Problem with ODSP caseworker

[Many]

I have a huge problem with my case worker and her managers that supporting her blindly and allowing her to discriminate against me.
I am a person with physical disability that moving, driving, or any physical activities are very limited.
I don't want to disturb you with the details as every thing done between me and her is recorded by the emails that she has insisted to ignore it.
Her voice messages that threatened me is also sent to her managers with no response from them at all except asking me to contact her. 

The case worker ........ got used to suspend my ODSP almost,  every months for non-sense reasons, and reactivated after I wrote email to her.

She wanted me to go to the office to evaluate my financial situation.She requested that after less than 3 months for being on ODSP after a long story from her discrimination.

I asked her to make the appointment in the beginning of the month because I can have some money to take a taxi to her office or send me a taxi voucher.

I cannot walk or drive to her office because of disability and I am getting injections, in a weekly base, on the pain clinic.
She does not care about that at all.
I don't know what she wants to do except revenge because I complained always about her unaccepted behavior.

She did not accept any of them without informing me.

Last month she suspended the ODSP because she want to evaluate my financial status (please be advised that she started doing that after less than 3 months being on the ODSP).

In her suspension letter, she requested me to talk to the office to discuss the case and If I disagree with the decision I can request an internal review.

I requested internal review but she did not consider it at all.
Till today I did not receive any response from her or her colleague that usually support her original decisions.
 

She did not conduct the internal review after the 30 days to make me appeal to tribunal.

If I request financial aid, she will object it to cause me leave without money and without medications. She did that before.

Just for her personal revenge.

Please I request to have an formal and fast  investigation about her behavior because I am leave with no money from ODSP neither the medical insurance which both of them are equal to me.

She is killing me.
I have complained to Ontario Ombudsman, where her friend holding all of my complains since Feb 2014 without any response at all.
 
Please I am looking to fast resolution because I am in need for my Diabetics insulin as well as more than 10 kinds of different medications and to pay my bills that she has prevented me from having my full benefits because of her discrimination.

This was a copy that I sent to every one I can send without no repsonse till now!
Any advises ?
Thank you

[Peter J]

Just from your English and the obvious level of frustration/anger you're experiencing, I would really suggest you get a representative to help you with this. Someone like Angela Browne or Ron Payne here on this group. Perhaps they could steer you to someone most appropriate if they can help you themselves.

Good luck!

[browne...@yahoo.com]

Ron Payne is not a legal representative any more than my neighbour's German Shepherd is

Sent from my iPhone

--
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ODSP Fireside" group.
To change email delivery, nickname or unsubscribe from this group visit:
 
Http://groups.google.ca/group/odspfireside/subscribe?hl=en
 
To post to this group via email, send email to odspfi...@googlegroups.com

[jbkeh]

I would suggest that you review Dir 3.1:

http://www.mcss.gov.on.ca/documents/en/mcss/social/directives/odsp/income_Support/3_1.pdf

Note that ODSP has the right to review your financial eligibility AT ANY TIME. The reason for the review may be anything from being a long time since the previous review, random selection, inconsistencies/missing data discovered in your records or an "anonymous tip" from someone with an axe to grind. I would question whether any worker would bring the workload of a financial review upon themselves just to be vindictive.

If you do not respond fully to a request for financial information, ODSP can threaten to terminate your support. Keep in mind that often this is simply an automatic computer system response (more than "x" number of days have passed since the request was sent and no follow-up has been noted), not a deliberate act by your worker. Actual termination requires that the requested information is essential to determine your financial eligibility, you are capable of providing that information and you have been given reasonable time to provide it.

Note that ODSP cannot compel you to go to their office, although it is far more convenient. If such travel would inflict suffering on you (financial or otherwise), either a combination of telephone/e-mail and letters can be used or ODSP can come to your home.

It is unclear as to where things are at this time. If you actually have been suspended (as opposed to merely being threatened) and more than 14 days have elapsed since ODSP received your request (IN WRITING) for an internal review, contact the Social Benefits Tribunal IMMEDIATELY and request the forms for an appeal. Fill them out, ensuring that you request interim support (the SBT makes its own determination, your ODSP office has no say in this) and sent them back ASAP.

"Reading between the lines", this appears to be more a "war of wills" than anything else.

On Friday, May 9, 2014 7:25:32 AM UTC-4, Many wrote:

I have a huge problem with my case worker...

|She wanted me to go to the office to evaluate my financial situation...

