Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability

Decision

[1] The Claimant is not entitled to an extension of time to request a reconsideration of the Minister`s decision that denied her application for a Canada Pension Plan (CPP) disability pension.

Overview

[2] The Minister received the Claimant`s application for a disability pension in January 2017. The Minister denied the application on April 12, 2017. On December 13, 2019 the Claimant requested the Minister reconsider the April 12, 2017 decision. On February 11, 2020 the Minister denied the request for a reconsideration. The Claimant appealed the Minister`s decision to deny his request for a reconsideration to the Social Security Tribunal (Tribunal).

[3] I decided this appeal based on the documents and submissions filed. I did not require any additional evidence to make my decision, as all relevant evidence in the file was clear and non-contradictory. I made my decision after reviewing all material and submissions contained in the file.

[4] A person who is dissatisfied with a decision to deny a CPP disability pension, may, within ninety days after the day the person is notified in writing of the decision, or within such longer period that the Minister may allow, make a request for a reconsideration of that decision.^{Footnote 1}

[5] The Minister may allow a longer period to make a request for reconsideration of a decision if the Minister is satisfied that there is a reasonable explanation for requesting a longer period, and the person has demonstrated a continuing intention to request a reconsideration.^{Footnote 2} Each criterion must be considered by the Minister, and the Minister must be satisfied that each criterion has been met.^{Footnote 3}

[6] In situations, such as this, where the delay is longer than 365 days, the Minister must also be satisfied that the request for reconsideration has a reasonable chance of success, and that no prejudice would be caused to the Minister.^{Footnote 4}

[7] A person who is dissatisfied with a decision of the Minister in relation to further time to make a request for reconsideration may appeal the decision to the Tribunal.^{Footnote 5}

[8] The Minister’s decision to grant or refuse a late reconsideration request is considered a discretionary decision. Case law indicates the Minister’s discretion must be exercised judicially.^{Footnote 6}

Analysis

[9] I must determine if the Minister exercised his discretion judicially in refusing the Claimant’s late reconsideration request. A discretionary power is not exercised “judicially” if it can be established that the decision-maker: acted in bad faith, acted for an improper purpose or motive, took into account an irrelevant factor, ignored a relevant factor, or acted in a discriminatory manner.^{Footnote 7}

[10] The Minister advised the Claimant in the decision letter dated April 12, 2017, of his right to request a reconsideration, and the requirement to make such request within ninety days of receipt of the decision. The decision letter noted the toll free telephone number he could call if he has questions regarding his right to request reconsideration of the decision. Enclosed with the decision letter was a document entitled “How to Ask CPP to Reconsider Its Decision.” The Minister received the Claimant’s request for reconsideration in December 2019, beyond the ninety-day period allowed for a reconsideration decision. I find the Claimant made her request for reconsideration outside the required ninety-day limit.

[11] The Claimant provided an explanation for his delay and set out that he had contacted Service Canada several times and was assured that he should continue to wait to file a request for reconsideration until he had additional medical evidence to support his claim.

[12] He further stated that his mental health condition impacted his ability to file a request for reconsideration within the timeframe allowed.

Reasonable explanation for the delay

[13] The Minister considered the Claimant’s explanation that he wanted to wait until he had all recent medical information available for a reconsideration. However, the Minister also noted that no additional medical information was submitted with the request for a reconsideration. The Minister further considered the impact of the Claimant’s mental health condition.

Continuing intention to request a reconsideration

[14] The Minister noted that the Claimant contacted Service Canada in November 2017 but took no further action until August 15, 2019 when he requested a copy of the initial decision letter. The Minister noted that this lack of action did not demonstrate a continuing intent to request a reconsideration.

The Minister’s discretion was exercised judicially when he refused to allow the Claimant a longer period to request a reconsideration

[15] I must decide if the Minister exercised his discretion judicially in refusing the Claimant’s late reconsideration request, not if the Minister made the correct decision.

[16] I find no evidence the Minister acted in bad faith or acted with an improper purpose or motive when it made the determination to refuse the Claimant’s late reconsideration request. The Minister advised the Claimant in its decision letter dated April 14, 2017 of his right to request reconsideration, provided clear instructions on how to make such request, and advised him of the requirement to make such request within ninety days of receipt of the decision. I find the Minister did not take into account an irrelevant factor, ignored a relevant factor, or acted in a discriminatory manner when he made the decision to deny the Claimant’s request for a reconsideration.

[17] Before allowing a longer period to make a request for reconsideration of a decision, the Minister must be satisfied that there is a reasonable explanation for requesting a longer period, and a continuing intention to request a reconsideration. Each criterion must be considered by the Minister, and he must be satisfied each criterion have been met.

[18] The Minister considered each criterion. He was not satisfied either criterion was met. He was not satisfied the Claimant provided a reasonable explanation for requesting a longer period to request a reconsideration. He was not satisfied the Claimant demonstrated a continuing intention to request a reconsideration. As the Minister was not satisfied either criterion was met he refused the Claimant’s request for a longer period to make a request for a reconsideration. I find the Minister exercised his discretion judicially when he refused to allow the Claimant a longer period to request a reconsideration.

[19] As the Minister acted judicially it is not necessary to examine whether the factors of prejudice against the Minister and a reasonable possibility of success were conducted judicially.

[20] This decision to deny the Claimant’s late request for a reconsideration request does not preclude him making a further application for CPP disability benefits.

[21] The appeal is dismissed.