Other Canada Pension Plan (CPP)

Decision

[1] The appeal is dismissed. The Appellant, C. F., is not entitled to additional retroactive payments of her Canada Pension Plan (CPP) retirement pension.

[2] This decision explains why I am dismissing the appeal.

Overview

[3] The Appellant was born on X. She turned 65 years old in July 2020.

[4] On July 23, 2020, a week before the Appellant turned 65, the Minister received her application for a CPP retirement pension.^{Footnote 1} The CPP retirement pension is based on contributions to the CPP. It is payable under certain conditions to contributors aged 60 and over.^{Footnote 2}

[5] The Minister processed the Appellant’s July 2020 application with payment to start in August 2020.^{Footnote 3}

[6] The Appellant was dissatisfied with this start date. She stated that in November 2019, she had taken an application for the CPP retirement pension in person to a Service Canada Centre. That application requested that the pension be payable as of January 2020. She asked that January 2020 be the start date of her CPP retirement pension.

[7] The Appellant stated that when she went to the Service Canada Centre in November 2019, she had also taken an application for the Old Age Security (OAS) pension. That application was in the same envelope as her CPP retirement application. The Minister had processed the November 2019 OAS application, but not the retirement pension application.^{Footnote 4}

[8] In November 2020, the Minister denied the Appellant’s request on reconsideration.^{Footnote 5} It stated that there was no record on file of her having submitted a CPP retirement pension application in November 2019. The Minister’s office received the application in July 2020, so the earliest date the Appellant would be entitled to the pension was August 2020.

[9] The Appellant appealed the reconsideration decision to the Social Security Tribunal (Tribunal).

What I have to decide

[10] I must decide whether the Appellant is entitled to greater retroactivity of her CPP retirement pension.

[11] I must consider these questions:

1. (i) Can the Minister award greater back payments based on the 2019 application?
2. (ii) Can the Minister award greater back payments based on the July 2020 application?
3. (iii) Does the Appellant have an earlier deemed application date due to administrative error by the Minister?

The position of the Appellant

[12] The Appellant is adamant that she dropped off the application at the Service Canada Centre in November 2019. She states that it is “entirely unfair” that she should lose seven months of benefits “based solely on the fact that my November 2019 application could not be found.”^{Footnote 6}

[13] The Appellant did not keep a copy of her 2019 CPP retirement pension application. However, in support of her argument that she submitted an application at that time, she provided the following:

• An Affidavit she swore on March 5, 2021, stating that:
  • She had personally delivered her CPP application to Service Canada in November 2019;
  • Her attendant^{Footnote 7} saw her sign both applications and place both of them in a manila envelope;
  • The attendant drove her to the Service Canada Centre, waited in line with her, and saw her deliver the envelope to the Service Canada agent; and
  • In spite of her best efforts to track the progress of her application, it was not until July 2020 that she learned that staff at the Service Canada Centre could not locate her paper application for the CPP retirement pension.^{Footnote 8}
• A letter from her attendant stating that she had seen the Appellant sign her CPP and OAS applications and place them both in a manila envelope. On November 12, 2019, the attendant drove the Appellant to Service Canada and was present when the Appellant delivered the envelope into the hands of the Service Canada agent.^{Footnote 9}
• A statement from staff at X stating that the records of the Appellant’s attendant showed that she drove to a Service Canada Centre on November 12, 2019.^{Footnote 10}

[14] The Appellant also provided documents to show that she had been diligent in her efforts to follow up on the progress of her November 2019 application.^{Footnote 11}

The reasons for my decision

i. The 2019 application

[15] The Appellant’s affidavit stated that beginning in January 2020, she followed all instructions in pursuing her quest for a CPP retirement pension based on her 2019 application. I have no doubt about her sincerity. She has provided considerable evidence that she followed up several times.

[16] There are, however, two difficulties with her 2019 application. First, the law says that a benefit is only payable if an application has been made and payment of the benefit has been approved.^{Footnote 12} Payment of the CPP retirement pension was not approved based on the November 2019 application.

[17] Second, the November 2019 application did not generate a reconsideration decision under section 81 of the CPP. Under section 82 of the CPP, a reconsideration decision is the only basis for an appeal to the Tribunal.

[18] On reconsideration, the Minister had the authority to decide only whether its initial decision on the July 2020 application was correct. The Minister did not have the authority to consider any other applications the Appellant might have made. As a result, the Minister could not modify the start date of the Appellant’s pension.^{Footnote 13}

ii. The 2020 application

[19] For a person younger than 65 years old, the law states that if payment of the retirement pension is approved, payment starts the latest of:

• The month the person reached age 60;
• The month after the Minister received the application if the person were under 65 when they applied; and
• The month the person chose in their application.^{Footnote 14}

[20] In the Appellant’s case, the relevant dates are:

• The month she turned 60 is July 2015;
• The month after the application was received was August 2020; and
• The start date the Appellant chose on her application was January 2020.

[21] The latest of the three dates is August 2020. The Minister received the Appellant’s application in July 2020 and payment began as of August 2020.

[22] The Appellant has received the maximum allowable period of retroactive payment for her pension under the CPP.

[23] The Minister’s submissions took note of the fact that the Appellant’s July 2020 application requested a start date of January 2020 for the retirement pension. However, the law does not provide for retroactive payments for individuals under the age of 65.^{Footnote 15}

iii. Does the Appellant have an earlier deemed application date due to administrative error by the Minister?

[24] The Appellant insists that she dropped off her first application in November 2019. If true, her allegation might establish that the Minister made an “administrative error” (AE) or gave “erroneous advice” (EA).

[25] The CPP explains what can happen in the event of AE or EA. If the Minister is satisfied that AE or EA occurred, and part of a benefit was denied as a result, the Minister “shall take such remedial action as the Minister considers appropriate” to put the person back in the position they should have been in.^{Footnote 16} The Tribunal has no authority to intervene in a matter of AE/EA.^{Footnote 17}

[26] In its reconsideration decision of November 2020, the Minister stated that “there is no evidence on file of a CPP retirement pension application being submitted” in November 2019.^{Footnote 18} However, the Minister has provided no documentation of any search for evidence.^{Footnote 19} It is not apparent that the statement in the reconsideration decision is a formal AE/EA decision. However, even if the Minister had made a decision on AE/EA, the Tribunal does not have the authority to intervene. In that case, the only remedy available to the Appellant would be to apply to the Federal Court for judicial review of the Minister’s decision.^{Footnote 20}

[27] I am sympathetic to the Appellant’s situation. She wanted payment of her CPP retirement pension to begin in January 2020. In her view, she did everything possible to ensure this result. Instead, her payments began only seven months later. She stated that she has lost almost $4,000 of CPP retirement payments “simply because [my] application was misplaced.”^{Footnote 21}

[28] I cannot help the Appellant. I am a statutory decision-maker. The provisions of the CPP are binding on me. I must interpret and apply the law as it is set out in the CPP. I have no authority to make exceptions. Nor can I make decision based on fairness, compassion, or extenuating circumstances.

Conclusion

[29] I find that the Claimant is not entitled to greater retroactivity of her CPP retirement pension.

[30] This means the appeal is dismissed.