I cannot walk or drive to her office because of disability and I am getting injections, in a weekly base, on the pain clinic...
I don't know what she wants.. Last month she suspended the ODSP because she want to evaluate my financial status.

[Ron Payne]

On 10 May 2014 22:14, browne2002ca via ODSP Fireside <odspfi...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Ron Payne is not a legal representative any more than my neighbour's German Shepherd is

Sent from my iPhone

Is this the was all members of the Law Society act?

Ron

[abrowne]

Ron, it was implied you are better trained than others here on the board.  I was pointing

out that you are not.  I actually think the response given by jbkeh above was excellent,

and I have never seen him ever make any claims of having legal expertise of any kind.

If you want to provide this kind of information, you should do the same and I would not

be all over you like to accuse me of.

Nobody is saying you cannot contribute to these discussions or provide useful information,

as many people on this board do that.  But just don't claim to be anything you are not.

Angela

[Ron Payne]

Yes great job jbk and glad to see that you added ODSP does provide email communications for those that are sick.

Would you kindly send us a link to your statement that one may appeal to the SBT 14 days after an Internal Review has been requested.

Just an add to the Interim Assistance issue. One must be careful when making this request as one now must prove that your poor to be granted this request.

Signed

Mr. German Shepherd  

On 11 May 2014 10:52, jbkeh <j...@teksavvy.com> wrote:

Note that ODSP cannot compel you to go to their office, although it is far more convenient. If such travel would inflict suffering on you (financial or otherwise), either a combination of telephone/e-mail and letters can be used or ODSP can come to your home.

It is unclear as to where things are at this time. If you actually have been suspended (as opposed to merely being threatened) and more than 14 days have elapsed since ODSP received your request (IN WRITING) for an internal reviewFill them out, ensuring that you request interim support (the SBT makes its own determination, your ODSP office has no say in this) and sent them back ASAP.

[Anne W]

Ron hadn't even posted, never mind claimed that he was better trained to answer this question before you jumped all over him hysterically insulting him.  We get your point as you have made it over and over and OVER ad nauseaum!  Good god please get over yourself.  I KNOW I am not the only person who is very sick of your ranting and railing against Ron, EVEN when he hasn't posted or said anything yet in this thread!  Why don't YOU put your money where your mouth is and offer answers and advice like jbkeh yourself?  I may get kicked off this board for saying this, but I am SO sick of your petty hysterics against Ron ranting on and on in every thread over and over that I am ready to quit this board anyway.

[jbkeh]

It would appear that ODSP changed the rules quietly last September 2013, (O. Reg. 222/13 s. 10) increasing the allowable response time to a request for an Internal Review from 10 days to 30. When you add in the normal 4 days for assumed mail delivery, the time one now must wait before filing an appeal to the SBT has been increased from 14 to 34 days if ODSP does not respond.

Rather nasty as this means there could be a delay of over a month before one can even ask the SBT to restore support pending an appeal being heard.

Thanks for the query.

[Ron Payne]

This is a tricky one jbk. The Social Benefits Tribunal has already decided that there is no waiting time to request a hearing as long as it is after a Internal Review request has been made.

Ron Payne
Welfare Legal
Hamilton, Ontario
Email welfarel...@hotmail.com

Blog http://welfarelegal.blogspot.ca/

[Ron Payne]

Would you kindly give evidence that I am claiming something that I am not.

[browne...@yahoo.com]

I won't be censored.  If you don 't like my posts, go on to those that you want to read. 

I'm sick and tired of being under attack whenever I write something.  I was simply responding to a post written by somebody else (not Ron) who implied that Ron had these qualifications, and I just suggested that Ron post more informative stuff if he wants to offer information.  

Sent from my iPhone

[Peter J]

I just want to be clear. I have always found Ron's information and advice here very helpful, polite and to the point. If there is something he is not familiar with he makes it clear and always acknowledges other people's input.

Personally I find him an invaluable resource here on Fireside, however, that is just me. 

[jbkeh]

OK, my turn to ask...

Even if a particular Social Benefits Tribunal hearing chose to waive the requirement that (one way or another) the Internal Review process was first deemed complete before an application to appeal can be filed, when did a decision of any Social Benefits Tribunal hearing become binding or relevant or even considered in another Social Benefits Tribunal hearing (link or citation please)? AFAIK, precedence is solely a matter of the Courts. (Of course, any Tribunal hearing must respect all precedence established by the Courts.)

