# 2015-224 - Relocation Expenses

Relocation Expenses

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2015–08–24

The grievor was posted in 2009 with a change of strength (COS) date in mid-April but she did not submit a claim for certain moving expenses until mid-October 2011. The grievor acknowledged that she had been reminded about submitting her claim but explained that she had been unable to do so within the two-year time limit due to personal circumstances and a very high tempo at her new unit. The Director Compensation and Benefits Administration denied the grievor's request for reimbursement on the basis that she had submitted her claim almost six months outside the two-year time limit specified in the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP).

The Initial Authority, the Director General Compensation and Benefits, acknowledged the grievor's personal circumstances but did not accept that she was unable to submit her claim with two years. The IA noted that, at the time the grievor was reminded of the claim she had indicated that only one receipt was missing.

The Committee determined that, contrary to the grievor's assertion, Compensation and Benefits Instruction (CBI) 208.96 – Acquisition and Disposal of Residential Accommodation (Section 8 of the CBI) did not apply to the grievor because she was moved under the CF IRP in accordance with CBI Section 9.

The Committee noted that although CFIRP 2.9.01 specifies a two-year time limit from the COS date, it also provides that an extension may be requested based on “exceptional circumstances”.

With respect to a busy work schedule, the Committee considered that the transactions associated with relocation would normally be finalized within a few months and that situations where the already generous two-year window would be considered insufficient should be extremely rare and truly exceptional. The Committee noted that the grievor had only one outstanding receipt in August 2009 and that she could have submitted the claim while waiting for the final receipt by making a statutory declaration. The Committee was not convinced that the grievor was busy to the point where she could not have submitted her claim within the two years.

With respect to the grievor's personal circumstances, the committee noted that there was a four-month period after her move before she was notified of a serious family illness in which she could have submitted her claim. The Committee acknowledged the grievor's circumstances but noted that her compassionate leave over an 18-month period would have left more than sufficient time to complete her claim. The Committee could not conclude that the timeline offered did not provide sufficient time to submit a claim.

The Committee was unable to find that the grievor's personal situation and work schedule constituted “exceptional circumstances” that would justify the use of the Chief of the Defence Staff's discretion to grant an extension in arrears.

The Committee recommended that the grievance be denied.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2015–11–20

The FA agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation that the grievance be denied.

Page details

Date modified: