PART C -Decision under Appeal The decision under appeal is the reconsideration decision of the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation (the ministry) dated 21 July 2014 that found that the appellant is ineligible for income assistance under section 1 O of the Employment and Assistance Act because she did not provide information as directed by the minister, specifically information regarding the status of her Insurance Corporation of British Columbia (ICBC) claim, and that under section 32 of the Employment and Assistance Regulation she will be ineligible for income assistance until she provides the required information PART D -Relevant Legislation Employment and Assistance Act (EAA), section 1 O Employment and Assistance Regulation (EAR), section 32 EMT 003(10/06101)
PART E-Summary of Facts With the consent of parties, the hearing was conducted in writing pursuant to section 22(3) (b) of the Employment and Assistance Act. The evidence before the ministry at reconsideration, as summarized in the reconsideration decision, consisted of the following: o On 30 April 20i 4 the appellant attended the local office. Upon review of her file, the worker found that the appellant was in a car accident in the first week of March and had not worked since, pending an ICBC claim for the accident. The appellant's June 20i 4 assistance was put on hold pending submission of ICBC documentation and an update of her status with ICBC. • On 03 June 20i4 the appellant updated the ministry on the status of her ICBC claim. She stated that her ex-spouse was not ready to settle as he was a passenger in the vehicle when she had the accident. She stated that she had no income for March 20i4. The appellant was not able to provide a claim number, and was instructed to present verification from ICBC confirming her statement and documentation that she has not received any funds. • On 04 June 20i4 the ministry made multiple attempts to contact the appellant regarding further eligibility issues, with no success. The phone numbers on file were not in service. • On 05 June 20i 4 the appellant attended the local office and was requested to submit the following information: 60 day work search, notice of income tax assessment, 90 day bank statement, new shelter information and ICBC information. The worker made a list of these documents for her to take; however she left the list behind. • On 14 June 2014 the appellant attended the local office for her June assistance. The worker noted issues on file regarding the appellant's living situation, income and compliance with her employment plan and stated that the appellant had not submitted all the documents and information requested by previous workers. • On 16 June the appellant amended her updated shelter information, stating that she submitted this once already and the ministry misplaced it. Her tenancy was effective Oi December 2013. • On 17 June the appellant requested a Request for Reconsideration package regarding the decision to deny June 20i4 assistance because of failure to provide information. • The appellant's Request for Reconsideration, dated 20 June 20i 4. The appellant writes: "I feel I have given the ministry all the information they requested. I am also willing to give the additional information they have requested [but] I need time to gather that information. I have received a 1 O day notice to vacate my home as a result of not receiving my assistance cheque this month." The ministry noted that on 1 0 July 20i4 the appellant was sent a letter requesting the following information with the deadline to submit the documents by 22 July 2014: rent receipts for the last two months, pay statements for all income, record of the employment from January 2013 to present, statements for all bank accounts for the period March 2014 to present, statements for all investments, RRSP's, pension funds and any other assets, income tax notices of assessment for 2012 and 2013 and the confirmation of earnings to be completed by her employer. In her Notice of Appeal, dated 08 August 20i4, the appellant wrote: "I feel I have provided the ministry with the documentation they have asked for." EAA T003(10/06/01)
T h e a p p e l l a n t p r o v i d e d n o s u b m i s s i o n f o r t h e w r i t t e n h e a r i n g . I n a n e m a i l d a t e d 2 8 A u g u s t 2 0 1 4 , t h e m i n i s t r y s t a t e d t h a t i t s s u b m i s s i o n i n t h i s m a t t e r w i l l b e t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n s u m m a r y p r o v i d e d i n t h e R e c o r d o f M i n i s t r y D e c i s i o n . E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )
