PART C – Decision under Appeal
Under appeal is the Ministry of Social Development and Social Innovation's (“the ministry”) January 9,
2015 reconsideration decision finding the appellant is not eligible for a crisis supplement for clothing,
because the criteria in Employment and Assistance Regulation section 59 (1) (a), an unexpected
expense or need for which there are no resources, and (b), imminent danger to physical health, were
not met.
PART D – Relevant Legislation
EAR Employment and Assistance Regulation, section 59(1) (a) and (b)
PART E – Summary of Facts
The evidence before the ministry at reconsideration was
•
December 16, 2014 service request crisis supplement form from the appellant requesting a
clothing voucher, stating “Looking for clothing for interview purposes & survival such as jean,
socks, undergarment”, that he had no family in BC, and with a note saying as of November
2014 all of his stored possessions including his clothes were auctioned off due to lack of funds
to pay storage.
•
A copy of an email exchange between the appellant and a storage facility about non-payment
and notice the appellant's belongings would be auctioned off if he did not make arrangements
with them, on which there is a handwritten note from the appellant saying this is a catastrophe,
he lost all his personal possessions including his clothing, that he lives in a moldy old RV and
what little he has had to be discarded.
•
January 5, 2015 request for reconsideration form with sections 1 and 2 completed by the
ministry, but without section 3 completed by the appellant, summarizing contact with the
appellant, and noting the appellant said his clothing was worn out and has holes, that he
requested warm clothing – jeans and a sweater.
•
January 3, 2015 request for reconsideration form with section 3 completed by the appellant.
He said all his personal possessions and clothing were seized and thrown away or auctioned
off, and thanked the ministry for assisting while he makes a transition from his former career to
one he hopes to successfully perform until retirement.
Upon appeal the appellant submitted a February 1, 2015 Notice of Appeal form in which he stated he
bought clothes in a thrift shop and other donated used clothing. He now has bugs in his living
quarters, has been trying to rid his living quarters of bugs, had to throw out clothing infested with
eggs, has done cleaning but bugs still exist.
The panel admits the additional information in the Notice of Appeal as per section 22(4) of the
Employment and Assistance Act, as being consistent with and in support of the information and
records at reconsideration, being a description of his efforts to find other resources for the clothes he
needs, but still unable to find any useful clothes.
The ministry's submission is the reconsideration summary provided in the Record of Ministry.
PART F – Reasons for Panel Decision
The issue is the reasonableness of the ministry's reconsideration decision finding the appellant is not
eligible for a crisis supplement for clothing, because the criteria in Employment and Assistance
Regulation section 59 (1) (a), an unexpected expense or need for which there are no resources, and
(b), imminent danger to physical health, were not met.
Relevant Legislation
EMPLOYMENT AND ASSISTANCE REGULATION (excerpt)
Crisis supplement
59. (1) The minister may provide a crisis supplement to or for a family unit that is eligible for income
assistance or hardship assistance if
(a) the family unit or a person in the family unit requires the supplement to meet an unexpected expense or obtain
an item unexpectedly needed and is unable to meet the expense or obtain the item because there are no resources
available to the family unit, and
(b) the minister considers that failure to meet the expense or obtain the item will result in
(i)
imminent danger to the physical health of any person in the family unit, or
(ii) removal of a child under the Child, Family and Community Service Act.
Appellant's Position
The appellant argues he is in need of a crisis supplement to purchase clothes to replace the worn out
clothes he has and his clothes in storage that were disposed of when he was unable to pay the
storage fees. He says he needs some warm garments and clothes suitable for job interviews.
Ministry's Position
The ministry argues the appellant did not meet the legislated criteria for a crisis supplement because
his need for replacement clothing was not an unexpected need, that normal wear and tear is not
unexpected. The ministry says it is not satisfied failure to receive a crisis supplement for clothing will
result in imminent danger to the appellant's physical health, and there is no indication that the
appellant does not have the resources to obtain the clothing.
Panel's Decision.
The applicable legislation provides for a crisis supplement in a situation where there is an unexpected
need, no resources available, and failure to obtain the item will result in imminent danger to physical
health. The panel finds the ministry's position that the appellant's need to replace worn out clothing
was not unexpected to be reasonable. The panel finds the fact that the appellant was unable to pay
the storage fees, and lost his stored possessions, to be an indication he did not have the
resources to obtain clothing, and therefore concludes the ministry was not reasonable in its
determination the appellant had resources available to obtain clothing. However, as no evidence was
presented that the appellant's physical health was at risk, the panel finds the ministry to be
reasonable in concluding that failure to receive a crisis supplement would not result in imminent
danger to the appellant's physical health.
The panel finds the reconsideration decision to be a reasonable application of the applicable
enactment in the circumstances of the appellant and confirms the decision.
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.