My name is Deborah Mayo, and I am a law clerk with the law Firm of Green & Vespry Law Offices, located at 200-190 O’Connor Street, Ottawa, Ontario.

1. I have reviewed the file of the client, David Thomasson, respecting his farm, farm taxes and various appeals against the Director, Ontario Disability Support Program (hereinafter “ODSP”) and therefore can swear that the following statements are true:
   
2. I was asked to review the documents contained in the David Thomasson file that relate to the current claim of ODSP of an over-payment that originates back to 2005 with the employment of temporary farm help for seeding and picking, by David Thomasson (hereinafter “client”).
   
3. On March 28, 2005 a letter was sent to ODSP advising that our client would be hiring temporary help starting in April 2005 for seeding and picking. This letter requested any information that may be adverse to the interests of our client as a result of hiring the farm help – no response to this letter was noted as being received. See attached as Exhibit “A” a true copy of the letter from Green & Vespry to ODSP, dated March 28, 2005.
   
4. On August 25, 2005, Joanne Lefebvre (JL), for ODSP, reviewed the income tax returns of our client regarding his farm income for the years 2000-2004. She noted in the file that the only adjustment for those years was the change of kilometer rate from .43 to .18 as per the ODSP provisions. She also noted in the file that this makes no difference to our client’s income because of his losses throughout these years. See attached as Exhibit “B” a true copy of the file notes of JL found in the disclosure of the Director of ODSP.
   
5. In the ODSP notes from August 25, 2005 it is recognized that the reason that our client is farming is because it is considered as therapy by his doctor. Letters from his doctor stating that farming is a therapy for our client are noted to be in the ODSP file. See attached as Exhibit “B” true copies of the file notes of JL noting receipt of letters from David Thomasson’s doctor and also see attached as Exhibit “C” a true copy of the letter from Dr. DeBanne to Green & Vespry dated January 15, 2005.
   
6. On August 31, 2005 Ms. Susan Chartrand(SC) , representing ODSP, sent a letter to Green & Vespry stating that the 2000-2004 income review of David Thomasson was completed. This letter did state that if Mr. Thomasson did not do a re-assessment of his 1999 taxes they would find him in an over-payment situation. See attached as Exhibit “D” a true copy of the August 2005 letter from ODSP to Green & Vespry.
   
7. On September 22, 2005 Terrance Green, representing David Thomasson, responded to the questions of ODSP and asked why in 2005 ODSP was again bringing up the 1999 income which was deemed to be resolved previously. See attached as Exhibit “E” a true copy of the September 2005 letter from Green & Vespry to ODSP.
   
8. On May 4, 2006 JL Reviewed our client’s farming income for the year 2005. Client's total income was $11,762.80 with allowable expenses of $12,565.52 for net income -$802.72, all expenses were allowed as they were acceptable for farming activities, including his farm helper's T-4 slip showing income of $3,185 plus employee’s portion of benefits totaling $3,437.26, with contributions of employer (member) explaining why David Thomasson reported salaries and benefits expenses of $3,522.44 and thus allowing the salaries for a farm helper, James McKay. It is stated in the notes that no adjustment was to be made as client was in negative income. See attached as Exhibit “B” a true copy of the file notes of JL to the ODSP file.
   
9. On June 6, 2006 JL, for ODSP, sent letter to client's lawyer, requesting: Business Assets Review form within 30 days, Vehicle trip log sheets, Exclusive use of vehicle declaration (in order to allow future motor vehicle expenses), copies of written contracts in order to allow harvester (pickers) as per policy 5.7, and verification of the interest expenses of $1,435.33 and the property taxes of $98.14 with an explanation as to how these apply to his farming. See attached as Exhibit “F” a true copy of the June 6, 2006 letter from ODSP to Green & Vespry.
   
10. On September 5 2006 JL for ODSP noted our client’s file as having sent a letter to client's lawyer requesting verification of information from letter of June 6. If information not received by end of September 2006, a review of the farm income for 2005 is not to allow items as expenses. See attached as Exhibit “G” a true copy of the September 5, 2006 letter from ODSP to Green& Vespry.
    