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 i n t h i s a p p e a l i s w h e t h e r t h e m i n i s t r y r e a s a s s i s t a n c e . M o r e s p e c i f i c a l l y , t h e i s s u e i s w h e t h e r t a p p e l l a n t i s i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e u n d e r s i n f o r m a t i o n a s d i r e c t e d b y t h e m i n i s t e r , s p e c i f i c a l l y c l a i m , a n d t h a t u n d e r s e c t i o n 3 2 o f t h e E A R s h e w i l p r o v i d e s t h e r e q u i r e d i n f o r m a t i o n , i s r e a s o n a b l y s u p a p p l i c a t i o n o f t h e l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f T h e r e l e v a n t l e g i s l a t i o n i s f r o m t h e E A A : I n f o r m a t i o n a n d v e r i f i c a t i o n 1 0 ( 1 ) F o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f ( a ) d e t e r m i n i n g w h e t h e r a p e r s o a s s i s t a n c e i s e l i g i b l e t o a p p l y f o r ( b ) d e t e r m i n i n g o r a u d i t i n g e l i g i b s u p p l e m e n t , ( c ) a s s e s s i n g e m p l o y a b i l i t y a n d ( d ) a s s e s s i n g c o m p l i a n c e w i t h t h t h e m i n i s t e r m a y d o o n e o r m o r e o f t h e f o l l o w i n ( e ) d i r e c t a p e r s o n r e f e r r e d t o i n m i n i s t e r w i t h i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h i n t ( f ) s e e k v e r i f i c a t i o n o f a n y i n f o r m p a r a g r a p h ( a ) , a n a p p l i c a n t o r a ( g ) d i r e c t a p e r s o n r e f e r r e d t o i n v e r i f i c a t i o n o f a n y i n f o r m a t i o n h e ( 2 ) T h e m i n i s t e r m a y d i r e c t a n a p p l i c a n t o r a r e m i n i s t e r i i t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n r e l a t e s t o t h e e l i g i b i l i a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t . ( 3 ) S u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) ( e ) t o ( g ) a p p l i e s w i t h r e s p e c s u b s e c t i o n ( 1 ) ( c ) o r ( d ) . ( 4 ) I I a n a p p l i c a n t o r a r e c i p i e n t f a i l s t o c o m p l y w t h e f a m i l y u n i t i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , p e r i o d . A n d f r o m t h e E A R : D e f i n i t i o n s 1 ( 1 ) I n t h i s r e g u l a t i o n : " u n e a r n e d i n c o m e " m e a n s a n y i n c o m e t h a t i s n o v a l u e r e c e i v e d f r o m a n y o f t h e f o l l o w i n g : ( d ) i n s u r a n c e b e n e f i t s , e x c e p t i n s u r a n c e p a i d a s c C o n s e q u e n c e s o f f a i l i n g t o p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n o r v e r i f i c a t E AA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )o n a b l y f o u n d t h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t i s i n e l i g i b l e f o r h e m i n i s t r y ' s d e c i s i o n , w h i c h d e t e r m i n e d t h a t t h e e c t i o n 1 0 o f t h e E A A b e c a u s e s h e d i d n o t p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e s t a t u s o f h e r I C B C l b e i n e l i g i b l e f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e u n t i l s h e p o rt e d b y t h e e v i d e n c e o r i s a r e a s o n a b l e t h e a p p e l l a n t . n w a n t i n g t o a p p l y f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e o r h a r d s h i p i t , i l i t y f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e o r a s k i l l s f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f a n e m p l o y m e n t p l a n , o r e c o n d i t i o n s o f a n e m p l o y m e n t p l a n , g : p a r a g r a p h ( a ) , a n a p p l i c a n t o r a r e c i p i e n t t o s u p p l y t h e h e t i m e a n d i n t h e m a n n e r s p e c i f i e d b y t h e m i n i s t e r ; a t i o n s u p p l i e d t o t h e m i n i s t e r b y a p e r s o n r e f e r r e d t o i n r e c i p i e n t ; p a r a g r a p h ( a ) , a n a p p l i c a n t o r a r e c i p i e n t t o s u p p l y o r s h e s u p p l i e d t o t h e m i n i s t e r . c i p i e n t t o s u p p l y v e r i f i c a t i o n o f i n f o r m a t i o n r e c e i v e d b y t h e t y o f t h e f a m i l y u n i t f o r i n c o m e a s s i s t a n c e , h a r d s h i p t t o a d e p e n d e n t y o u t h f o r a p u r p o s e r e f e r r e d t o i n i t h a d i r e c t i o n u n d e r t h i s s e c t i o n , t h e m i n i s t e r m a y d e c l a r e h a r d s h i p a s s i s t a n c e o r a s u p p l e m e n t f o r t h e p r e s c r i b e d t e a r n e d i n c o m e , a n d i n c l u d e s , w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n , m o n e y o r o m p e n s a t i o n f o r a d e s t r o y e d a s s e t ; i o n w h e n d i r e c t e d
