The Estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development

The Estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development Collection Old Age Security (OAS) and Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) Decision date 2021-02-26 Neutral citation 2021 SST 226 Reference number GP-20-1483 Member Connie Dyck Division General Division Decision Appeal summarily dismissed Related decisions SST - The estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development - 2021 SST 223 - 2021-05-31 - Appeal Division SST - The estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development - 2021 SST 224 - 2021-02-24 - General Division SST - The Estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development - 2021 SST 225 - 2021-05-31 - Appeal Division Decision Content Citation: The estate of WB v Minister of Employment and Social Development, 2021 SST 226 Tribunal File Number: GP-20-1483 BETWEEN: The estate of W. B. Appellant and Minister of Employment and Social Development Respondent SOCIAL SECURITY TRIBUNAL DECISION General Division – Income Security Section DECISION BY: Connie Dyck DATE OF DECISION: February 26, 2021 On this page Overview Analysis Conclusion Reasons and decision Overview [1] A. B. is the executrix of the estate of her late father, W. B., who passed away on July 6, 2018. The estate made an application for the Old Age Security (OAS) pension. It was received by the Minister of Employment and Social Development (Minister) on January 24, 2020.Footnote 1 [2] The Minister denied the application initially and upon reconsideration. The Claimant appealed the reconsideration decision to the Social Security Tribunal. [3] This appeal involves whether the OAS application was received in time. [4] I must summarily dismiss an appeal if I am satisfied that it has no reasonable chance of success.Footnote 2 [5] I have decided that this appeal has no reasonable chance of success for the reasons set out below. Analysis [6] The Claimant was given notice in writing of the intent to summarily dismiss the appeal and was allowed a reasonable period of time to make submissions.Footnote 3 In her submissions, she stated that her application to the Tribunal was based on the hope that the Tribunal was able to address the extenuating circumstances. She was disappointed to learn that the Tribunal does not have authority to make exceptions to the provisions of the OAS.Footnote 4 [7] The OAS says that an application has to be made within one year of the person’s death to be entitled to the post-mortem OAS benefit.Footnote 5 In this case, the application was received more than 12 months after the contributor’s death. [8] The executrix submitted that she only discovered her father was not receiving an OAS pension after he passed away. She did not know she could make an application for her father’s unclaimed benefits. When she became aware, she immediately filed an application. She submitted that the minimal delay of 6 months is an insignificant time when considering that her father made CPP contributions for decades. [9] I am very sympathetic to this unfortunate situation. However, the Tribunal is created by legislation and only has the powers granted to it by its governing statute. This means I am required to interpret and apply the provisions as they are set out in the OAS. I have no authority to make exceptions to the provision of the OAS, or to make decisions on the basis of fairness, compassion, or extenuating circumstances.Footnote 6 [10] In this case, the application was received by the Minister more than 12 months after the contributor’s death. Therefore, I find that the appeal has no reasonable chance of success. Conclusion [11] The appeal is summarily dismissed. Footnotes Footnote 1 The application is at GD 2-11. Return to footnote1 referrer Footnote 2 As required by Section 53(1) of the Department of Employment and Social Development Act (DESD Act); Miter v Canada (A.G.), 2017 FC 262. Return to footnote2 referrer Footnote 3 As required by Section 22 of the Social Security Tribunal Regulations. Return to footnote3 referrer Footnote 4 The submissions of the executrix are at GD 5. Return to footnote4 referrer Footnote 5 This is in the OAS at Section 29(1). Return to footnote5 referrer Footnote 6 Miter v Canada (A.G.), 2017 FC 262. Return to footnote6 referrer