The oral testimony of the appellant and the ministry representative provided additional supporting detail with respect to issues that were before the ministry at the time of reconsideration. The panel admitted this information into evidence as oral testimony in support, in accordance with section 22(4) of the EAA. EAAT 003( 10/06/01)
I APPEAL# PART F -Reasons for Panel Decision The issue under appeal is the reasonableness of the ministry's reconsideration decision of June 20, 2014, wherein the ministry determined that the appellant was no longer eligible for income assistance in accordance with section 32(1) of the EAR. The basis for the determination was that the appellant failed to comply with the ministry's direction to provide information as required under section 10 of the EAA. The relevant legislative provisions are as follows: EAA Information and verification 10 (1) For the purposes of (a) determining whether a person wanting to apply for income assistance or hardship assistance is eligible to apply for it, (b) determining or auditing eligibility for income assistance, hardship assistance or a supplement, (c) assessing employability and skills for the purposes of an employment plan, or (d) assessing compliance with the conditions of an employment plan, the minister may do one or more of the following: (e) direct a person referred to in paragraph (a), an applicant or a recipient to supply the minister with information within the time and in the manner specified by the minister; (f) seek verification of any information supplied to the minister by a person referred to in paragraph (a), an applicant or a recipient; (g) direct a person referred to in paragraph (a), an applicant or a recipient to supply verification of any information he or she supplied to the minister. (2) The minister may direct an applicant or a recipient to supply verification of information received by the minister if that Information relates to the eligibility of the family unit for income assistance, hardship assistance or a supplement. (3) Subsection (1) (e) to (g) applies with respect to a dependent youth for a purpose referred to in subsection (1) (c) or (d). (4) If an applicant or a recipient fails to comply with a direction under this section, the minister may declare the family unit ineligible for income assistance, hardship assistance or a supplement for the prescribed period. (5) If a dependent youth fails to comply with a direction under this section, the minister may reduce the amount of Income assistance or hardship assistance provided to or for the family unit by the prescribed amount for the prescribed period. EAAT 003(10/06/01)
EAR Consequen ces of failing to prov ide i nform ation or verification w 32 (1) For t he purpo ses of se c tion 10 (4)[information w hich t he mi nister may declare the family unit applicant o r rec i p i ent c omp l ies with the direction. * Th e app ellant's posi t ion is that he did not und e r stand thought th at he had provi d ed all the information that a rgu ed that it would be expen s ive for him to take the boat to a dealer T h e ministry's position is that the a ppellant h as not reques ted b y th e mi nistry, and that he has not prov v alue of his boat. Th e ministry a r gued that it c a nnot d assis tan ce until the a ppella nt pro vide s t h e r e que st e Panel Decis i o n Section 1 O of t h e EAA give s t h e ministry b road p o w an d ver ifica t i o n as part of dete r m ini ng o r v erifying el p r ovid ed bank tr ansac tio n s t a t ement s fo r t h e p eriod acknowled g e s tha t he h asn 't p r ov i d ed i nf orma t ion f also ack nowle dge s tha t he ha s n 't p r ov i d ed the re qu Despit e the a ppel lant's concerns reg ard i n g the co s ther e are variou s o p t i ons for o bt a ini ng a valuation tha Consi d ering t h e ev idence as a whole, the panel c on t hat t he a ppel lan t h ad faile d to p r o vi d e inf ormatio n 10 (4) of the EA A p r ovid es that i f a recipie nt fail s to the family unit ineligible for a pre scribed p e riod. The pe " ...u ntil the applic ant or recipient complies with the direction." For these reasons, the panel finds that the ministry's decision that the appella income assistance until he complies with the ministry's direction under section 1 O is a reasonable applicati o n of the legislation in the appellant's circumstan ministry's decision. EM T003(10/06/01) I APP E AL# hen d irected a n d v erificati on] of th e Act, the period for ineli g i ble f or assis ta n ce l a st s until the * * th e reasons for the minist ry's dec ision and the ministry h a d d ire c ted hi m to p rovide. H e to get an a ssess ment of value. provid ed bank stat ements for the full pe riod ided t h e reque s te d i nformation con f i r m ing th e e t e rmine the app ellan t 's eligibili t y for income d in f or m at i o n. e rs to requ ir e a re c ipient t o p r ov ide info rmation i g ibility. I n th e cu rre nt case, the ap pella nt initially requ ested by the min istr y, b ut he or the l onger peri od sub s e q ue ntl y r eq u ested . He e ste d info rma t i o n re ga rdi n g valuat ion of h is boat . t of gettin g an assessme nt of t he b o a t 's val u e, t t he app ell an t ha d no t yet exp l o red. cl udes that the min ist ry r eas o n ab l y de te r mine d as d ir e cte d under s e ction 1 O o f the EAA . Sect i o n c o m p l y with a di r ection, t he ministry may decl are ri od pr escribed in section 32(1) of the EAR i s nt is ineligible for ces . Accordin g l y , the panel confirms the
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.