PART C – Decision under Appeal
The decision under appeal is the Ministry for Social Development and Social Innovation’s (the
Ministry’s) decision, dated September 11, 2015, which held that the Ministry was unable to reconsider
the decision that the Appellant was ineligible for a medical transportation supplement because the
Request for Reconsideration was not delivered within 20 business days of the decision as required
under section 16 of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act and under
section 71 of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation.
PART D – Relevant Legislation
Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act (EAPWDA) section 16
Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation (EAPWDR) section 71
PART E – Summary of Facts
The Appellant’s wife joined the hearing as the Appellant’s advocate. Because a signed release of
information form was not in the appeal package, the Appellant gave oral consent at the hearing to
allow his wife to represent him at the hearing.
The evidence that was before the Ministry at reconsideration included the following:
A request for reconsideration form listing the following “relevant dates”:
o
Date decision effective: July 22, 2015
o
Date requestor informed of the decision: July 22, 2015
o
Date requestor must submit form by: August 20, 2015
o
Date signed by Ministry worker: July 22, 2015
Section 3 of the request for reconsideration contains a letter from the Appellant’s wife explaining
the need for the supplement that was requested. It is signed and dated September 4, 2015.
A letter from the Ministry to the Appellant, dated July 22, 2015, stating that the Appellant was
ineligible for the supplement, and that if the Appellant was dissatisfied with the decision he had 20
business days to submit a completed Request for Reconsideration form.
The Appellant stated that he did not realize that there was a deadline to file his request for
reconsideration form, and did not dispute that the form was submitted after the 20 business day
deadline.
The panel finds that the additional oral evidence was admissible under section 22(4) of the
Employment and Assistance Act as it was in support of the information available at reconsideration
and it corroborates the dates that the Ministry listed in their request for reconsideration.
The panel finds that the decision to deny a supplement to the Appellant was made on July 22, 2015
and that the appellant was notified the same day. The Appellant signed and submitted the request for
reconsideration on September 4, 2015, 29 business days after he was notified of the decision.
PART F – Reasons for Panel Decision
The issue is whether the Ministry’s decision, dated September 11, 2015, which held that the Ministry
was unable to reconsider the decision that the Appellant was ineligible for a medical transportation
supplement because the Request for Reconsideration was not delivered within 20 business days of
the decision required under section 16 of the EAPWDA and under section 71 of the EAPWDR was
reasonably supported by the evidence or was a reasonable application of the legislation in the
circumstances of the Appellant.
The legislation provides the following:
Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Act: Reconsideration and appeal rights
16 (1) Subject to section 17, a person may request the minister to reconsider any of the following decisions made under
this Act:
(a) a decision that results in a refusal to provide disability assistance, hardship assistance or a supplement to or
for someone in the person's family unit;
(b) a decision that results in a discontinuance of disability assistance or a supplement provided to or for someone
in the person's family unit;
(c) a decision that results in a reduction of disability assistance or a supplement provided to or for someone in the
person's family unit;
(d) a decision in respect of the amount of a supplement provided to or for someone in the person's family unit if
that amount is less than the lesser of
(i) the maximum amount of the supplement under the regulations, and
(ii) the cost of the least expensive and appropriate manner of providing the supplement;
(e) a decision respecting the conditions of an employment plan under section 9 [employment plan].
(2) A request under subsection (1) must be made, and the decision reconsidered, within the time limits and in accordance
with any rules specified by regulation.
(3) Subject to a regulation under subsection (5) and to sections 9 (7) [employment plan], 17 and 18 (2) [overpayments], a
person who is dissatisfied with the outcome of a request for a reconsideration under subsection (1) (a) to (d) may appeal
the decision that is the outcome of the request to the tribunal.
(4) A right of appeal given under subsection (3) is subject to the time limits and other requirements set out in the
Employment and Assistance Act and the regulations under that Act.
(5) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may designate by regulation
(a) categories of supplements that are not appealable to the tribunal, and
(b) circumstances in which a decision to refuse to provide disability assistance, hardship assistance or a
supplement is not appealable to the tribunal.
Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation: How a request to reconsider a decision is
made
71 (1) A person who wishes the minister to reconsider a decision referred to in section 16 (1) [reconsideration and appeal
rights] of the Act must deliver a request for reconsideration in the form specified by the minister to the ministry office
where the person is applying for or receiving assistance.
(2) A request under subsection (1) must be delivered within 20 business days after the date the person is notified of the
decision referred to in section 16 (1) of the Act and may be delivered by
(a) leaving with an employee in the ministry office, or
(b) being received through the mail at that office.
The Ministry argued that the deadline, August 20, 2015, was communicated in writing to the
Appellant. The Ministry noted that the worker mailed the request for reconsideration on the same day
that the Appellant was advised of the decision by telephone and that the deadline was noted on the
request for reconsideration, on the letter that was sent to the Appellant on July 22, 2015, and on the
pamphlet explaining the reconsideration process. The Ministry also notes that even if 5 business are
added to the deadline in order to account for mailing, the Request for Reconsideration was still
submitted after this addition.
The Appellant did not dispute that the request for reconsideration was submitted after the 20 business
day deadline. He argued that he did not realize that there was a limited window of time in which he
could request a reconsideration and thought that a request for reconsideration was needed in order to
process future requests for assistance from the Ministry.
The panel finds that the Ministry’s reconsideration decision was reasonably supported by the
evidence. Under section 71(1) of the EAPWDR, a person who wishes to appeal a decision referred to
in section 16(1) of the EAPWDA must deliver a request for reconsideration in the form specified by
the Minister, and under section 71(2) of the EAPWDR, a request for reconsideration must be
delivered within 20 business days after the date the person is notified of the decision. The panel finds
that the Appellant delivered the Request for Reconsideration after 20 business days had elapsed
since the Appellant was notified of the decision. Because the legislation states that a “request for
reconsideration must be delivered” within 20 days, and because the undisputed evidence shows that
the Request for Reconsideration was delivered on September 4, 2015, the panel confirms the
Ministry’s 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.