I would think that the last thing the SBT would want is to open the floodgates of appeal submissions prior to the completion of or non-response to a request for an Internal Review.

[Ron Payne]

Thanks jbk.

Better yet lets have the legal beagles in this group tell us that I’m wrong. After all they have had years to check this out.

My organisation has been using this procedure for years. 

See my post at the end of this thread.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!searchin/odspfireside/"One$20minute$20after"|sort:relevance/odspfireside/Fz7_3PJi6B4/dFvcNEJrMA0J

[jbkeh]

I'm afraid that simply pointing to a previous posting of yours making the same claim is not substantiation. If you have been "using this procedure for years", please explain EXACTLY how you obtain an order from the SBT for interim support prior to the completion (by response to or exhausting the time limit of) an Internal Review. Such information would be of immense value, and I do not understand why you have not posted the details already.

[Ron Payne]

On 15 May 2014 10:13, jbkeh <j...@teksavvy.com> wrote:

I'm afraid that simply pointing to a previous posting of yours making the same claim is not substantiation.

This was never meant to be substantiation. It was meant to be proof to the many new members that the legal beagles in this group has had lots of time to research and tell the group that I am right or wrong.

 

If you have been "using this procedure for years", please explain EXACTLY how you obtain an order from the SBT for interim support prior to the completion (by response to or exhausting the time limit of) an Internal Review.

This is not rocket science jbk. All one must do is ASK. Ask for a hearing using the procedure described.

 

Such information would be of immense value, and I do not understand why you have not posted the details already.

Exactly… I do not understand why has the legal community not told people abut this? I do not understand why is the legal community is not cooperating with me?

Just think of the immense suffering that has been going on for years because of this. People being evicted, no medication, not eating, becoming homeless etc.

Ron

[jbkeh]

That is precisely the question I have asked and you seem intent to avoid answering.

The Ontario Disability Act itself states:

"23.  (1)  An applicant or recipient may appeal a decision of the Director within the prescribed period after an internal review by filing a notice of appeal that shall include reasons for requesting the appeal". (I have added the emphasis.)

http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_97o25b_e.htm

The SBT site's own instructions also state the requirement that an internal review must first be 'competed':

"1. you have requested and received an internal review
decision, or

2. you have requested but not received an internal
review decision within 10 days of your request."  (Yes, they haven't updated the document to reflect the change from 10 to 30 days.)

http://www.sbt.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=122

I don't question that the SBT will evaluate the question of interim support as soon as a request for an appeal is received (they have 60 days to simply decide if they will allow a hearing), but the appeal request procedure itself requires that a preceding Internal Review has been 'completed' (one way or another) before it can be considered.

So again, I ask, WHAT ARE THE DETAILS OF THIS "PROCEDURE" OF YOURS THAT CIRCUMVENTS THE REQUIREMENT THAT AN INTERNAL REVIEW UPHOLDS THE ORIGINAL DECISION OR THAT THERE IS NO RESPONSE TO THE REQUEST WITHIN 30 DAYS? 

[browne...@yahoo.com]

Good question Brian 

Sent from my iPhone

--

[Bloggy.Deb]

I am a relatively savvy person, but this thread has me baffled. Is there or is there not a way to do this.

If there is. Ron, Angela or freaking Ronald MacDonald please explain to me. I am NOT asking for legal advice nor legal or quasi legal advice or opinion.

 

Simply as a resident of Ontario, who at one point received ODSP, I want to know. Please folks if you won’t (not can’t) answer the question, stop sniping at one another. It’s becoming altogether too much.

 

I don’t even want you to be civil to one another…..simply, don’t speak to one another, that would do me just fine.

I personally like and get a lot from each of your posts when not sniping or insulting the other.

OK my duty here is done, everyone have a marvellous Victoria Day weekend.

Bloggy Deb

--

[Ron Payne]

On 16 May 2014 12:13, browne2002ca via ODSP Fireside <odspfi...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Good question Brian 

Angela

You are qualified to answer this question as I am not.

1) Am I right.

2) Am I wrong

3) You don't know.

[Ron Payne]

On 16 May 2014 12:08, Bloggy.Deb <blogg...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am a relatively savvy person, but this thread has me baffled. Is there or is there not a way to do this.

Yes I stake my reputation on it.

