How does our settlement stack up?

In the end GOC payed people to evaluated and strat clawback's, then they payed for people to actually find excuses of all types and natures to claw us back. Then they payed a lot to have the situation re-evaluated by many different comities, then they payed to go to court and finally they will pay us back. Poor taxe payer would go crazy trying to figure that out!

Bigrex, I agree fully with what you are saying, however, from a legal standpoint its a whole different ball game. Common sense seems to fly out the window in a court of law and they concentrate on what can be 100% proven, hence judges will mostly always err on the side that both parties really believe in their point of view and will throw out the assertion that one party or the other was grossly negligent or incompetent. Common sense tells me GOC were vendictive pricks in this fiasco but proving it is difficult, even with the various reports on file.

I respect peoples opinion on the differences between these cases. The point of the thread was simply to show that the deal isn't as great as is being portrayed, and I don't expect that our deal should be as good as these other cases, but there was a lot if wiggle room to give us a better deal if they truly respected the Veterans and were anywhere regretful for what disabled Veterans had to endure over the last 30+ years

As far as the GoC being negligent, it is once again a matter of opinion. The government had been notified by SISIP that the clawback was wrong, Committees of both the House and Senate stated in was wrong. The House of Commons voted that it needed to stop and back to back DND Ombudsmen reported that it was wrong, and in fact so wrong it could be a breach of our human rights. But the Government ignored the advise of all these people, even after extensive studies to back up their recommendations, until the courts said it was unlawful. So either it was gross negligence or gross incompetence. Take your pick.

Bigrex, liked your post but the cases you cited it was easily proven that GOC were negligent. In our case they argued that our VA pensions for pain and suffering etc was income and we said it was not income. They lost but I believe no judge would accuse GOC of being negligent, spiteful, etc. A judge would simply see 2 differing opinions and then make judgement, which he did. I truly wish it could be ruled in our favor but very hard to prove.

Bigrex, your research is good, but their is a difference with returning lost wages to us and the 2 case mentioned. What we are receving back as no choice to be taxed. For the 2 cases you are refering to, the can't get back what was lost and never in my life I would trade my place with them. The Damages they are getting is tax free as it is not the same as us.

Your point concerning legal fees is also right, it will be the Judge who will decide what he finds fair and correct with reprensentation from MC law firm and the Class representation.

It is our duty to write if we aren't agreing and also a good idea to write to the Judge if we agree. All wanted info and communication, we have everything in hand, so lets do what is needed.

You have rights to be for or against this deal and to write what you did.

We live in a democracy and to bad if we don't like having one, it is here to stay.

The important thing is to be repectfull.

As for GOC, they will be the same with or without any Court Judgment!

They will do minimum and our lawyers did maximum for us, it was at the end a take it or leave it proposed setlement the gave our team lawyers and the Class,
That is it!

Patrick.

I agree wholeheartedly as well KyleRCR and fallensoldier that the public's persception is important in this cause and future causes for Veterans, Soldiers and the RCMP. I also support the settlement proposal and have never written otherwise rather I attempt to provide resources in support of the settlement outcomes. Notwithstanding that however, I respect bigrex and your opinions equally.

Sparrow

Well that's the problem , Fallensoldier, if we continue to have people who complain about everything, all the time, it wears down the issues and corrodes our image to the public. For us to turn our noses at a deal which is for the most part good would leave a bad taste in the publics eye especially in times of economic uncertainty .

fallensoldier, with respect, I was not crying the blues nor have I ever cried the blues in any of my posts on Csat. I was simply stating that I appreciated the effort it took for bigrex to research the references posted and furthermore to also agree with the subject of abuse coming in many different forms. I think people know me here at Csat as one that allows others to have their opinions albeit I always find a morsel of knowledge within each persons' post that I can learn from.

Sparrow

I thought the lawyers already explained damages. And i think we are much better off than the people above. Quit crying and accept what we are getting. I fucking tired of seeing people cry thee blues

Bigrex thank you for taking the time to research this legal precedance and then posting it for us to read. If you are not a paralegal now then you must have been in your past life Again, thanks for bringing this to our attention. I agree that injuries and abuse come in many different ways some seen some not so easy to see.

Sparrow

Actually, it also states in the tainted blood settlement this little clause.

"1.02 No Admission of Legal Liability

Canada does not admit any of the allegations in the Class Action and nothing in this settlement will be construed as an admission of liability by Canada."

