Subsidy Calculations - Part II

The Ontario Human Rights Commission in their report entitled Right at home: Report on the consultation on human rights and rental housing in Ontario, dated March 2, 2009, stated:

Iness v. Caroline Co-operative Homes Inc. (No.5), 2006 HRTO 19 (Can LII) (Iness). Ms. Iness was expected to pay the full shelter component of her social assistance as rent to her co-operative, instead of paying 25% of her income as rent, which she had done previously. As a result, she was no longer able to pay her insurance and hydro costs out of the shelter portion of her benefit, resulting in her having to cover these out of her basic living costs. The Tribunal found that Ms. Iness was treated differently from other low-income tenants, who were not on social assistance and were expected to pay a percentage of their income in rent.

The Human Rights Tribunal rules that Ms. Iness should be given full credit for her fuel and hydro costs, as well as a credit for her household insurance. She was awarded retroactive costs for same as well as compensation for her loss of dignity and respect while trying to rectify the situation.

Members on social assistance also underwent the same discrimination at that time and are still struggling today to receive full credit for their utility costs.

In 1996 our housing charge went up substantially even though our income had not changed. We noted on our subsidy breakdown form that we had not been given one of the credits to pay our heat and hydro, nor a credit for our household insurance. We, therefore, withheld $50. from our housing charge and pursued the matter further. In speaking with other subsidized members we found out that some people had not received any credits at all for quite some time.

Two years prior to this the co-op forced members on assistance to ask for the Maximum Shelter Allowance from their workers. The co-op was now not allowing ANY credits for utility costs. Members were being forced to pay their utility costs with their food money. This was nothing short of an illegal money grab from the most vulnerable members in the co-op. We sought advice from a lawyer and under pressure, the co-op begrudgingly gave only one-month credits back to members receiving social assistance.

The subsidy calculation for people on social assistance is as follows:

Occupants receiving welfare assistance or family benefits shall pay the shelter component of the welfare or family benefits payment or the amount required by the application of the total payment to the graduated occupancy charge scale, whichever is greater.

In our co-op, we've always paid the Shelter Component, not 25% of our total income. When we paid the Maximum Shelter Component with minimal deductions for our utilities, we actually paid more than 25% of our total income for our housing charges.

However, there's been yet another twist to this calculation. The co-op is now using as total income the GROSS amount ODSP would have paid the recipient without taking into account ODSP's deduction of 50% of the recipient's earnings. The co-op then revokes the recipient's housing subsidy because of this over-the-top 'fictitious' income.

I wrote to The Agency several weeks ago asking them for a sample calculation pertaining to my potential earnings in the upcoming year. My concerns are: (1) Will we lose our subsidy based on my estimated earnings? And (2) Will my husband have to go off ODSP in order for me to have earnings and retain a subsidy? To date I have received no reply to my request for information.

I do, however, have a question that The Agency might answer, and that is:

Should I, instead, divorce my husband in order for him to remain on ODSP and retain his housing subsidy, in light of my potential earnings?