 

If there is. Ron, Angela or freaking Ronald MacDonald please explain to me. I am NOT asking for legal advice nor legal or quasi legal advice or opinion.

The only way I could tell you is to give legal advice which I don't give.

 

 

Simply as a resident of Ontario, who at one point received ODSP, I want to know. Please folks if you won’t (not can’t) answer the question, stop sniping at one another. It’s becoming altogether too much.

Please don't shoot the messenger.

Bloggy Deb

 

[Ron Payne]

On 16 May 2014 11:31, jbkeh <j...@teksavvy.com> wrote:

That is precisely the question I have asked and you seem intent to avoid answering.

My intent is to show that we do not have adequate legal representation when on OW or ODSP here in Ontario.

 

The Ontario Disability Act itself states:

"23.  (1)  An applicant or recipient may appeal a decision of the Director within the prescribed period after an internal review by filing a notice of appeal that shall include reasons for requesting the appeal". (I have added the emphasis.)
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_97o25b_e.htm

The SBT site's own instructions also state the requirement that an internal review must first be 'competed':  (BUT)

2. you have requested but not received an internal
review decision within 10 days of your request."  (Yes, they haven't updated the document to reflect the change from 10 to 30 days.)
http://www.sbt.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=122

You yourself noted that the 30 day limit came from more that a year ago.

I would suggest there is many examples of decisions being made that are not reflected in current written legislation and directives. The procedure I describe is one of them.

You will note that in the link you offer it states that one can have non-legal representation at a hearing. (OH my)

It's all up to interpretation I guess eh. (something I don't do)

Ron

[Ron Payne]

Seems like I forgot the point of my query.

Ontario Disability Support Program Act, 1997

PART V
GENERAL

 

Notice

50.  If notice is given by ordinary mail, it shall be deemed to be received on the third day following the date of mailing. 1997, c. 25, Sched. B, s. 50.

On 11 May 2014 17:24, Ron Payne <hamiltonsoth...@gmail.com> wrote:

Would you kindly send us a link to your statement that one may appeal to the SBT 14 days after an Internal Review has been requested.

Signed

Mr. German Shepherd  

[browne...@yahoo.com]

Not in the new rules for the Ontario Social Justice Tribunals for representation.  They ARE cracking down on this.  Vince Chiarelli just lost his case before the Ontario court of appeal.  Social.  Benefits. Tribunal is part of the same regulatory cluster as the. landlord and tenant board and non licensed representatives are simply not allowed to appear.  This has to be raised before the member and when it is, the non licensee is booted out and an adjournment is usually granted

Sent from my iPhone

[jbkeh]

So, from which side of your mouth are you arguing? Is the SBT document invalid because of its age and now has an incorrect value for the time allotted for ODSP to respond to a request for an Internal Review, or is the document valid and non-legal representation is permitted?

To answer my own question, it doesn't matter as the document was simply the SBT's attempt to summarize things at the time it was written.

What matters is the CURRENT LEGISLATION (Acts and Regulations, Rules and By-Laws). This means you have to LOOK IT UP and follow the trail.

Then, to be credible, you have to TELL people where they can find the SUBSTANCE behind your statements.

In regard to representation, the Law Society of Upper Canada's by-law 4

http://www.lsuc.on.ca/WorkArea/DownloadAsset.aspx?id=2147485805

establishes who and in what capacity may practise law in Ontario:

PART V
 
PROVIDING LEGAL SERVICES WITHOUT A LICENCE
....
Providing Class P1 legal services without a licence
 
30.  (1)  Subject to subsection (2), the following may, without a licence, provide legal
services in Ontario that a licensee who holds a Class P1 licence is authorized to provide:
...
Acting for friend or neighbour
 
5.  An individual,
i.  whose profession or occupation is not and does not include the provision
of legal services or the practice of law,
ii.  who provides the legal services only for and on behalf of a friend or a
neighbour,
iii.  who provides the legal services in respect of not more than three matters
per year, and
iv.  who does not expect and does not receive any compensation, including a
fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect, for the provision of the legal
services.

Acting for family

5.1.  An individual,
i.  whose profession or occupation is not and does not include the provision
of legal services or the practice of law,
ii.  who provides the legal services only for and on behalf of a related person,
within the meaning of the Income Tax Act(Canada), and
iii.  who does not expect and does not receive any compensation, including a
fee, gain or reward, direct or indirect, for the provision of the legal
services.

