APPEAL I PART C-Decision under Appeal The decision under appeal is the Ministry's reconsideration decision dated June 24, 2014 which held that the appellant was ineligible for amounts of Child Care Subsidy provided under the Child Care Subsidy Act (CCSA) section 7, and the Child Care Subsidy Regulation (CCSR) section 7, from March 2013 to November 2013 because she lived in an unreported marriage-like relationship beginning in March 2013 when her status changed from single parent to couple, and the family net income then exceeded the child's income threshold as outlined in the CCSR section 10, resulting in an overpayment of $2,166.25 in child care subsidies that the appellant was not entitled to and is required to repay. PART D -Relevant Legislation Child Care Subsidy Act (CCSA) Child Care Subsidy Regulation (CCSR) Employment and Assistance Act (EAA) Part 3 -Appeals Employment and Assistance Regulation (EAR) Part 6 -Reconsiderations and Appeals EAAT 003( 10/06/01)
I APPEi' PART E -Summary of Facts With the consent of both parties, the hearing was conducted as a written hearing pursuant to section 22(3)(b) of the EAA. The following evidence was before the ministry at the time of reconsideration: • The appellant began receiving a child care subsidy for her daughter born October 3, 2008 from May 2009. • The child care subsidy was based on the appellant's status as a single parent and paid accordingly from May 2009 to November 2013. • On November 28, 2013 the appellant advised the ministry by telephone that her boyfriend moved in with her and her daughter in December 2012. • A copy of the ministry notes concurrent with the November 28, 2013 telephone conversation outlined that there now appeared to be 2 parents, and the appellant was reminded to report these changes. The appellant said that her boyfriend was not yet technically her common-law spouse, and that her family unit consisted of herself and her daughter. The ministry advised the client that her boyfriend would be considered a spouse for the purposes of child care subsidy eligibility. • At the request of the Verification and Audit Branch the appellant and her boyfriend provided verification of the boyfriend's self-employment income during the period they lived together, and it was determined that the combined family income was in excess of the child care subsidy thresholds from December 2012 -November 2013. • A Child Care Subsidy Overpayment Calculation form dated March 12, 2014 confirmed the amount of subsidy paid per month from December 2012 through November 2013, and established a final overpayment amount of $3,816.25. • The appellant's request for reconsideration of the original ministry decision was received by a Child Care Subsidy Service Centre on May 26, 2014. Included with the request were copies of utility bills in her boyfriend's name for the period December 14, 2012 through December 2013 associated with a separate out of province residence. • The appellant asked for a definition of a "marriage-like relationship" and the ministry provided the definitions under the CSR of 'dependent' and 'spouse' in an April 16, 2014 email. • The appellant wrote that when she and her boyfriend began living together, there was no financial interdependence and all rent and utilities were shared on a 50/50 basis. • The appellant wrote that at the end of March 2013 or the beginning of April 2013 she and her boyfriend started dating and spending more time together. She remained financially independent of her boyfriend however, and their social/family aspects were not "consistent with 'marriage-like'." • The appellant submitted as part of her reconsideration argument a 5 page document entitled "Marriage-Like Dependency Relationship: July 1, 2006". The appellant indicates this is a ministry document, and it appears to provide practice and procedural information for determinations under 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 decision that determined that the appellant was ineligible for amounts of Child Care Subsidy provided under the Child Care Subsidy Act (CCSA) section 7, and the Child Care Subsidy Regulation (CCSR) section 7, from March 2013 to November 2013 because she lived in an unreported marriage-like relationship beginning in March 2013 when her status changed from single parent to couple, and