Grievance Case Summary - G-492

The Grievor learned that her son would be born with a medical condition. He would require an immediate and ongoing type of care which was offered 230 kilometres from her posting. Her superior told her that he genuinely believed that the Force could reimburse the travel costs that she incurred while driving her son to and from his out-of-town medical appointments. After the Grievor gave birth, she drove her son to and from 12 appointments, over five months. She filed expense claims totalling $3,132. Her superior appreciated the fact that she limited her claims to certain costs. He approved her claims. The Force later paid them. The Grievor soon learned that an audit showed that she was not entitled to the $3,132, that the Respondent felt he had no choice but to recover it as a debt owing to the Crown, and that it would be recovered shortly.

The Grievor filed a grievance. A Level I Adjudicator denied it. He held that the Grievor was not entitled to the $3,132 payment under the Force policies upon which she relied. He stated that those policies applied only to members at recognized isolated posts, or to members who were escorted by dependents on medical-related travel, and that the Grievor was neither. He noted that a government directive and a Force policy indicated that travel costs were not necessarily unpayable just because they arose from mistakes. However, he opined that the Force had to recover the Grievor's expenses in view of a provision of a government travel directive which required the retrieval of overpayments from "travellers". The Grievor filed a Level II grievance.

The ERC confirmed that no authority entitled the Grievor to the $3,132 she received. However, it disagreed that the Respondent had no option but to recover that sum as a debt owing to the Crown. It observed that the policy provision under which the overpayment recovery was ordered did not actually apply to the Grievor. This was so because she did not meet the policy's definition of "traveller". It also noted that although other Force authorities said that overpayments were to be recouped, a debt forgiveness provision of a federal Act permitted the government to waive overpayment-related debt in certain situations. It found that the record suggested that the Respondent would have looked into the possibility of debt forgiveness in the Grievor's circumstances, if he knew the option existed. It also found that there were compelling reasons for permitting the Grievor to keep her payment. It further opined that there was no authority at the time for the Grievor to successfully claim similar expenses in the future.

The ERC recommended that the Commissioner of the RCMP allow this grievance, in part. In so doing, it recommended that he direct an appropriate official at National Compensation Services to inquire into whether the Grievor's debt may be forgiven under a statutory debt forgiveness authority. If the Commissioner opts to deny the grievance, then the ERC recommends that he direct the Respondent to recover the Grievor's debt in an authorized manner which does not impose financial hardship. Either way, it recommended that he affirm there was no authority for the Grievor to successfully claim ongoing similar expenses.

The ERC commented that the Grievor may wish to discuss costs with her insurer. It also remarked that she might inquire into whether she may receive a grant from the RCMP Benefit Trust Fund.

The Commissioner has rendered a decision in this matter, as summarized by his office:

As recommended by the ERC, the Commissioner allowed the grievance in part.

The Commissioner found that the Grievor was erroneously reimbursed for expenses incurred when driving her child to and from the closest city for medical care that was locally unavailable. The Commissioner agreed with both the Level I Adjudicator and the ERC that no authority entitled the Grievor to the $3,132 payment that she received for those expenses.

Like the ERC, the Commissioner questioned the application of the policy provision under which the overpayment recovery was ordered, since the Grievor did not meet the policy's definition of "traveller". Nonetheless, the overpayment to the Grievor had to be recovered unless the debt could be remitted or forgiven by the appropriate approval authority. Pursuant to the RCMP's Pay Procedures Manual (PPM), an overpayment of pay and allowances is deemed a "debt owing to the Crown" and cannot be "written off without Treasury Board of Canada approval" (PPM V.1, D.1 and D.1.a).

The Commissioner noted that the Grievor had submitted her travel expense claims in good faith. Unfortunately, she was misguided by her supervisor who, also in good faith, erred in informing her that she could be reimbursed for these expenses, and later in approving her two travel expense claims. The Commissioner understood that this took place at a very difficult time in the Grievor's life. He regretted that the overpayment recovery order had added financial stress to the stress that the Grievor and her husband were already experiencing due to their child's medical condition. The Commissioner also took note that the Grievor had been modest in her claims, limiting them to mileage and private accommodations. In these very specific circumstances, the Commissioner agreed with the ERC that it was appropriate to inquire into whether it was possible to remit the Grievor's debt under a debt forgiveness authority such as subsection 23(2.1) of the Financial Administration Act. The Commissioner assigned the handling of this inquiry to the Force's Chief Financial and Administrative Officer.

In the event that it would not be possible to remit the Grievor's debt of $3,132, the Commissioner directed that this debt be recovered in an authorized manner that would not impose financial hardship on the Grievor.

Finally, the Commissioner noted that the Grievor had asked for direction with respect to similar expenses in the future. He indicated that he could not answer this question. The answer would depend on the specific expense claimed and the relevant policy provisions, as policies change over time.