In turn, the SBT, under the Social Justice Ontario Common Rules

http://www.sbt.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=163

acknowledges this:

A9 REPRESENTATIVES
 
A9.1  Parties may be self-represented, represented by a person licensed by the
Law Society of Upper Canada or by an unlicensed person where
permitted by the Law Society Act and its regulations and by-laws.

The SBT does provide a Practice Direction on Representation before the Social Justice Tribunals Ontario

http://www.sjto.gov.on.ca/stellent/groups/public/@abcs/@www/@sjc/documents/abstract/ec164268.doc

but this is guidance, NOT legislation.

The change from 10 to 30 days for an Internal Review response occurred about 8 months ago, not "more than a year". Note that in responding to your request for substantiation, I discovered and immediately corrected my error. Frankly, now that I see your following post, I suspect you were no more aware of this than I, but were merely trying to 'trip me up' on the delivery delay. (To which I alluded in my May 11 reply.)

I AM NOT A LAWYER. I make no claims of any 'superior' legal knowledge over anyone else, let alone those in the legal profession. I do not purport (without any evidence) to "fix" mistakes made by those in the legal profession. I do not label myself with the word "LEGAL". I do not throw out 'challenges' to show others that I know something that they do not. I simply try to provide factual answers as to the legislation on a given question.

Obviously, you are not going to divulge this "procedure" that you claim you have described which will circumvent the requirement that an Internal Review be completed (by response or the time limit exhausted) BEFORE an appeal (with an application for Interim Assistance) may be submitted.

On Friday, May 16, 2014 5:11:57 PM UTC-4, Ron P wrote:

You yourself noted that the 30 day limit came from more that a year ago.

The procedure I describe is one of them.

[Atb]

Okay all

Wow! You guys really know how to fight amongst yourselves whenever the teacher is out of the room?

Angela, Ron, you both have great value on this board; please you never came from the same place but both had excellent advice/experience to share! Clearly, if only from your own posts is it clear that the easy going competition between you has two has blown up out of hand.

If you truly must bicker such, please take it off the board for your own sakes! If you need a private mediator; then please email me privately, either way lets sort this out without poisoning the group!

Beyond this & I encourage you to delete the above part prior to posting this to the group.

Adam

Alright you lot, I've been gone way to long... What happened to you guys? When did things change from open respection & mutually benefical compition?

Either way when I step back, I don't see 2 people fighting arm in arm! I see two people, paralyzed into inaction by the government's cruel catch 22s.

How sucessfully those in power have effectively disarmed you & this group in one foul swoop! Does it even matter which is true? Either way they won, we aren't getting anything but crap! Meanwhile the very few with any real power in Canada just keep amassing more wealth & power then ever before imaginable!

Am I the only person to question if this group is still active & functional?

I hope you guys will put away your swords & battleaxes, if just for a moment to listen!

The way I see it is everyone has suffered under ODSP, especially recently! However those who have survived the politicians knows that it doesn't matter who's party is in office; the disadvantaged are always sacrificed!

I would argue that though the NDP is admirable! They are incapable of the task of truly fighting back effectively! Unfortunately their equally 1 sided approach of refusing to acknowledge the importance of operating a fiscally responsible, effective & accountable system means that too many people are hard set in their inherent oposition of the NDP!

That isn't to say that none of them are good people just ineffective...

I know we could do better with both hands tied behind our backs, simply because any effort to do our best will always be better then every effort to actively screw us!

I am not offering perfection or an utopia! I am merely saying that we could achieve success beyond our wildest dreams if we demand our freedoms, rights & responsibilities!

I won't claim anything is guaranteed to succed but if we do our best while actively acknowledging our mistakes/screw ups & then actively fix them!!!

We are bound to do better then through inept throw blindly in the dark or active destruction!

I have spent the majority of my life talking to people & the thing i know is most people are decent, hard working, honest people just struggling to survive 1 more day, week or month...

Very few indeed are more then 6 months from the streets & eventual dying homeless & destitute even in Canada! The few that aren't are those in power & those complicit in their matencance of power!

Yes, we are 3rd lowest through no fault of our own in a system that throws people away all the time... A variable assembly line of death & destruction!

The way I see it, you can stay here bickering amongst yourselves over which way to respond to a system literally killing us or we can fight back!