the family net income then exceeded the child's income threshold as outlined in the CCSR section 10, resulting in an overpayment of $2,166.25 in child care subsidies that the appellant was not entitled to and is required to repay. The CCSA outlines the following: 5 (1) For the purpose of determining or auditing eligibility for child care subsidies, the minister may do one or more of the following: (a) direct a person who has applied for a child care subsidy, or to or for whom a child care subsidy is paid, to supply the minister with information within the time and in the manner specified by the minister; (b) seek verification of any information supplied by a person referred to in paragraph (a); (c) direct a person referred to in paragraph (a) to supply verification of any information supplied by that person or another person; (d) collect from a person information about another person if (i) the information relates to the application for or payment of a child care subsidy, and (ii) the minister has not solicited the information from the person who provides it. (2) A person to or for whom a child care subsidy is paid must notify the minister, within the time and in the manner specified by regulation, of any change in circumstances affecting their eligibility under this Act. (3) If a person fails to comply with a direction under subsection (1) (a) or (c) or with subsection (2), the minister may (a) declare the person ineligible for a child care subsidy until the person complies, or (b) reduce the person's child care subsidy. (4) For the purpose of auditing child care subsidies, the minister may direct child care providers to supply the minister with information about any child care they provide that is subsidized under this Act. 6 (1) Subject to section 6.1, a person may request the minister to reconsider a decision made under this Act about any of the following: (a) a decision that results in a refusal to pay a child care subsidy to or for the person; (b) a decision that results in a discontinuance or reduction of the person's child care subsidy. (2) A request under subsection (1) must be made, and the decision reconsidered, within the time limits and in accordance with any rules specified in the regulations. (3) Subject to section 6.1, a person who is dissatisfied with the outcome of a request for a reconsideration under subsection (1) may appeal the decision that is the outcome of the request to the Employment and Assistance Appeal Tribunal appointed under section 19 of the Employment and Assistance Act. (4) A right of appeal given under subsection (3) is subiect to the time limits and other requirements set EMT 003( 10/06/01)
I APPEA out in the Employment and Assistance Act and the regulations under that Act. 7 (1) If a child care subsidy is paid to or for a person who is not entitled to it, that person is liable to repay to the government the amount to which the person was not entitled. (2) Subject to the regulations, the minister may enter into an agreement, or may accept any right assigned, for the repayment of a child care subsidy. (3) A repayment agreement may be entered into before or after a child care subsidy is paid. (4) An amount that a person is liable to repay under subsection (1) or under an agreement entered into under subsection (2) is a debt due to the government and may (a) be recovered by it in a court of competent jurisdiction, or (b) be deducted by it from any subsequent child care subsidy or from an amount payable to that person by the government under a prescribed enactment. (5) The minister's decision about the amount a person is liable to repay under subsection (1) or under an agreement entered into under subsection (2) is not open to appeal under section 6 (3). The CCSR definition section includes the following: • "child" means an unmarried person under 19 years of age; • "Child Care Subsidy Service Centre" means the government office responsible for administering payment of child care subsidies under the Act; • "child's threshold" means the threshold income level calculated for a child under section 1 O (1) ; • "family" means a parent and the parent's dependents; • "family's monthly net income" means the monthly net income calculated for a family under section 9; • spouse", in relation to a parent, means anyone who (a) is