How secure is ODSP once granted. Temporary vs permanent disability?

[Abroxis]

I am currently receiving ODSP due to mental illness.

I am well aware that disability recipients can work part time.

What has never been clarified for me is whether this part time
employment can ever be used against me , as evidence of a change in
employability resulting in a re assessment.

Getting accepted onto ODSP requires a lot of assessment and paper
work.Once one is on ODSP, are there some recipients that have to go
through a re assessment where ones ODSP status is at stake.

Not to sound paranoid, and I have no concrete evidence to support this
but........ If the conservative government should return to power, or
if changes in ODSP policy seem politically expedient to the Liberals, I
would not be surprised to find that they plan to create two classes of
ODSP recipients.

Those that have never taken advantage of the "right to work" rules and
those that have worked part time under the rules.

Given that ODSP regulations are not changed by legislation , but by the
whim of a Minister or his/her minions, I would not be surprised by new
rules requiring new assessments , with much tighter criteria, for any
one who has worked more than a set criteria.

The new rules on working while on disability, may be a double edged
sword. Yes, I am well aware what promises the current government have
made. I also know that some politicos would never think twice about
changing the rules to curry favour with voters and save tax dollars.

Therefore my question, are some recipients subject to re assessment (a
permanent vs. temporary status) to prove the continued existence of a
disability.

[Malcolm53]

On ODSP security, on one is realy secure on ODSP.

Along with your very real concern of reglualtion changes that could
declassify recipients there are other many current ways a recipient can
become disqualified to receive benefits. Any infraction of the current
rules by a recipient can and will quickly result in suspension. This
is one of the complaints about the system. I do believe that every
recipient who has been on the system for any length of time will tell
you of receiving a notice of termination letter. These letters are
sent out at the drop of a hat any time an ODSP agent is not happy with
how you respond to them. That is the main reason we push so hard to
get recipients to send correspondence via registered mail or to make
sure they receive date stamped photocopies of anything they leave at an
ODSP office.

On the medical disqualification front there already are two catagories
of ODSP recipients. Just as you hinted at there are permanent
recipients and temporary recipients. One need not be permanently
disabled in order to qualify for ODSP assistance. The starting point
for this distinction begins with how your doctor completes the
application form. On the application form there are places to select
wether your disability is permanent or there is a possibility of
recovery. If there is any possibility of recovery then your assistance
is subject to periodic review for eligability on medical grounds.

A while back there was a rash of letters sent out by ODSP notifying
recipients that they had been moved from temporary status to permanent
status and no further medical reviews were needed. This is the notice
one needs to receive in order to feel fairly confident that they will
not be summairly disqualified on medical grounds.

Most recipients are initially registered as temporary until ODSP is
satisified that their condition is permanent, even if their doctor
listed it a permanent.

Malcolm

[jbkeh]

Yes.

Locate your notification from the DAU that you were deemed a person
with a disability - it will either state that your condition was
evaluated as permanent or it will state a review date.

Even if it does state a review date, did you receive a letter in the
last year stating that you had been re-evaluated as 'permanently
disabled'? Many did as the ministry was/is swamped and elected to
simply 'dump' a large number into 'permanent' status to ease the
backlog.

[simonshields]

Dear Abroxis,

Gosh, I just tripped over this FANTASTIC NEW WEBSITE that answers all
these questions. (blush blush). Turns out your question is mostly about
the "review
date" assigned to you.

Read s.6(c) especially:
<http://www.isthatlegal.ca/index.php?name=disability2.odsp#Post-Grant%20Procedures>

Also -

I've NEVER seen employment efforts or actual employment used against an
appellant by the Director on either SBT appeal or otherwise (if for no
other reason than the Director's case preparation is too disorganized)
- so don't sweat that. Work efforts buy credibility before the Tribunal
and dispel the suggestion of malingering. I actively bring them out in
direct examination of a client because it HELPS the case. ODSP is WAY
to disorganized to use that against you AND it would be political
suicide to try:

Toronto Star: 14 February 2007:
"Liberal Government threatens to Cut-off Disabled Person Struggling
Become Independent (Premier threatens to kick puppy too)".

