An interesting decision made its way to the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal, and it involved an Aeroplan card that was loaded with points, a patient with dementia, the patient’s daughter, and a B.C. caregiver.
The applicant in the case, TI, who was speaking on behalf of her father, the patient, claimed that the respondent, HJ, took her father’s Aeroplan card, changed the contact information, and used the points for her own benefit. TI claimed $5,000 for the value of the points.
HJ claimed that the card was a gift to recognize her work.
HJ had started working for TI’s father in November 2020. She was hired as a care aide through an agency. Between January 2021 and April 2022, she continued work under a private agreement.
TI, who had Power of Attorney (POA), claimed that the employment contract was with her, not her father. She added that HJ was paid in cash and was not aware of the POA.
TI alleged that HJ took her father’s Aeroplan card, changed the password and email address, and used the points herself. HJ again reiterated that the card was a gift. She said that TI’s father did not ask her to return it or account for the points. She also said that the father said it was “just points” and he wouldn’t use them anyway.
TI said that if her father did indeed give the card to HJ, he did not have the capacity to do so regarding his health. TI said there was no reason for him to give HJ the points and that they never travelled together.
TI wanted to book some flights in 2024, but saw that the points had been used. The tribunal decision points to three flights that HJ booked in 2023 and 2024, using 121,554 points in the process.
The flights were from Delhi to Vancouver using 61,190 points, a flight from Vancouver to Edmonton using 46,695 points, and a flight from Edmonton to Vancouver using 13,668 points.
The main question the tribunal was hoping to answer was whether TI’s father had intended to gift the points and if he had the capacity to do so. It said there was no evidence that the respondent took the card without the father’s knowledge. The tribunal said that HJ had the password, and there was no allegation that TI’s father did not provide that password.
The tribunal dismissed the claim of theft.
Both parties said that TI’s father had Alzheimer’s disease. However, a letter from a doctor stated that TI’s father had six months of cognitive decline, which affected his short and long-term memory, adding that he had a caregiver “just in case” for four hours a day for cleaning and cooking. The letter said he was able to do many activities independently.
The doctor noted that his decline was more related to physical difficulty rather than memory.
TI argued that her father may have misunderstood the number value of the Aeroplan points, or that the points had continued to accrue.
Either way, the tribunal determined that TI’s father had a cognitive decline, but that decline didn’t establish that he lacked the ability to understand the nature and effect of gifting the Aoerplan points.
Ultimately, the B.C. tribunal determined that it was more likely than not that the card with the Aeroplan points was a gift and dismissed TI’s claims.