married to the parent, or (b) is living with the parent in a marriage-like relationship; The CCSR also includes the following: 4 (1) To be eligible for a child care subsidy, a parent must (a) complete an application in the form required by the minister, (b) supply the minister with the social insurance number of the parent and each adult dependant, and (c) supply the minister with proof of the identity of each member of the family and proof of eligibility for a child care subsidy. (2) Only one parent in the family may apply for a child care subsidy. (3) Repealed. [B.C. Reg. 187/2007, s. (b).] (4) A parent ceases to be eligible for a child care subsidy on the date that is 12 months after the date of application under subsection (1) or this subsection, as applicable, unless, before that date, the parent completes an application referred to in subsection (1) and otherwise complies with that subsection. 7 (1) An applicant is not eligible for a child care subsidy for a child receiving a type of child care if (a) the family's monthly net income exceeds the child's threshold, and (b) the result of the calculation under section 8 (2) for the child is not more than zero. 14 The notification re EMT 003( 10/06/01)
(a) as soon as po s sible after any chang e in circum st (b) to an employee in the Child Care Subsidy Se rvice Centre. 1 7 ( 1 ) A person who wishes the mi nister to reconsider a decision made under the Act must d the Child Care Sub sidy S ervice C entre a request for reconsideration th (a) i s i n the f o rm specified by the minister, and (b) i s d elivered w i thin 20 business days aft er the perso (2) A request for reconsideration may be deli vered und trans mission to the Chi l d Care Subsid y Service Centre. (3) A request f or reconsideration tha t is mailed in accordance with subsection (2 been deliv er ed 3 business days after the ma iling d ate. (4) If a request for reconsideration is no t deliv er ed in the time req (a) the pe rson is deemed to have accepted t h e decision (b) the de ci sion i s not open to revie w in a court or subject to appeal to a ( 5) Within 1 0 b usin ess d ays aft e r rec eiv ing a re quest f min ister mu st ( a ) recon side r t he dec ision, and (b ) provide t he person who delive red the r eques t with a ( 6 ) I f a req uest f o r recons id e ratio n is del iver ed under disco ntin uatio n or re du ct i on of a ch il d ca re subs idy, (a) recons ider s t he decision, and (b) p r o vides t he p erson w ho del ivered the re quest wi ( 7) If a r e que st for re co nsid e ra tio n i s d eliver ed u nde re fu s a l of a chi ld car e su bsi dy, tha t d ec i sio n s t a nd s ( a) r econsi ders the dec ision, and (b ) provid es t he person w ho delive red the re quest wit The EAAT prov id e s: 19 (1) Th e Emplo ym e nt and A ss i stan ce Appea l de cisions that are app ealabl e under ( a ) s e c tio n 17 (3) [re consideration an d appeal r i ghts] (b) section 16 (3) [reconsideration and appeal rights] of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act, and (c) section 6 (3) [reconsideration and appeal rights] of the Child Care Subsidy Act. Ministry's p osi t i o n Th e ministry argued that the CCSR section 7 sets out that an applic subsidy if the fam ily's monthly net inco m e exceeds the child's income thre sectio n 8. The app e l lan t told the Ch ild Care Service Centre on November 28, her boyfriend had been re sid ing wit h her since December 2012, and a subsequent audi that this was an unreported marriage-like relationship. this was a roommate arrangement until March roommates to a couple; at this point, the cohabitants were considered in a marriage-like relationship. The Ministry determined that Section 7(1) of the CCSA applies, and the appellant is liable to repay $2,166.25 of child care subsidies received f rom March 2013 to EM T003(10/06/01) APPEAL I a nces affecting the eligibility of the parent, and e li ver to at n is notified of that decisi on. e r subs ecti on ( 1) by mail or f a csimile ) is d e emed to hav e u ired by subsect i on (1), , and t r ibunal or other body . o r re con sid er atio n un der s u bsectio n (1 ), t he w ritt en d e ci s i on o n t he r equ est. t his s e c tio n a bout a d ec i sio n th at results in a tha t d e cisi on is set asid e un til t he minist er t h a writ ten decision o n the requ est. r t his s e c ti on abou t a d ecisi on th at results i n a u nti l the minis ter h a w r itten decis i on o n the r eque s t. Tr i bunal i s es t ab l is hed to dete rmine a p pea l s of of this Act , ant is not eligible for a child care s h o ld as calculated under 2 0 1 3 by telep h o n e t hat t established At reconsideration the ministry accepted that 2013 when the relationship transitioned from November 2013 tha t she was not
