if its hypothetical lawyers using 7.5 and 7.5 and 2.83 to get 17.83 why in medias eye they only charging 7.5

R22R what veterans groups? Perhaps you need to read CVA opinion ,perhap you need to talk it over with Teentitan who is a founding member of this site..
Both support the fact the legal fees and taxes are tempering the comments.
Loosing 60% is not a victory and they agree. Do not take my word for it.

The goc are the ones not being polite. there are the ones that ripper us of. If the fee are not fair it will be up to the judge to fix it!

Thank god this will be over in two days and this forum can move on to more productive ventures . Every veterans organization has sent a letter to MC stating its a great deal, it's going to pass , and with flying colours. Good luck and enjoy all

the amount of fees okay to charge, i dont care about that part..... its the hypotheticle part they use to get 17.83 however in front of judge they use term of 7.5 legal fees in court.... why dont they just say 17.83 and no other terms the way they make it sound is its only 7.5

the amount of fees is not the issue for me, if lawyer say 7.5 now and 7.5 future THEY SHOULD DAM WELL do it that way... this way its fair for both sides... money not taken from those who will not receive in future and also money not taken thats not received yet......

Good morning mfors2222!

-Test Seen as Push by Kim for Credibility
-Pope Benedict 'will not interfere in successor's affairs'
-How safe is the fossil fuel industry?
-Leafs' Reimer falls to injury
-Way baby born, fed may affect future health, study finds
-Jeffrey Delisle gave no hints he was a traitor, spy chief says

Morning headlines have nothing about this class action.
I'm disappointed.

at least both sides getting f---ed... taking $$$ from people on money not going receive at the same time taking $$$ from people who have not even received yet

if its only hypothetical for them to come up with 17.83 why do they still use term 7.5 % in court and to media??