# 2020-089 Pay and benefits, Interim lodging, meals and incidentals, Relocation benefits

Case summary

F&R Date: 2021-08-25

The grievor challenged the refusal to pay for a second house-hunting trip (HHT), claiming a lack of support from the chain of command and the service provider while he had health issues.

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, acting as Initial Authority (IA), refused to grant the redress requested, indicating that the grievor had not suffered harm. The IA explained that the grievor’s own decisions during his relocation had caused him so much stress and aggravated his health issues.

The Committee found that the service provider did not deny the grievor’s request for a second HHT. Rather, he was informed that the reimbursement could be made from the custom funding account, which was limited, in accordance with article 4.2.06 of the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program. The Committee also determined that, although the relocation was difficult on the grievor and his family, and although the grievor had health issues, he received all the relevant information and assistance for his relocation.

The Committee concluded that the grievor was not entitled to benefits for a second HHT and recommended that the Final Authority not grant redress. 

FA decision summary

The Director of the Canadian Armed Forces Grievance Authority, Final Authority (FA), agreed with the Committee's recommendation to deny the grievance. The FA, like the Committee, noted that a second house hunting trip was granted to the grievor, but that its reimbursement was done from the personalized funding. Since the grievor was informed of the benefits to which they are entitled, the decision they made to purchase a residence by internet and phone, without visiting the residence prior, is therefore not attributable to the CAF. The FA concluded that the grievor was treated fairly, despite a lack of communication amongst units.