e n t i t l e d t o . A p p e l l a n t ' s p o s i t i o n T h e a p p e l l a n t ' s n o t i c e o f a p p e a l w a s r e c e i v e d b y t m i n i s t r y f a i l e d t o r e s p o n d t o t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n r s e c t i o n 1 7 o f t h e C C S R n a m e l y , a c o m p l e t e d r e c o t h e 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 f u r t h e r a r g u e d t h a t t h e e v i d e n c e s h e d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a m a r r i a g e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p e x p r o v i d e s u p p o r t i n g e v i d e n c e f o r t h e i r c o n c l u s i o n t h a 2 0 1 3 . S h e a r g u e d t h a t i f i t i s f o u n d t h a t t h e t r a n s i t i o a p p r o p r i a t e m e a s u r e , t h i s s h o u l d b e c o n s i d e r e d a s A f i n a l s u b m i s s i o n w a s r e c e i v e d f r o m t h e a p p e l l a n t o a r g u m e n t s , a n d a d d e d t h a t i t w a s n ' t u n t i l J u n e 2 0 1 3 n o t d a t e o t h e r p e o p l e a n d t h a t t h i s w o u l d b e t h e r e a c o u p l e . T h e a p p e l l a n t m a i n t a i n s t h a t t h r o u g h o u t t h e r e m a i n e d n o f i n a n c i a l i n t e r d e p e n d e n c e a n d t h e a p p d i d n o t e x i s t . T h e a p p e l l a n t a l s o a r g u e d t h a t i t w a s n h e r e l i g i b i l i t y s t a t u s ( C C S R s e c t i o n 1 4 ) w h e n t h e d e p u b l i c a l l y a v a i l a b l e , n o r a v a i l a b l e u p o n r e q u e s t , a n d m i n i s t r i e s . P a n e l D e c i s i o n T h e a p p e l l a n t h a s a r g u e d t h a t b e c a u s e t h e r e c o n s b u s i n e s s d a y s r e q u i r e d w i t h i n s e c t i o n 1 7 o f t h e C n o t e s h o w e v e r t h a t t h e r e a r e n o l e g i s l a t e d c o n s e q u e T h e a p p e l l a n t w r i t e s t h a t h e r a r g u m e n t a n d s u b m d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r s h e w a s p a r t o f a m a r r i a g r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n . T h e r e i s n o e v i d e n c e i d e t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n m o d i f i e d t h e o r i g i n a l d e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n s p e c i f i c a l l y i n d i c a t e s t h a t c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e m a k i n g o f t h e d e c i s i o n , t h e p a n e l f r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n p r o c e s s . T h e a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t t h e E m p l o y m e n t a n d A d e f i n i t i o n o f a m a r r i a g e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p , a n d t h e 3 b e e n a p p l i e d t o h e r c i r c u m s t a n c e s . T h e p a n e l f r e l a t i o n s h i p i s a p p l i c a b l e f o r d e c i s i o n s m a d e u n d e r t i s n o l e g i s l a t i v e r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t i t b e a p p l i e d t o d e c i T h e a p p e l l a n t a r g u e s t h a t a l t h o u g h s h e s t a r t e d d a 2 0 1 3 , t h e v d i d n o t b e c o m e a c o u o l e u n t i l J u n e 2 0 1 3 E A A T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )A P P E A i I h e m i n i s t r y o n J u l y 1 8 , 2 0 1 4 . S h e a r g u e d t h a t t h e e q u e s t w i t h i n t h e l e g i s l a t e d t i m e f r a m e s e t o u t i n n s i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n w i t h i n 1 0 d a y s a f t e r r e c e i v i n g p r o v i d e d , r e g a r d i n g f a c t o r s t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i n i s t s , w a s n o t a d d r e s s e d , a n d t h e m i n i s t r y f a i l e d t o t s h e w a s i n a m a r r i a g e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p i n M a r c h n d a t e f r o m t h a t o f r o o m m a t e s t o