So getting them to pay a proper compensation package has nothing to do with whether or not they admit to any wrongdoing.

And you are right that we didn't get physically abused, but knowingly causing hardship to those already vulnerable is a form of abuse. Not to mention how this clawback caused many Class members to go bankrupt, lose their homes, lose their families, as well as lose the possibilities that the money would have afforded them.

Good research, Big Rex, but in all these cases you missed are an important fact. The Canadian government was found to have caused neglect which as a direct result, caused the said injuries ie.. not cleaning or testing for Hep C , hiv, etc.. or not reporting and taking action To prevent abuse that occurred.
In our case it was an unfair deduction from a wage loss plan, which caused financial hardship but not sexual or medical abuse. ie because sisip clawed you back didn't cause you to get a blood borne disease or resulted in sexual abuse. So factoring in these facts our deal is not perfect but in the circumstances its the best that we could have got.

I am sure some people will flame me for this, but since I have been accused of being mentally unstable and unable to use facts, I thought I would point some facts out. This is in no way a slam on the legal team, but it makes it apparent that the GoC acted in bad faith during the negotiations, when compared to the two other large Class actions lawsuits where they were the defendant, in recent history. Below are actual quotes from those actions Notice of Settlements.

Legal Fees

Residential School Lawsuit

The government will pay the lawyers listed at the website for their work on the settlement. These payments to the lawyers will not reduce the money available to former students.

You may hire a lawyer to help you make a claim under the IAP for a serious abuse. The IAP process can be complex and you should have a lawyer assist you. lawyers, who may include the same lawyers listed at the website, will charge you additional fees for any IAP payments you get. if you are represented by a lawyer, your IAP payment will be adjusted by the Government to provide an extra 15% towards any fee a lawyer may charge you, but you must pay anything beyond that, up to an additional 30%, plus taxes.

Tainted blood Lawsuit

(1) Following the negotiation of the amount to be paid for the Class Member compensation and the costs of administration, the Parties negotiated and agreed the Canada will pay thirty-seven million, two hundred and ninety thousand dollars ($37,290,000.00) plus GST and other applicable taxes for Class counsel fees plus disbursements to be agreed among the parties and approved by the courts to a maximum of five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000.00), plus GST and other applicable taxes.

SISIP lawsuit

Class members are responsible to pay 15.7% of their gross return for legal fees plus an additional 2% (average) to cover HST and disbursements.

Damages

Residential School Lawsuit

Common Experience Payment - At least $1.9 billion, plus interest, will be made available for the lump sum payment to former student who lived at one of the residential schools. payments will be $10000 for the first school year (or part of a school year) plus $3000 for each school year (or part of a schoolyear) after that. If there is not enough money in the fund to pay all valid claims, the Government will add money to the fund.

Independant Assessment process (IAP) - Allows those who suffered sexual or serious physical abuses or other abuses that cause serious psychological effects, to qualify for between $5000 and $275000
each. More may be awarded if you also show a loss of income. Altogether the maximum IAP amount is $430000.

Tainted Blood Lawsuit

"Compensation fund" means the sum of one billion, twenty-three million, four hundred and seventy five thousand five hundred and seventy five dollars ($1,023,4745,575.00) which is comprised of nine hundred and sixty0two million dollars ($962,000,000.00) for class members compensation, twenty million dollars ($20,000,000.00) for the costs of administering the settlement, $3729000.00 for legal fees, $2237400.00 for GST on legal fees, $1378175.00 for PST on legal fees. plus ($500000.00) for disbursements and another $70000.00 for GST and PST on the disbursements.

SISIP lawsuit

100% of monies wrongfully deducted plus simple interest. No damages awarded for pain and suffering.

Income tax Consideration

Residential School Lawsuit

Will the CEP be taxable?

No, the Government has determined that the CEP payments will not be taxable.

Tainted Blood Lawsuit

The amount of compensation paid to or received by a Class Member pursuant to this Agreement will not be required to be included in the income of the recipient thereof the Income Tax Act (Canada).
(this was for federal taxes only, the agreement was not binding to provinces)

SISIP Lawsuit

The government will pay an additional 3.27% of the principle to partially cover taxes owing.


So when you put these three settlements up against each other, it is hard to say that we got the best deal possible, because we didn't. The Government did not want to stop the clawback and they obviously did not want to compensate us for what was done to us or our settlement would have reflected it.