I've formed a new Canadian federal political party to run against the rest in the next federal election in Canada! We are the "Radical Canadian Reform" Party & we are very new. Our focus is grassroots & the internet activism!

You can get more information on my facebook page adam bartlett... Or email me at adambar...@gmail.com

I am not special, talented, unique or god blessed... But I am fighting for all of us! For the 1st time in history, the internet has given the 99% the freedom to communicate & organize without the 1%'s control...

Our ancestors fought valiently for us to have the right to self determination through free elections! All we have to do is put aside our petty differences & stop fighting pointless catch 22s/ self destructive internal wars!

Literally, we all have valid worthwhile points & agree on most topics; it isn't that difficult to let go of those stupid, destructive distractions that those in power created to prevent us from noticing that we are still slaves...

The war is not between the middle & lower class or any within the 99%!!! Its between the people & any who would corrupt the system & enslave all of us for their gain!

You are going to hear a lot saying the tired line "but we can't afford it/to"!!! Yet don't let them deceive you... If we were behaving wisely, effectively, efficiently & responsibly without hemorrhaging cash through ineptitude, corruption & fraud/theft!

All of you are well aware that ODSP & other programs may claim to be fiscally reasonable, responsible, etc... But that's the furthest from the truth possible!!! How much money could be saved by better health care, food, education, volunteer/employment supports, etc...

The saving in heart disease costs alone more then make up the costs of providing universal dental care... The savings in emgergency, general, wait times, etc. alone more then make up for the costs of nurse practitioners... The saving to overall health/society by ensuring universal adequate, reasonable nutrition alone are obvious! I would argue in most cases the solutions are obvious but they are not in the interests of those in power, so instead we all continue to suffer while we bicker!

If you don't like the status quo, then make your voices heard! If the idea of the same old bullshit & games upsets you; then speak up! Tell them we are tired of the devils we know; at least the "Radical Canadian Reform" Party is offering to do our best not screw you at every turn!

Anyways, I've said my peace; I'll get off my soapbox now...

Adam Bartlett

[Ron Payne]

On 17 May 2014 14:16, jbkeh <j...@teksavvy.com> wrote:

So, from which side of your mouth are you arguing?

Please don't talk to me like that Brian. It's not like you. Your first 2 posts in this thread had misinformation in them.

Don't get me wrong here you and Angela know 10 times what I know, it's just what I know is very focused on a few pieces of the pie and I simply want to fix any errors.

 

Is the SBT document invalid because of its age and now has an incorrect value for the time allotted for ODSP to respond to a request for an Internal Review, or is the document valid and non-legal representation is permitted?

Isn't it curious that when you make reference to the document everything is fine BUT as soon as I do, I'm wrong or the document isn’t fact?

 

What matters is the CURRENT LEGISLATION (Acts and Regulations, Rules and By-Laws). This means you have to LOOK IT UP and follow the trail.

Like I have said before sometimes decisions are made that counter the laws etc.

 

Then, to be credible, you have to TELL people where they can find the SUBSTANCE behind your statements.

To be credible the legal community must give us a response to my statement.

 

In regard to representation, the Law Society of Upper Canada's by-law 4

As I have said many times before I am not breaking any laws.

In turn, the SBT, under the Social Justice Ontario Common Rules

I just do what the tribunal says and what they allow me to do.

The change from 10 to 30 days for an Internal Review response occurred about 8 months ago, not "more than a year".

I stand corrected on that one, the mad cow is taking is toll.

Note that in responding to your request for substantiation, I discovered and immediately corrected my error. Frankly, now that I see your following post, I suspect you were no more aware of this than I, but were merely trying to 'trip me up' on the delivery delay.

Brian, you are not giving me enough credit. I have always abided by the 10 day plus 3 day for mail delivery for years before I started to send in requests for appeals right after the reuest for an Internal Review. It was your statement re 4 days for mail delivery that got my attention. I simply wanted to correct the mistake in a polite way.

I AM NOT A LAWYER. I make no claims of any 'superior' legal knowledge over anyone else, let alone those in the legal profession. I do not purport (without any evidence) to "fix" mistakes made by those in the legal profession. I do not label myself with the word "LEGAL". I do not throw out 'challenges' to show others that I know something that they do not. I simply try to provide factual answers as to the legislation on a given question.

Again this statement certainly doesn't sound like you Brian, as you are always polite.

Obviously, you are not going to divulge this "procedure" that you claim you have described which will circumvent the requirement that an Internal Review be completed (by response or the time limit exhausted) BEFORE an appeal (with an application for Interim Assistance) may be submitted.

I never feel the need to request policies or procedures from an organization under the FIA if the organization is following them. Feel free to request this info either by FIA or ask a qualified legal professional if you like. Oh ya, where are the legal professionals in this group to settle this issue once an for all.

I try not to bicker and always enjoy a GOOD polite debate.

The question remains, why have we not heard from the legal community and why have we been waiting so long?

Ron

[Mini]

I am leaving this forum because of the tone and immaturity of posts like this below. These two have not added anything to my experience on her with their diatribe and hateful posts.
Negative begets negative.
I'd wish you both well....
But your ego won't allow it.
To the others whom post and helpfully assist each other- job well done.
Moderators my condolences to have to suggest such postings hourly- if not daily.


Sent from Mini's iPhone

[Ron Payne]

On 20 May 2014 16:58, Mini <mi...@bmts.com> wrote:

I  am leaving this forum because of the tone and immaturity of posts like this below.  

Don’t go Mini, you are a communications expert, help us communicate.   Ron

[Justice4ODSP]

My only comment is, I've seen many attempts by Ron to clarify things and move on.

I don't get why his multiple 'confessions' aren't good enough.

The last post was one where he came back on blended knee. He couldn't be more clear if he tried.... At least that's my take on things.

It's sad that we're now losing good people.

Justice4odsp

[Debbie Buttle]

> On May 20, 2014, at 4:58 PM, Mini <mi...@bmts.com> wrote:
>

[Ron Payne]

On 20 May 2014 19:18, 'Debbie Buttle' via ODSP Fireside <odspfi...@googlegroups.com> wrote:

Oh my

Ok What... ;)

[Atb]

Alright Many/Me too;

I don't know if you will read this, especially since its at the bottom of a largely steaming pile of... Well, you get my point! Frankly, it so bad as to prompt me to speak up immediately & even distract me from the important matter at hand, i.e. The dangerous situation you are in...

I don't know if you will read this but I will try, hopefully its not too late! To be honest, I haven't actually read every post here; I couldn't even dream of it right now with every single assistive/adaptive technology/device I desperately need & use constantly having been ripped from my close to cold dead hands... I apologize but the little I did was so pathetic as to break my heart!

I won't suggest I am alone in my suffering; yet the most critically ill among us are always the 1st to suffer & frequently among the most effected by the inaction, ineptitude, corruption & outright violence! Its quite obvious to me that things have changed quite seriously; even my home office (were brilliant 5 years ago) has been effected & suddenly when most unable to defend, I felt the brunt.

Many, I am talking to you as a very ill man; frankly I am dying with my world burning around my shoulders... It sounds like our situations are similar. I won't suggest my suffering/situation is worse than yours; nor will I say "things can't get any worse" or "its the worst it can get"...

I've learned to live in terror of those words; I was born with lunatic sanctimonious family & life threatening misunderstood rare genetic disease, it took me 2+ decades to get diagnosed, was a messed up young person (run away, homeless, destitute, outlaw, addict, etc); I am a survivor! I made a life for myself but moved back with family (care for dying grandma) many years ago & got trapped! Grandmother died in year2, major multi-stage surgical procedure in years 4, ended up paralyzed in year 5, catastrophic hit & run took out my service dog & I in my powerchair in year 6, corrupt assistive device provider stole my money for new chair, leaving me a junker & the car insurance screwed me out of everything else in years 7 & 8...

Then having effectively lost everything but a new phone & my service dog (also severely injured in hit & run); a phone repair company stole, then broke my new phone (acted as sole communications device) at the beginning of this year, my service dog developed catastrophic fungal osteomyelitis 2 weeks ago (put down on sunday, RIP Timbit, you were perfect);

Then last week I was kidnapped, unlawfully confined, assaulted, forced to undergo medical treatment against wishes despite being terminal with advanced medical directives prohibiting treatment & sane; by a SOB police sergeant & his minions... All this after losing my horrible inaccesible home & being made effectively homeless (shhh, don't tell ODSP) by my lunatic family...

A few weeks ago I made the mistake of saying "it couldn't get any worse after the incident with my phone... Foolish me! You will notice that any battles with ODSP are oddly absent (not that the prior list is inclusive by any stretch)!