a c o u p l e i s a n J u n e 2 0 1 3 . n J u l y 2 7 , 2 0 1 4 . S h e r e i t e r a t e d h e r p r e v i o u s t h a t s h e a n d h e r b o y f r i e n d d e c i d e d t h e y w o u l d s o n a b l e d a t e t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t t h e y b e c a m e a e n t i r e t y o f t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p h o w e v e r , t h e r e e l l a n t m a i n t a i n s t h a t a m a r r i a g e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p o t r e a s o n a b l e t o e x p e c t h e r t o r e p o rt a c h a n g e i n f i n i t i o n o f a m a r r i a g e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p i s n o t i s a p p l i e d i n a m a n n e r i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h o t h e r i d e r a t i o n d e c i s i o n w a s n o t p r o v i d e d w i t h i n t h e 1 0 C S R , s h e h a s b e e n t r e a t e d u n f a i r l y . T h e p a n e l n c e s a r i s i n g f r o m t h i s d e l a y . i s s i o n s c o n c e r n i n g f a c t o r s t o b e c o n s i d e r e d i n e l i k e r e l a t i o n s h i p w e r e n o t a d d r e s s e d i n t h e n t i f i e d o r p r e s e n t e d t o s u p p o r t t h i s h o w e v e r . A s c i s i o n f o l l o w i n g i n p u t f r o m t h e a p p e l l a n t , a n d t h e t h e d o c u m e n t s s u b m i t t e d b y t h e a p p e l l a n t w e r e i n d s t h a t e v i d e n c e w a s n o t o v e r l o o k e d d u r i n g t h e s s i s t a n c e R e g u l a t i o n ( E A R ) p r o v i d e s a d e t a i l e d p a r t t e s t u s e d u n d e r t h i s l e g i s l a t i o n s h o u l d h a v e i n d s t h a t t h e E A R d e f i n i t i o n o f a m a r r i a g e l i k e 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 ) ; t h e r e s i o n s m a d e u n d e r t h e C C S R . t i n g h e r b o y f r i e n d ( t h e n r o o m m a t e ) i n M a r c h , w h e n t h e y b o t h d e c i d e d n o t t o d a t e o t h e r p e o p l e .
No ne w evidence has been provide d to support why the June date should mark th e transition of the relationship of the app to a couple in a m arr ia ge-like relationship. The evidence a period of cohabitation and a change in the nature of the rel t he e nd o f March 20 13; the panel finds th e ministry's decision evidence . Conclusion The CCSR definition of 'spo use' includes anyon e who is living with the par r e la ti o ns hip, and the de fin i tion of 'dependant' includes the spou CCSR requires that to b e eligible for a child care subsidy, the par in surance number of any adult dependant to th e minis care su bsidy. Section 7 o f th e CCS R re ferenc e s th e i ncome, and the basis for i neligibili t y if the family's mo f o r e nt i t lement p urpose s . T he p anel fi n ds that the ministry's decisi on that de termined amou nts of Chil d Care Subsidy r ece iv e d from Mar c h CCSR was reaso nab le be cause she lived i n an un rep Marc h 20 13 an d the subsidy wa s calcu lated o n t he ba ap plication o f C CSR sectio n 4 an d 7 es t abl i shed the i ncome thre shold a s o ut l ined i n t he C CSR secti o n 10, re su bsid i e s th at the appellant was n ot e nti tle d t o an d The p an e l dete rmi ned t h e M ini stry's deci sion was a enac t m ent in t h e circ ums tance s o f the a ppellant. T he refore the p anel c onfir m s t he ministry's de c is io n. EAA T003(1 0/06/01) I APPEA 2013 dat e in stead of the March 20 13 ellant and her boyfriend from roommate s vailable at r e considerat ion was a le ngthy a tionship re p orted b y the a ppe l l a n t a round w as re asonably s upported by this e nt in a marriage-like se of the p arent. Sect i on 4 o f the e nt must prov i de the social t ry , a n d e st a b li sh proof of eli gibility for a c h ild inc o me test to be app li ed to the family' s net n th l y net i ncome exceeds the child's threshold that the ap pellant was in e l ig ib le fo r 20 13 t o Nove m ber 20 13 u nder S ectio n 7 of o rted m arr i age-like rela tionship begi n n ing in si s of a singl e pare nt a nd not as a cou ple. T he fa mily net i n co me then e xceeded the ch ild' s sul ting in an overpay ment in child car e p urs uant to S e ction 7 CCSA is liab le to re p ay. reasona ble applicati on of the ap plic a b le
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.