Decision #01/02 - Type: Victims' Rights
Preamble
An Appeal Panel hearing was held on January 24, 2002, at the request of legal counsel acting on behalf of the appellant. The Panel discussed this appeal on January 24, 2002.Issue
Whether or not the life insurance proceeds are a benefit received pursuant to the provision of The Victims’ Rights Act; and
Whether or not the dependant’s benefits should have been discontinued June 1, 2001.
Decision
The life insurance proceeds are a benefit received pursuant to the provision of The Victims’ Rights Act; and
The dependant’s benefits should have been discontinued on June 1, 2001.
Decision: Unanimous
Background
The Victims’ Rights Act was replaced on August 31, 2001 by The Victims’ Bill of Rights. The part of the respective Acts which pertains to compensation is identical, albeit with different section numbering. Although the claim, which forms the basis of this appeal, was commenced under the former statute, the references in this decision are to The Victims’ Bill of Rights.
On May 15, 2000, a Claims Adjudicator with the Compensation for Victims of Crime program advised the claimant’s grand-parents (guardians) that, pursuant to The Victims Rights & Consequential Amendments Act, the claimant would receive a monthly pension benefit of $270.00 per month and that this benefit was to be received until the claimant was of the age of 18 and/or in full time attendance at school.
In a second letter dated May 8, 2001, the Manager with the Compensation for Victims of Crime program determined that payment of benefits to the claimant would cease as it was learned that the claimant was in receipt of an insurance benefit of $100,000 which had been paid out on behalf of his mother. “Section 33 of our legislation requires us to deduct any benefits payable from insurance plans or other government or private programs. Given that the insurance payment was greater than the amount that you would receive from our program, we have no option but to discontinue benefits effective June 1, 2001.”
On September 11, 2001, the Director of the Public Safety Branch confirmed that the insurance pay out in the amount of $100,000 constituted a “benefit received” and therefore fell within the meaning of clause C of section 56 of The Victim’s Bill of Rights (formerly numbered as section 33 of The Victims Rights Act). On November 2, 2001, the claimant’s grandparents disagreed with the decision and an oral hearing was held.
Reasons
This appeal is pursuant to The Victims’ Bill of Rights of Manitoba. The claimant is a minor whose mother lost her life as a result of a murder. The claimant’s grandparents – his guardians – are seeking compensation benefits.
Subsection 46(1) of The Victims’ Bill of Rights states that an application for compensation may be made in respect of a person who dies as a result of a crime. Section 48 allows for compensation in the form of a monthly payment to be paid to a dependant other than a spouse.
The claimant, in this case, applied for and was awarded a monthly payment. As noted above, he subsequently received the proceeds of a life insurance policy in the amount of $100,000. This resulted in the cessation of benefits under this Act.
The issue before the Panel was whether or not these life insurance proceeds should have been considered a benefit which would lead to the termination of benefits provided under The Victims’ Bill of Rights.
This Panel receives its jurisdiction pursuant to section 61 of The Victims’ Bill of Rights and is mandated to reconsider decisions made by the director of the program. As an inferior tribunal, we are required to make our decisions in accordance with the statute (The Victims’ Bill of Rights) and any relevant policy. We are not a court of equity and, thus, no matter how sympathetic we might be to a claimant’s cause, we cannot grant equitable relief.
In this case, we were asked to determine that the insurance proceeds were not a benefit as set out in section 56, which reads, in part:
Certain amounts to be deducted from compensation
56 The director shall deduct the following from any compensation payable to a victim or dependant:
….
(c) a benefit received by the victim or dependant as a result of the victim's injury or death through accident, sickness or life insurance or another compensation scheme; ….
We were not able to come to that determination. In coming to our decision, we made a careful review of all the evidence on the file, and conducted an oral hearing, at which we heard the testimony of the claimant’s grandparents and the argument of their legal counsel.
Counsel argued that The Victims’ Bill of Rights was intended to provide compensation to victims of a crime who have an immediate need of the monies.
In this case, all the proceeds of the life insurance policy were placed into a trust fund for the benefit of the claimant. We were told that the claimant is not to receive any benefits from the trust until he is at least 18 years of age. It was argued that, because of these trust provisions, it should be held that he is not in receipt of benefits that would result in the loss of any compensation due under The Victims’ Bill of Rights.
We learned, however, that there is, in fact, nothing preventing the trustees from using the money, for the claimant’s benefit, at any time prior to the his eighteenth birthday.
We also note that the decision to place the insurance proceeds in a trust was one taken by the claimant’s grandparents, for a very particular reason. The policy did not have a designated beneficiary. As such, the proceeds would normally have been paid into the estate of the policyholder. This would have exposed them to attachment by creditors. By having the proceeds paid into a trust for the benefit of the policyholder’s dependant child, the totality of the proceeds were protected.
To our mind, this does not remove the insurance proceeds from being a benefit as contemplated in The Victims’ Bill of Rights. Subsection 56 (c) of The Victims’ Bill of Rights is very clear in its language, when it states “…. a benefit received by the …. dependant …. through …. life insurance ….” (Our emphasis.) Section 56 does not speak to the timing of the receipt of such benefits.
Furthermore, section 56 states that “[t]he director shall deduct …” (Our emphasis). The Victims’ Bill of Rights is again very clear in its intent. The director has no discretion, but to deduct such benefits from the amount of compensation payable to the claimant.
For this appeal to be successful, we would have had to come to a finding that The Victims’ Bill of Rights was unclear and ambiguous when speaking of benefits to be deducted from the compensation provided by The Victims’ Bill of Rights. As noted, we found the language to be very clear.
Accordingly, the appeal is not allowed.
Panel Members
T. Sargeant, Presiding OfficerA. Finkel, Commissioner
M. Day, Commissioner
Recording Secretary, B. Miller
T. Sargeant - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)
Signed at Winnipeg this 5th day of March, 2002