Appeal Number 2025-0186 Part C – Decision Under Appeal The decision under appeal is the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction (the “ministry”) Reconsideration Decision dated 12 May 2025, which denied the appellant a replacement of a lost May disability assistance cheque.
Specifically, the ministry determined that they could not replace the cheque in accordance with Section 77 of the Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disability Regulation.
Part D – Relevant Legislation Employment and Assistance for Persons with Disabilities Regulation (the “Regulation”) section 77.
EAAT003 (17/08/17)
2
Part E – Summary of Facts
Appeal Number 2025-0186
The hearing took place on June 16, 2024, as a teleconference. The appellant was not present at the start of the hearing. Tribunal staff confirmed that the appellant had been notified of the hearing start time and made attempts to contact them, and after 15 minutes the hearing commenced with the ministry representative in attendance. The appellant joined the hearing 20 minutes after the start of the hearing.
Evidence at the time of reconsideration
In the Request for Reconsideration dated April 29, 2025, the appellant stated: …”I never received my full cheque. $850.00 I cashed I’m missing $200.00.”
It also included a copy of cheque# 7601, dated April 15, 2025, for $870.50. The back of the cheque included a signature and bank identification and routing numbers, including “BMO”.
According to the Ministry’s decision, the following is a chronology of events:
1) April 23, 2025: the appellant contacted the ministry to advise that they had not received their May benefit cheque of $870.50 that was issued on April 16, 2025; 2) April 25, 2025: the ministry reviewed a cheque trace and determined that the cheque was “endorsed with your signature and cashed at Bank of Montreal on April 16, 2025”; 3) April 25, 2025: the ministry informed the appellant that a request for a replacement cheque was denied.
The ministry completed its review of the Request for Reconsideration on May 12, 2025.
In the Reconsideration Decision, the ministry found that: 1) Cheque # 760 for $870.50 was mailed to the appellant’s home on April 16, 2024. 2) The cheque trace for cheque # 760 confirmed that the appellant signed the back and cashed it. 3) The request for a replacement of cheque # 760 did not meet all the criteria set out in Section 77 of the Regulation.
Testimony at the hearing The appellant spoke about their situation.
EAAT003 (17/08/17)
3
Appeal Number 2025-0186
The appellant confirmed that they received and cashed cheque # 760 for $870.50. They state they made the reconsideration application to the ministry to replace a missing $200.00 cheque.
The appellant is frustrated and does not understand why the ministry is fixated on the cheque for $870.50. The appellant repeated the wording in the original application for review, which states “$850.00 I cashed. I’m missing $200.00”.
The ministry representative confirmed the total monthly disability assistance amount of $1,535.50 to the appellant for May 2025 is paid out as follows : 1. A monthly payment directly to the appellant for $870.50 (cheque # 760); 2. A second monthly payment to the appellant for $200.00; 3. Payment for medical fees paid directly; and, 4. Payment for rent, which is paid directly to the landlord.
The ministry representative noted that, from the ministry’s perspective, there appeared to be a misunderstanding about which cheque required replacement. On the morning of the hearing, the ministry representative initiated a cheque trace to obtain information about the $200.00 cheque. The ministry representative confirmed from their records that cheque # 253 for $200.00 was issued on April 17, 2025. They also stated that ministry records indicate that the cheque was collected in person at a ministry office, and that the identification of the person who collected the cheque was confirmed by a ministry staff member. However, the visual record of the cheque trace, which would include the endorsement, signature of whoever cashed the cheque, and the bank the cheque was deposited at, would take more time to receive.
During the hearing, the appellant denied visiting the ministry office to obtain the $200.00 cheque and states that they did not deposit the $200.00 cheque. They believe it was lost or stolen and they would like it replaced.
Admissibility of Additional Information
The panel admitted the appellant’s and ministry representative’s oral testimony at the hearing and the ministry’s evidence about cheque # 253 for $200.00 as evidence under Section 22(4) of the Employment and Assistance Act which allows for the admission of evidence reasonably required for a fair full and fair disclosure of all matters related to the decision under appeal. The appellant and the ministry representative did not object to the admission of this evidence.
EAAT003 (17/08/17)
4
Part G – Order The panel decision is: (Check one)
APPEAL NUMBER 2025-0186
☒Unanimous
☐By Majority
The Panel ☐Confirms the Ministry Decision ☒Rescinds the Ministry Decision If the ministry decision is rescinded, is the panel decision referred back to the Minister for a decision as to amount? Yes☐ No☒
Legislative Authority for the Decision: Employment and Assistance Act Section 24(1)(a)☐ or Section 24(1)(b) ☒ Section 24(2)(a)☒ or Section 24(2)(b) ☐
Part H – Signatures Print Name Robert McDowell Signature of Chair
Print Name Jan Broocke Signature of Member
Print Name Rick Bizarro Signature of Member
EAAT (26/10/22)
Date (Year/Month/Day) 2025/06/20
Date (Year/Month/Day) 2025/06/19
Date (Year/Month/Day) 2025/06/17
Signature Page