NOT going to happen.

Also too -

Don't sweat the political change thing. Mike Harris was a unique
phenomenon - even for conservatives. (Not that I'd ever vote for them)
but John Tory is much more a Bill (God bless all my children, where's
my limo?) Davis type of tory.

Bill Davis ... you remember the 70s?? The tight pants and funny hats
...disco ... hellooooo

- Simon

[abrowne]

Abroxis,

You're thinking about the old Family Benefits system, which pulled this

scam on people ;-)  A woman on FBA locally was working part-time, like

... 15-20 hours a week at a minimum wage job, and then she was told she

was no longer disabled.  She ended up committing suicide and I made a

public fuss about this.  This was before the Tories changed the law.  I

remember all the media coverage I helped generate over the issue, and

then seeing my MPP about it, then he told me, there will be no inquest

because they are changing the law.  And they did.

 

There is no such thing as "permanent unemployability" under ODSP rules.

When you were accepted for ODSP, some people were scheduled for a

review, which essentially meant that they agreed you qualified for ODSP,

but they also believed you may recover, e.g. if you had cancer, been in a

recent car accident, or a case of Hepatitis C that is responding to treatment.

That means they can later assess your condition again to see if it changed.

But while on ODSP, whether scheduled for review or not, you are not deemed

to be "permanently unemployable".  In fact, that term has actually been

deemed to be too imprecise and unpredictable by the courts.  ODSP allows

people to work if they want, but does not force them to.

 

I am aware of many cases where people worked A LOT to the point they

basically only received a drug card and possibly a year or two later, they

had to stop working and they were put on full ODSP.  It only goes

according to how much you earn.  The system has improved now to the

point that if you worked yourself OFF ODSP, and later had to go back on,

you are automatically re-instated even IF THERE IS A MEDICAL REVIEW,

provided you continue to fall within the financial requirements.

 

You go through the review, while on ODSP income, not OW.  This was one

change I particularly fought for because I believe the way OW treats many

vulnerable people is horrible and many are actually quite traumatized by the

time I managed to secure them on ODSP and/or other supports.

Angela

Abroxis <pickm...@gmail.com> wrote:

I am currently receiving ODSP due to mental illness.

I am well aware that disability recipients can work part time.

What has never been clarified for me is whether this part time
employment can ever be used against me , as evidence of a change in
employability resulting in a re assessment.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com

[abrowne]

Hi,

The only regulation change I can see happen, esp. if this government gets

re-elected is, putting most or all ODSP recipients on some type of workfare.

These clowns have no clue what it means to have a disability and have

proven as such by putting most of us on workfare by stealth by keeping the

rates low enough to make some people HAVE to work, whether they can or not.

 

As for the suspension letters, the Ministry has admitted they are a problem

and are in process of finding ways to get this fixed.  Many of these letters are

apparently not supposed to go out, though some workers have learned how to

by-pass the computer system and send their own letters just asking for what

specific piece of information is missing.

A

Malcolm53 <malc...@gmail.com> wrote:

On ODSP security, no one is really secure on ODSP.

Along with your very real concern of regulation changes that could

declassify recipients there are other many current ways a recipient can
become disqualified to receive benefits. Any infraction of the current
rules by a recipient can and will quickly result in suspension.

__________________________________________________

[abrowne]

Simon,

Believe it or not, that's what happened under Bob Rae's NDP and for the

first year or so of Harris' mandate - you were permanently unemployable,

and if you appeared to be working "too much", some FBA'ers ended up

getting the boot.  The case I referred to was in my own region, and I went

public over it and also worked with the family to push for an inquest; my

letters landed on my MPP's desk and he called me and told me they

were then changing the law so none of this will happen again.