32 (1) For the pur poses of secti on 10 ( 4) [inform ati m i nister may declare th e fam ily un it ineligible for assistance las with the direction. In the reconsideration decisio n, the minis t ry notes t set of documentation as outli ned in the let ter date d 22 July 201 4. A s this deadline has not been reached by the tim minis tr y did not den y income ass istance for failure to out standing iss u e is the requested verification from ICBC regard ac cident in Ma rc h 2014. T h e position of t he minis t ry is that the appellant has been give to provide the requested information between 30 April 2014 and when she wa assi stance on 05 J une 2014. H owe v er, v e rifi c at io n co nfirm s h e has not rece iv e d any income fr o m her cl c o ncluded that t he i nformati on requeste d was reasonable to d etermi ne the a pp el lant's on g oi ng el i gibility for as sistan requested information, the mini s t r y d ete r m ine d that P ursuan t t o sectio n 32 o f the E AR, she is i neli g i ble i nfo rmati on . The appellant's positio n, a s e xp l a i ned in h er N oti ce mi nistry wit h the documenta tion i t has as ke d for . Pan e l d ec is i on The e vidence f rom t he min ist r y's fi l e s , un disput ed b ac ci dent in t h e f irst wee k of Mar c h 20 14 an d subse quent the a ppellant a t tende d the lo c al min is try o ffi ce and w documenta tion an d an update of h e r status with ICBC. Mean on hol d. On 0 3 Ju ne 201 4 t he app e l la nt adv is ed the settle as he was a passenger in the vehicle when she had the accident. The a to present verification from ICBC confirming her statement and documentation that she has not received any funds. While the appellant states that she feels she had provided the ministry with the documentation it asked for, th e minist ry states that verificati and documents to confirm that she ha s n ot received any income from her claim has not been submit ted. T he panel note s that t he appella nt did not p Reconsideration or in her Notice of Appeal that would demonstrate that such documentation had been subm itted t o th e ministr y . As an IC BC claim se ttlement might involve inc ome -that is, unearned income as defined in section 1 of the EAR -and thus affect her eligibility for income assistance, the panel finds that the ministry was reasonable in relying on its authority under section 10(1) of the EAA to audit her eligibility for income assistance by directing the appellant to supply information on the status of her claim. And since there is no record of the appellant providing documentation directed by the ministry, the panel finds the ministry was reasonable in findi eligible for income assistance under section 10(4) until the annellant complies with the EAAT 003(10/06/01) on a nd verifi cation] of the Ac t , th e period for whic h the ts u nt il the applicant or r ecipient complies h a t th e app e llant had been re quested to submit a 1 O July 2014, with the dead line for submis sion of e of th e reconsideratio n decision, the provide thi s do cumentatio n. However, the in g the ap pella nt's c l a i m fr om a car n ample time and mult i p l e opp ortun i t ies s denie d income f rom her IC BC claim status an d doc uments to ai m ha s not b een sub mit ted t o da te. The mi nistry compl et e i ts review and is req u ired to c e . As the app e l la nt ha s not p rov ided th e she is not eli g ib le for income ass i s t a n c e. fo r assis t a n c e un til sh e provid e s t he r equi r ed of A p pe al , is th a t she f eels she has pro v i ded th e y the appellan t , is that th e appe ll ant was in a car ly fil ed a claim wit h ICB C. On 30 April 201 4 as advi s ed of the n eed to s u bmit ICBC whi l e her Jun e 2014 ass i s tance was put mini s t r y t hat her ex-spouse was not ready to ppellant was instructed on f r om th e appel lan t' s ICBC c laim stat u s r o v i de a n y information in he r Request for from ICBC on the status of her cla im as ng the appellant not ministrv 's
direction and provides the required information, in accordance with section 32(1) of the EAR. Accordingly, the panel finds that the ministry's decision that the appellant is not eligible for income assistance until she provides the required information is reasonably supported by the evidence. The panel therefore confirms the ministry's decision. EAAT 003( 10/06/01)
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.