# 2021-235 Pay and Benefits, Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program, Income-Producing Property, Principal Residence

Case summary

F&R Date: 2022-08-22

The grievor grieved the Director Compensation Benefits Administration denial of his claim for expenses associated with a posting cancellation. As redress, he requested reimbursement for two months' lost rental income and the administrative costs associated with obtaining a new tenant.

The Initial Authority denied redress on the grounds that that the grievor was not entitled to benefits associated with an income-producing property.

The Committee applied the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program (CFIRP) Directive to the grievor's circumstances. It noted that the grievor rented out his house while he was posted outside of Canada. He was subsequently posted to the area in which the house was located, whereupon he gave notice to his tenants to vacate. When his posting was then cancelled, the grievor was obliged to seek new tenants.

As the house in question was not the location to which the grievor's household goods and effects were last moved at public expense, nor was it occupied by the grievor or his dependants prior his being officially notified of the (subsequently cancelled) posting, the Committee found that it was not the grievor's “principal residence” as defined in the CFIRP Directive.

The Committee noted that the CFIRP Directive does not provide for reimbursement of expenses associated with maintaining an income property, regardless of how a tenancy comes to an end. As the grievor's lost rental income was not a relocation expense, the Committee found that he was not entitled to relocation benefits.

Accordingly, the Committee recommended that the Final Authority not afford redress.

FA decision summary

The Chief of the Defence Staff agreed with the Committee's findings and recommendation not to afford the grievor redress.