The simple reason is that until a few years ago, I had enjoyed a relatively pleasant stretch of excellent service from my home office... Unfortunately things didn't remain pleasant, 1st they moved from an accesible office to an inaccesible office in the boonies!

Then things started being cut, unfair demands placed, unresponsive ineffective deeply frustrating workers, ignored internal review requests, etc. & to be frank, it was beyond me to fight the battles, so I just accepted the hits to my already sinking ship. Now my ship sunk, riddled with holes & I am drowning!

This is the result when everyone takes a shot at the stable, most resourceful disabled guy you could hope to meet... Sadly, the reality is (at least for the moment) that we live in a really messed up world & we are simply a few of the many nameless souls being destroyed by a cruel corrupt system! They are not our friends, they do not have to do most things & they will be vindictive if able!

I read your post & couldn't help but think you are in trouble; you have got bad pissed off workers & no clue what you are doing... They are not required to provide transportation or consideration of your financial situation or scheduling consideration but they can still demand you see them in person for an income verification at any time without any oversight. If you refuse or fail to comply, they can cut you off until you do, period!

Aside from that, if you are new to ODSP; you have to undergo a financial review & at the beginning they are typically more frequent but technically they can do it whenever they feel! You must comply or else give them grounds to go after you. If your health/abilities prevent you from complying there can be some basic modification of the request, i.e. phone calls, emails, faxes & snailmail, home visits (avoid if at all possible) can all be useful...

You can say, you need an appointment in PM because you can't function in AM or you need low lighting in meeting because you are light sensitive or you can say "x" days/time doesn't work because of appointments, treatment, etc; & you can say I need these modifications/adaptations because of "x" health problem BUT you can never justifiably say "I won't come in unless you pay for transportation or make it at the beginning of the month when I have money)!

Of course, i understand why you say it but you only reveal weakness to an enemy that will use that weakness against you. None the less, the law here is clear; they don't have to pay for/provide transportation to the ODSP office; you can't refuse to go; they can demand at nearly any time, for nearly any reason; & they are 0 obligation to take anything besides health issues into account when running their scheme.

Actually failling to comply with income/asset verification demand can not only result in scary letters, it can also result in being suspended & eventually losing your case at the tribunal... It is shaking ground to be on! You may very well have legit complaints about other things but you can screw up those valid cases by refusing an income/asset verification demand!

Normally I'ld tell people like yourself to get your butt into their offices with the required documents right away but I am concerned how far this may already go; so instead I'll say, take all your papers/info with you to a lawyer. If they demand another meeting before you see the lawyer, give some health reason why that date/time won't work until after you will have reviewed the case with a lawyer...

Incidentally we all have budget shortfalls, but if in that situation we use health reasons why we have to postpone until next month! We don't share extra info with the enemy... Actually along that lines, home visits can be essential; I wish home visits were used in my case but then I have nothing they don't know but most do! Once a worker is in your home the laws with lawful/admissible search/seizures gets thrown out the window! Most people would be well advised to not have worker in their homes but if its the only alternative to being violated for income/asset verification, its a risk that may need to be taken..

On that note, i am done here... I know... I know, usually I am far more through but right here, right now; I am done...

BTW- 1 last note, I know the terror of losing my meds, that would surely kill me just like if it were your insulin... That's why I am being blunt (some may say hard) on you! You don't have room to wait until they cut your benefits! If this really is a sustained discrimitory attack, you need a lawyer fast! The SBT tends to frown on attacks like that which endanger you recipients life. Aside from that a lawyer can help sort everything out, if this is a case of confusion & hurt egos! So get a lawyer, go to legal aid clinic or legal aid if needed!

Last thing, the workers/ODSP office has no say in financial eligibility, just bring monthly statement, drug/dental card, I.D., lease, etc, bank statements for 6 months (12 months better; don't give them all, just what asked for) & any paperwork, letters, emails, documents, records, info, etc you have regarding the case.

Adam Bartlett

Sorry i couldn't offer more help... But i'm overdue medwise...

[Anne W]

Wow!  What a practical and useful (not to mention articulate, eloquent, intelligent and literate) post Adam!  Thank you for your contributions here - you Sir are a treasure.  I am sorry to hear of your difficulties and SO SO sorry to hear about Timbit.  I hope some wonderful miracles happen for you and I am sending you all the love and positive energy your way and pray for good things to happen for you.  If nothing else please know that you are very appreciated.
Anne