P A R T C-Decision und e r Ap pe al T he a ppel l a nt app eal s t h e reco nsid e rat i on d e cisio n Innova t ion ( m inistry) dated Oc tobe r 24, 2014, in wh supple m ent for a b u s p ass on the basis t h at t h e a ppell o ut in se c tion 5 1 (1) o f t h e Employment an d A s sistance fo ( EAPWDR) as the appellant is not "eli gible for disabili PART D -R elev a n t L egislation Employment and As sistance for Perso ns w ith Disabi liti es Em plo ym en t and Assista nc e fo r Perso n s w ith Disabi l it ies EAAT 003(10/06/01) I APPE AL# of the Minis try of Socia l Develop ment a nd Social ich the m ini s tr y d en ied his req uest for a a nt di d no t meet the e ligi b il ity re quir ements set r Perso n s wi th Disa bili ti es Regu la ti on ty assistance " a s requi red by sect ion 5 1 ( 1). Ac t (EAPWD A ) , sections 1 (1) & 5 R egu la tion ( EAPWDR) se ctio n 51 (1 ).
P A R T E S u m m a ry o f F a c t s T h e p a n e l w a i t e d 1 5 m i n u t e s t o b e g i n t h e h e a r i n g , b p a n e l r e c e i v e d c o n f i r m a t i o n f r o m t h e T r i b u n a l t h a t t a n d l o c a t i o n o f t h e h e a r i n g . A c c o r d i n g l y , u n d e r s . 8 R e g u l a t i o n , t h e p a n e l h e a r d t h e a p p e a l i n t h e a p p e l T h e a p p e l l a n t h a s b e e n d e s i g n a t e d a p e r s o n w i t h d r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n c l u d e d t h e f o l l o w i n g d o c u m e n t s : • 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 a p p e l l a n t ' s o n e p a g e h a n d w r i t t e n s u b m i s s i o n • A l e t t e r f r o m t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s p h y s i c i a n d a t e d m u l t i p l e m e d i c a l c o n c e r n s , i n c l u d i n g s e i z u r e d [ c o m o r b i d i t i e s ] , t h e a b o v e p e r s o n [ t h e a p p e l l • A l e t t e r d a t e d N o v e m b e r 7 , 2 0 1 3 t o t h e a p p e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f m o t o r v e h i c l e s c o n f i r m i n g t c a n c e l l e d d u e t o h i s m e d i c a l c o n d i t i o n s ; • A n o t i c e o f c a n c e l l a t i o n f r o m t h e o f f i c e o f t h e N o v e m b e r 8 , 2 0 1 3 r e g a r d i n g t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s l • A c o p y o f a m e d i c a l c o n s e n t f o r m d a t e d J u n e I n t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s s u b m i s s i o n w i t h h i s r e q u e s t f o r r e b u s p a s s s u p p l e m e n t u n d e r s e c t i o n 5 1 ( 1 ) ( b ) ( i ) " . I n 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 w r o t e t h a p a s s o n a y e a r l y b a s i s a n d t h a t h e " m e e t s a l l t h e d e a p p e l l a n t w r o t e t h a t h e i s a " v e r y s i c k i n d i v i d u a l w h o d o c t o r s a p p o i n t m e n t s a n d a d m i s s i o n s t o d i f f e r e n t h c a n c e l l e d b y t h e o ffi c e o f t h e s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f m o t c o n s i d e r h i s c a s e " o n c o m p a s s i o n a t e a n d h u m a n i t a A t t h e h e a r i n g , t h e m i n i s t r y c o n f i r m e d t h a t t h e a p p e h e h a s a m e d i c a l s e rv i c e s o n l y f i l e w i t h t h e m i n i s t r y N o v e m b e r 2 0 1 3 . T h e m i n i s t r y c o n f i r m e d t h a t s i n c e d i s a b i l i t y b e n e f i t s t o t a l i n g $ 8 3 7 . 9 6 p e r m o n t h , w h i c h a s s i s t a n c e r a t e f o r h i s f a m i l y u n i t o f $ 8 1 4 . 4 2 p e r m o EAA T 0 0 3 ( 1 0 / 0 6 / 0 1 )I A P P E !\ � # u t t h e a p p e l l a n t d i d n o t a t t e n d t h e h e a r i n g . T h e h e a p p e l l a n t h a d b e e n n o t i f i e d o f t h e d a t e , t i m e 6 ( b ) o f t 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 l a n t ' s a b s e n c e . i s a b i l i t i e s . T h e i n f o r m a t i o n b e f o r e t h e m i n i s t r y a t d a t e d O c t o b e r 1 4 , 2 0 1 4 , t o g e t h e r w i t h t h e d a t e d O c t o b e r 1 4 , 2 0 1 4 ( d i s c u s s e d b e l o w ) ; O c t o b e r 7 , 2 0 1 4 w h i c h s t a t e s t h a t " d u e t o i s o r d e r , [ P a r k i n s o n ' s ] d i s e a s e a n d c a r d i o v a s c u l a r a n t ] i s e l i g i b l e f o r a b u s p a s s ; l l a n t f r o m a c a s e m a n a g e r a t t h e o f f i c e o f t h e h a t t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s d r i v e r ' s l i c e n c e h a d b e e n s u p e r i n t e n d e n t o f m o t o r v e h i c l e s d a t e d i c e n c e ; a n d 2 , 2 0 1 4 a n d s i g n e d b y t h e a p p e l l a n t . c o n s i d e r a t i o n h e w r o t e t h a t h e " a l s o q u a l i f i e s f o r a t h e h a n d w r i t t e n s u b m i s s i o n a t t a c h e d t o t h e t d u r i n g t h e p a s t 4 y e a r s , h e w a s i s s u e d a b u s a d l i n e s i n i n c o m e e l i g i b i l i t y r e q u i r e m e n t s . " T h e d o e s n o t h a v e t h e m e a n s t o t r a v e l t o n u m e r o u s o s p i t a l s " a n d t h a t h i s d r i v e r ' s l i c e n c e h a d b e e n o r v e h i c l e s . T h e a p p e l l a n t a s k e d t h a t t h e m i n i s t r y r i a n g r o u n d s . " l l a n t i s d e s i g n a t e d a p e r s o n w i t h d i s a b i l i t i e s , b u t a n d l a s t r e c e i v e d d i s a b i l i t y a s s i s t a n c e i n O c t o b e r 2 0 1 3 , t h e a p p e l l a n t r e c e i v e s C P P e x c e e d s t h e a p p e l l a n t ' s m a x i m u m d i s a b i l i t y n t h .
I APPEAL# PART F -Reasons for Panel Decision The issue on this appeal is whether the ministry's decision to deny the appellant's request for a supplement for a bus pass on the basis that he did not meet the criteria set out in section 51 (1) of the EAPWDR is reasonable. The criteria to be applied by the ministry on a request for a supplement for a bus pass for a person with disabilities are set out in section 51 of the EAPWDR as follows: ( 1) The minister may provide a supplement to or for a family unit that is eligible for disability assistance and contributes $45 to the cost to provide an annual pass for the personal use of (a) A person with disabilities in the family unit, or (b) The spouse of that person if that spouse (i) Is 60 or more years of age, (ii) Receives the federal spouse's allowance or federal guaranteed income supplement, or (iii) Is 65 years of age or more and meets all of the eligibility requirements for the federal guaranteed income supplement except the 10 year residency requirement (2) In this section, "annual pass" means an annual pass to use a public passenger transportation system in a transit service area established under section 25 of the British Columbia Transit Act. In his notice of appeal, the appellant wrote that the ministry has not fully considered his "financial, illness and ability to drive." The appellant's position is that he meets the eligibility criteria to receive a supplement for a bus pass because he previously received a bus pass supplement, he meets the income requirements, and he is no longer able to drive because his driver's licence has been cancelled due to medical reasons. He asks for the bus pass supplement on compassionate and humanitarian grounds so that he can get to his medical appointments. The ministry says that the appellant does not meet the legislative requirements under subs. 51 (1) for a supplement for a bus pass as he is not "eligible for disability assistance" due to excess income because the amount the appellant receives each month in CPP disability benefits exceeds the amount of monthly disability assistance for which he is eligible, he is not "eligible for disability assistance" as required by subs. 51(1). The ministry also says that the appellant does not qualify for a supplement for a bus pass under subs. 51(1)(b)(i) as that section only applies to the spouse of a person eligible for disability assistance. An applicant for a supplement for a bus pass under s. 51 of the EAPWDR must meet the criteria set out in subs. 51(1)(a) or (b). The first requirement of subs. 51(1) is that the applicant be eligible for disability assistance. The appellant does not dispute that he receives CPP disability benefits in the amount of $837.96 per month, which exceeds the maximum disability assistance rate for his family unit of $814.42 per month, and that he has not received disability assistance since November 2013. The panel notes the appellant applies for the supplement for himself, not for his spouse, and thus subs. 51(1)(b) does not apply to him. The panel finds that the ministry's determination that the appellant did not meet the requirement of subs. 51(1) of the EAPWDR as he is not eligible for disability assistance because he receives CPP disability benefits in excess of the monthly disability assistance for which he is eligible was a reasonable application of the legislation to the appellant's circumstances and reasonable based on the evidence. The panel therefore confirms the ministry's reconsideration 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.