 

As for being disorganized, you're right.  Under the new spousal rules,

they tried to get my husband to join workfare.  I asked them to check

the file to see if they can see any non-working, non-disabled spouse,

and if they still wanted my husband to work, I told them I expect this

to come with after school and school break daycare, transportation,

clothes, and actual placement into a decent job paying at least

$10-$12/hour to start ... interesting how they suddenly "dropped"

his file.  As for me, I never worry about these things because I challenge

absolutely everything, so they just don't want to waste their time.

 

The Tories wouldn't cut people off for working because I sat in on many

of the drafting and consultation meetings.  They knew they got into a lot

of trouble about the major cuts to welfare, education and so forth, and

they did not want to be seen as stomping on the rights of people with

disabled, who they saw as deserving of help.  But the Liberals ... give them

another mandate, I wouldn't be surprised if they try to push more ODSPers

to work (which they are already given the impossibly low rates for most).

A

simonshields <simons...@isp.com> wrote:

Toronto Star: 14 February 2007:
"Liberal Government threatens to Cut-off Disabled Person Struggling
Become Independent (Premier threatens to kick puppy too)".

NOT going to happen.

__________________________________________________

[harmony]

Hi Angela,

i wrote earlier that i had taken on a part time job. i was very
hesitant to take this job on because i did not want to be seen as
employable. after reading many posts here, yours included, i lightened
up a little and thought i would give working a try.

the first reporting card i sent in was applied to my benefit amount
that month fine but the second card i sent in by mail, they did not
receive and suspended me for the end of November cheque, right at
Christmas time!

as soon as this happened bells and whistles went off for me remembering
some of the posts i read here warning me of some of the problems that
had arisen for some when they tried working a part time job. i ended up
quiting my job the day i was suspended. it really scared me and now i
am not in any kind of hurry to work again while on ODSP.

i have more peace of mind not working to be frank. yes, i need the
money, as we all do, but, my peace of mind is far more important to me.
i cant, physically, always get into my local ODSP office to hand
deliver my reporting cards when working and i am not willing to risk
suspension again. what a mess that caused me at Christmas time! i did
not think to register the mail. wish i had of and this might have been
avoided.

Harmony

[cross-eyed idiot]

I had been an FBA recipient working part-time when I was striken with
fibromyalgia and it was recommended that I apply for ODSP. Rather
than "grandfathering" my file, they determined that because I was
working, even though it was only part-time I was not eligible for ODSP
and they transferred my file to OW. I was given a medical exemption
from signing the participation agreement, but chose to join a program
called The WorkHope Project which was jointly funded by OW the
provincial Min.Com.Soc and a hospital. The project co-ordinator was
expected to keep track of the hours of each members involvement.
OW tracked the hours of participation, whether part-time work,
participation in a program, or volunteering. Anyone who put in more
than 20 hours monthly was deemed not to be a person with a disability,
their application for ODSP denied and their medical exemption to sign
the participation agreement revolked.

[abrowne]

Harmony,

I don't know why they suspended you; it's not because you are

working.  If you can't physically get to the ODSP office, fax your

reporting card in with a reporting sheet copy to you or send it by

registered mail.  Quitting your job will only put you behind the

8-ball financially, particularly if you are in market housing.  I find

I HAVE to work ... having financial problems and huge deficits is

NOT peace of mind for me, esp. when shelter in a market setting

averages 70% of ODSP income for people around here.  I hope to

get OFF ODSP A.S.A.P. because I noted my health became even

worse since I had to rely on it.  But I would immediately PHONE

the ODSP office in your area on Tuesday morning and tell them

what the problem is and try to work it out.  You should be able to

keep working and keep your ODSP.

A

harmony <denise...@yahoo.ca> wrote:

the first reporting card i sent in was applied to my benefit amount
that month fine but the second card i sent in by mail, they did not
receive and suspended me for the end of November cheque, right at
Christmas time!

__________________________________________________