# 2023-146 Pay and Benefits, Post Living Differential, Recovery of Overpayment/Debt Write-Off

Case summary

F&R Date: 2024-07-26

The grievor challenged the decision of the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) to recover overpayments of the Post Living Deferential (PLD). Between 2019 and 2021, the grievor was posted to Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, while his primary residence was located in the Post Living Differential Area (PLDA) of the South Shore of Montreal. During this period, the grievor continued to receive PLD payments. In 2021, the grievor was informed that as a result of a review of the geographical boundaries of the Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu place of duty (Operation ZONAGE) in 2016, he had not been eligible for the PLD during his posting at Saint-Jean and that the money now had to be recovered. In his grievance, the grievor stated that it was unreasonable to expect a member being deployed to correctly understand the application of the rules pertaining to geographic areas, particularly when the experts themselves had difficulty interpreting and applying them consistently. As redress, the grievor requested the cancellation of the recovery action and the amount of the debt associated with the overpaid PLD. 

The Director General Compensation and Benefits, acting as Initial Authority (IA), found that the grievor had been treated in accordance with the applicable policies and refused to grant the redress requested. In her decision, the IA stated that the grievor's place of duty changed from Montreal to Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu in 2019. Because the geographical area of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu does not include the grievor's place of residence and the grievor had chosen to keep his residence in that location, paragraph 205.45(8) (PLD at other than the place of duty) of the Compensation and Benefit Instructions for the Canadian Forces applied. Consequently, the grievor was entitled to the lower of the PLD rate for his place of residence or the PLD rate for his place of duty, which represented zero dollars for the PLDA of Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu. The IA added that, although the grievor had been the victim of an administrative error, it was still his responsibility to repay the debt, as prescribed in article 203.04 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for the Canadian Forces. 

The Committee wanted to highlight the fact that files involving administrative errors in members' financial benefits are a recurring issue. The Committee stated that, although overpayments resulting from errors had to be recovered, they have harmful consequences for members and their families. Members are forced to submit grievances, which inevitably creates additional costs for the Crown and reinforces the public's negative opinion of the CAF.  

The Committee found that the grievor had been aggrieved because he had consulted the CAF's human resources professionals about whether he was eligible for the PLD beforehand. The Committee deemed it legitimate to assume that, in such a situation, a reasonable person would naturally trust the CAF's subject matter experts, without questioning their qualifications. The Committee therefore recommended that the Final Authority consider the scope of the financial and personal repercussions of the recovery for the grievor and prepare a submission to the Governor in Council for the remission of the debt.