HOW DOES THIS ALL ADD UP

thanks teen.

propat

Glad to help trooper

Teen, I agree with you 100%, and thanks for the very well put explanation on this.

This is Judge Barnes decision...8% on retro only ($424.3 million).

McInnes Cooper made up the 4% on the $886 million to give the "illusion" they charged a low amount.

MC knew they could not charge legal fees on going forward money, they wanted to but couldn't. So that is why they did some very creative and distracting writing when they submitted their bill. Remember the 7.5% on retro and 7.5% going forward.

Justice Barnes had to address that cockamamme explanation in his decision and that is why it is in there. To 'validate' MC when they say it's only 4% on $886 million.

Just remember the only money that is billable is the $424.3 million. That is a solid number that is not going to change. The $461.7 million of going forward money is not a fixed amount. It's 'potential' money that can/is/will be paid as long as one thing does not happen to the LTD client before he/she reaches age 67...they die. Death before 67 stops LTD payments and chips away at the $461.7 million.

The distorted truth of 4% on $886 million is meant for one purpose only...the law firm worked hard for the injured soldier and charged very little. Where in reality they got 8% on $424.3 million. So that is the only figures you look at.

well the judge said 8% on retro only so im sure one of you is right either way its a done deal.

propat

The legal fees are 4% on money from 1976 to when every current TPI turns 65 or dies , which ever comes first , but legal fees can not be taken currently from money that has not been paid yet so the law firm is taking another 4% legal fees for the future money now from everyones retro for a total of 8% regardless of TPI or not TPI which results in non TPI paying an extra 4% legal fees on money they will not get. That is all I have to say on this topic.

mmmmm sounds good had some groundhog goulash just last night and it was awsome.

propat

Propat, I agree, now time for some squirrel stew!

yes in the proposed agrement MC stated that what they were asking is only 7.5 of the entire value of the settlement (cant remember the exact figure but thats close) when the judge made his decision he responded by stating what they are getting is equal to aprox 4% of the settlement.he never states anywhere in his decision he was useing going forward payments for leagal fees in fact quite the contrary.but theis is an old conversation we have had before at 7.5 retro and 7.5 going forward.if the imposible happens and the judge recalls the deal and changes the fees to 4% we would have it once again at 2% retro and 2% going forward.

and the world keeps on turning

last time we had this conversation i moastly avoided it ecept for a couple of posts trying to point out that maybe people should not be looking at guys declaired TPI by sisip (and im sure we all know by now how dificult that is) and saying how good they have it since by percentage they may pay less than the rest in leagal fees.and the only reason is becouse they are permanently disabled.i really think this conversation is beneath us.

as for the judge he stated 8% of retro only saying he couldnt concider the going forward ammount and also stating why.this guy was the only one involved in this prosses with no dog in this fight and the one who showed time and again a great deal of respect for this class yes more than our own leagal team he has even showed us more respect than we have shown each other.i dont think he lied ore twisted ore slanted his decission i think he made the best one he could have made given the circumstances.

propat

Look at the settlement decision by the Judge , it does state 4 percent in there.

firebird i think the leagal team was doing the hiding with the 15% i really think the judge wasnt hiding anything.unless he was in MC,s pocket he woul have no reason and if he was we would have got a better deal and MC would have got their 15%.

propat

It's smoke and mirrors , confuse the enemy, deceive us! Believe me , we were always looked at like a cow to milk! And milked we got!

It is still the same , 4 percent retro , 4 percent forward , hiding it behind 8 percent from retro.

Good to know and got to go , good night.

well actually i think they wanted arround 8% of the retro and 8% on future so to make it look good they asked for around 15% saying they didnt want to touch going forward payments.after that they came up with a bunch of prpoaganda to justify that ammount.in the end the judge said no you will get 8% of retro only.yes their is some totaly disabled vets out their with different conditions (being in the infantry moast of the ones i know are missing some parts) that will pay a smaller % overall and depending on how long they live maybe much smaller but im sure many of them would trade places with a lot of the two year guys if they could.i mean the real two year guys not the ones fracked by sisip.

but hey im sure im wrong here just my thoughts on this thats all.

maybe that grass is greener

propat