Difference between revisions of "Welfare Overpayments and Fraud (21:VII)"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
no edit summary
Line 9: Line 9:
'''NOTE:''' If  a  client  faces  a  civil  lawsuit  for  a  welfare  overpayment  resulting  from  failure  to  provide complete  or  accurate  information,  refer  him  or  her  to a  lawyer  at  the  Community  Legal  Assistance Society.   
'''NOTE:''' If  a  client  faces  a  civil  lawsuit  for  a  welfare  overpayment  resulting  from  failure  to  provide complete  or  accurate  information,  refer  him  or  her  to a  lawyer  at  the  Community  Legal  Assistance Society.   


== B. Repayment Agreements ==
== B. Repayment Agreements and notifications of other Overpayments ==


MSDSI  often  asks  people  suspected  of  having  received  a  welfare  overpayment  to  sign  a  repayment agreement acknowledging the alleged debt.  Before signing a repayment agreement, clients should ask to review MSDSI’s evidence and its reasons for the determination that there is an overpayment and, if possible, get legal advice or help from an advocate.  MSDSI can often make errors in its overpayment determinations.
MSDSI  often  asks  people  suspected  of  having  received  a  welfare  overpayment  to  sign  a  repayment agreement acknowledging the alleged debt.  Before signing a repayment agreement, clients should ask to review MSDSI’s evidence and its reasons for the determination that there is an overpayment and, if possible, get legal advice or help from an advocate.  MSDSI can often make errors in its overpayment determinations. See MSDSI's policy on recoveries and overpayments at http://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/governments/policies-for-government/bcea-policy-and-procedure-manual/compliance-and-debt-management/recoveries


In many situations, it is advisable to '''not''' sign an acknowledgment. However, if the client does choose to sign an acknowledgment and repay the overpayment, repayment schedules can be negotiated for as low as $10 each month. The MSDSI is not presently charging interest on repayments.  
In many situations, it is advisable to '''not''' sign an acknowledgment. However, if the client does choose to sign an acknowledgment and repay the overpayment, repayment schedules can be negotiated for as low as $10 each month. The MSDSI is not presently charging interest on repayments.  
Line 17: Line 17:
== C. Appealing an Overpayment Decision ==
== C. Appealing an Overpayment Decision ==


A welfare recipient can appeal a decision by MSDSI that he or she owes an overpayment.  However, MSDSI’s decision about the amount of a person’s overpayment is not open to appeal (EAA, s 27(2) and  EAPWDA,  s  18(2)),  although  a  person  can  apply  for  a  reconsideration  of  the  amount  of  an overpayment (for more on reconsiderations, see [[Welfare_and_Health_Supplements_(21:IX) | section IX]] below).  
A welfare recipient can appeal a decision by MSDSI that he or she owes an overpayment.  However, MSDSI’s decision about the '''amount''' of a person’s overpayment is '''not open to appeal''' (EAA, s 27(2) and  EAPWDA,  s  18(2)),  although  a  person  can  apply  for  a  reconsideration  of  the  amount  of  an overpayment (for more on reconsiderations, see [[Welfare_and_Health_Supplements_(21:IX) | section IX]] below).  


In  ''Newfoundland  (Social  Services  Appeal Board) v  Butler'',  [1996]  NJ  No  91,  the  court  held  that  the Ministry could not recover the monies paid out to Ms. Butler by mistake. Ms. Butler successfully used the defence of change of circumstance. The court held that because Ms. Butler had made expenditures that she would not otherwise have made without the overpayment, it would be unjust to force her to pay the Ministry back. Therefore, it may be that in similar situations, recipients of overpayments will not be obligated to repay social assistance for monies paid under a mistake of fact. Please note that in this case, Ms. Butler reported the income to the Ministry and the Ministry erred in not deducting it.  
In  ''Newfoundland  (Social  Services  Appeal Board) v  Butler'',  [1996]  NJ  No  91,  the  court  held  that  the Ministry could not recover the monies paid out to Ms. Butler by mistake. Ms. Butler successfully used the defence of change of circumstance. The court held that because Ms. Butler had made expenditures that she would not otherwise have made without the overpayment, it would be unjust to force her to pay the Ministry back. Therefore, it may be that in similar situations, recipients of overpayments will not be obligated to repay social assistance for monies paid under a mistake of fact. Please note that in this case, Ms. Butler reported the income to the Ministry and the Ministry erred in not deducting it.  
5,109

edits

Navigation menu