I am taking the opportunity to write about what DCAC and the team are noticing lately about the state of CPP disability decision letters.
I have been doing this work for over 20 years and the decision letters from CPP disability have not really changed much.
The letter advises when the CPP application was received. For example, the letter I am looking at states that the CPP disability application was received in November 2020 and a “decision” (if you want to call it so) was made in March 2021.
The letter is a denial, and it says that their review shows the CPP disability rules have not been met.
In this decision CPP found that the client met rules 1 and 2.
Then they note:
“The information we received from the client and their health care providers supported our decision that the medical conditions do not prevent the client from regularly working at any job. Therefore, both severe and prolonged are not met.”
CPP then advise the reason for the decision and say:
“We recognize that the client has limitations. However, we have concluded they should be able to do some type of work in the future”
It is my understanding that a decision maker is required to give the client reasons why a decision is made, to review the information they received on the file, to apply the adjudicative guidelines consistently across Canada and to help the client understand the deficiencies in their application to allow them to prepare an appeal.
This example in my opinion is a “rubber stamp” denial and the volume of these that I am seeing is increasing rapidly. This letter I have quoted from comes out of the Chatham Ontario office, but I have seen many from various regions in Canada.
How would you feel if you have prepared your application, done all that you can to ensure that it is complete, only to receive a letter that gives you no reasons for the decision to deny your application. Oh, wait the CPP adjudicator CONCLUDED this client should be able to return to some type of work, but they do not say why.
In closing, I have been at this a long time and these letters are disturbing. It is my view that it is evidence of “rubber stamping”denials due to excessive backlogs. My feeling is that it is going to get worse.