11. On October 25 2006 JL, for ODSP, re-reviewed client's farm income for the year 2005 and did not allow the expenses of $1,453.33 for interest and $98.14 for property taxes as client's lawyer could not explained how taxes and mortgage interest for the farm property could be required for the operation of David Thomasson’s farm. JL calculated the revised allowable expenses as $11,032.05 His gross income was $11,762.80, leaving his net farm income as $730.75 or $60.89 per month, which was asked to be recorded as farm income for the 2005 year. See attached as Exhibit “H” a true copy of the October 2006 ODSP file notes.
    
12. On January 3, 2007, there is a note on the ODSP file of a telephone call from Jeff Baker from legal services. Mr. Baker was inquiring about current status of David Thomasson’s file and how overpayment was created. ODSP explained the farm business review and revision of 2005 completed due to expenses which were deemed not to be allowed, specifically property taxes and mortgage interest for the farm property. Mr. Baker was also informed that ODSP did allow the farm help in 2005 as David Thomasson’s accountant provided a copy of the T-4 for the farm help. It was explained that the farm help had been considered as being allowable due to David Thomasson’s disability and work required to harvest his crop. It was explained to Mr. Baker, that as per policy, ODSP clients are allowed to subcontract, on an infrequent basis, but such contracts should not involve ongoing contractual agreements. See attached as Exhibit “H” a true copy of the ODSP file notes of the telephone call from Mr. J. Baker.
    
13. On January 3, 2007 JL spoke to Vince Collard (VC) regarding client’s farm business income for 2005. The file was reviewed for the third time and it was determined that David Thomasson’s lawyer was provided 6 months (from June 2006 to December 2006) to provide a copy of the written contract for his farm helper. ODSP are now claiming that the contract has not been provided to ODSP, however, it was noted earlier in the file that they accepted the T-4 provided by the client’s accountant as proof of the employment. A further review was to be conducted by JL of the file. See attached as Exhibit “H” a true copy of the ODSP file notes where JL requested an additional review of the file.
    
14. On January 5, 2007 JL, for ODSP, revised the calculation of Thomasson’s farm business income for the year 2005, disallowing the wages paid for farm help being $3,522.44 reducing the allowable expenses to $7,509.61 and increased the Gross farm business income for 2005 to $11,762.80 less allowable expenses of $7,509.61 resulting in the net farm business income being adjusted to $4,253.19 Averaged over 12 months = $354.43 per month from January 2005 to December 2005. Further JL, for ODSP, adjusted the farm business income to zero effective January 2006 creating arrears of $60.88 and applied this amount to the constructed overpayment created. This overpayment was applied from January 2005 to December 2005 at $1,949.84 less arrears of $60.88 for net overpayment of $1,888.96. It certainly appears that the overpayment through the various adjustments to the farm business income for 2005 was to create the means not to allow the expense for the farm helper. See attached as Exhibit “I” a true copy of the January 5, 2007 letter sent from ODSP to David Thomasson.
    
15. On January 31 2007 Linda Burgess (LB) conducted the internal review and made her decision to uphold the previous decision by JL to assess an overpayment as a result of a farm business income review for the period of January 1 2005 to December 31 2005 plus the months of November and December 2006. See attached as Exhibit “J” a true copy of the January 31, 2007 letter sent from ODSP to David Thomasson.
    
16. I found a copy of the Ministerial Directive 5.7 stating that wages and employee benefits paid for farm help cannot be considered as an expense but is counted as the ODSP recipient’s income. Further, this Directive also states that source deductions paid on behalf of a farm employee are like wise not to be considered as an expense but considered as income of the ODSP recipient. See attached as Exhibit “K” a true copy of the Ministerial Directive 5.7.
    
17. In the file was also a copy of the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) guidelines for farm expenses which are to be used by farmers in calculating their income and to determine which expenses can be considered as valid expenses and not counted as the farmers’ income. See attached as Exhibit “L” a true copy of the CRA guidelines for calculating farm expenses to determine farm income.

I make this affidavit in support of David Thomasson’s application and for no other or improper purpose.

Affirmed before me at Ottawa,	)
in the Province of Ontario,	)
on this 13th day of July, 2007	)
	)
	)
__________________________	)	__________________________
Nancy Hellyer	)	Deborah Mayo
Barrister and Solicitor	)
A Commissioner for taking affidavits	)