POLL; DO YOU THINK THE LEAGAL FEES ARE FAIR?

Navrat Why do you keep saying i'm trying to change the Deemed taxes , I agree we can NOT change the Deemed taxes at this point. please stop putting words in my mouth. the Deemed tax issue was Just to show the Judge what effects it would have on long retroactive members.

I will give it a shot, Propat

nav stay tuned and send in your request for tax relife buds ya never know.

propat

Teen, your right , and paying legal fees on future monthly payments is a non starter . Impossible and I believe the majority would fight it more so than the clawback. MC knows this and that is why it will never happen

It's a win for everyone if he reduces legal fees but nothing more than 5 percent, as this might help with the taxes, and don't get me wrong, COD, I believe those deemed taxes will be a killer but at this point it's beyond what anyone can really do

The way I like to see it is this way...

The lawfirm used this method to explain their 15% fee. On the retro they are charging 7.5% and on going forward they wanted to charge 7.5% but they did not want to do that.

So seeing as they are fine with 7.5% then they should be ready to accept 7.5%. Easy-peasy.

Now as for this 7.5% on going forward money...ask yourself this how would the lawfirm "collect" the 7.5% from each of us until we reached 65?

Manulife is an insurance company NOT a collection agency so it wouldn't be their responsability to collect it for the lawfirm.

Same goes for the GoC. The only collection they make from people is for themselves not a private lawfirm.

So MC would have to send a bill every month to each member AND future members Now I don't know how you guys feel about this but here is what I have told Peter...

"I would get my own lawyer and sue McInnes Cooper! Why would I exchange a bad government policy that was stealing my money for a lawfirm who wants to steal my money until the day I die or hit 65?"

Yep I believe the Judge will be fair. He has been given all the info he needs to make a fair decision, including Taxation issues that may well lower the legal fees.

agreed supreem 2% ore 20% i think the judge is verry fair and decide the correct amount with both the class and the leagal teem in mind.

propat

I hope you guys get nothing short of what's deserved.

hey supream i could be wrong but i do recall a conversation on here in the past that we were both involed in on different sides.did you say you have no doubt they would get 30% ore am i just imagining things????

propat

The average contingency is always sought. If the amount sought is higher then the average, J. Barnes will remedy it. 17.5% is not even the average. So if you want my opinion MC will get what they requested, it is below the average. Regardless if the claim is 800 million, 2 million, firms are entitled to there contingency fees. You all can say oh that's too high but 17.5% is lower then average. And it would shock me to see the judge decline that percentage. Just my opinion.

Like I said time will tell and bring out the real truth and I believe we will see more as time goes on.

And Yes people thought 17.83 was good not 7.5 is no good maybe 5% might be fair or exceptable.

Once you compare apples to apples and not say well we asked for 30 %. The people that signed up for that deal had blinders on and were not shown that facts on what other major class action lawyers made on similar class actions.

Its easy to get caught up in the excitement for the Case in Halifax, but yes to come out thinks that the fees were a good deal and or remotely fair. I just don't see people responding with saying it a great deal for fees maybe a greed deal.

Whatever percentage Judge Barnes decides on, I really hope he puts down his foot and makes it on retro money only .. Please don't touch our future monies

Great foot i sent you the actual payout numbers from the Attorney general of Canada for the other class action suits

wow are these numbers ever tilted hard to unfair to verry unfair.

propat