SISIP COLA RETRO (Assorted Topics)

Teen,

Correct, originally they wanted 15% - and yes no doubt that amount was way to high - we new it - and the judge new it, and fortunately reduced it down to 8%.
So I think we have the judge to thank for that.

I think for MC to have asked for 15% resulted in a great deal of Veterans to now realize what MC's main interest in going forward is, " MONEY "
I personally don't see anything wrong with any firm wanting to make money, but I do think one has to draw the line between "money versus greed".

I also think that once the judge reduced the fees to 8%, I am going to guess that this action by the judge gave relief to many Veterans involved in this suit.
I think most can live with 8% - 15% not.

The way I see it is that MC did accomplished the job it was suppose to do - Regardless of what their main interest is - or was.
They did the job.
How they went about accomplishing the job is subject to a variety of different opinions, and I am almost certain that the Law firm themselves will change some of the ways in which they handled things moving into another suit, if one becomes available to them, this is just the way in which the Legal system works.
I think each Law suit presents it's own challenges for the Lawyers involved - some are better than others - and some like to be more compassionate with their clients in putting their clients ahead of " MONEY "
In our particular case, I think " MONEY " was in our Law firms best interest even though they were successful in winning our case.

The COLA raises another issue, it has proven to be a strengthening in my suggesting, and others of the greed factor involved in the way in which we are treated here, in charging us fees for this.
Like I have already said - we all paid our fair share of fees in 2013 - to me , again, that's where our fees should have ended - charging fees again is just not right - again, it proves what the Law firms main interest is, and always was " MONEY ".

The worst part of it all is that they are in their right to charge us the fees " THE SECOND TIME " - and there is nothing we can do about it.

So we will pay the fees for " A SECOND TIME " obviously not because we want to - because we have to.

Let's make no mistake here - asking for 15%, and charging us fees for the COLA has proven one thing -
The Law firm took, and won this case on the very basis of money, and money only !

Not a lot to hide on here about the little cola adjustment , if I'm on the 1st turnaround , i'll let you all know the results ...........

Results of , getting " Gang Raped "

And the the """  Cost of Living """  I had to pay to McInnis / Cooper to stay Quiet !!!!!!

This is Absolutely Fxxxxxx Embarrassing !  

How Can ????  McInnis / Cooper hold their heads High &&&&&&  "  GANG RAPE """  us at the same time , then go on National News & Boast about it ???

Their just Pissing Us Off ..... All over Again ! & Again ! & Again ! ............ BEND OVER !

For Country eh ?
Retired Army MasterSniper
Dave Fitzpatrick
family of .......7......get er' done bye's !

Especially considering the vast majority of the class, ie 24 month recipients, are going to be getting next to nothing anyways, their 8% from us will likely never leave the double digits. like the buddy the Navrat said received his cheque of $145. His payment probably only started out at $180 or so, so MC's cut would only be around $15.

But what gets me, is the number of completed files. If they can go through and complete these COLA adjustments on 2300 files in a month, then why were they only able to complete 250 or so every month during the original payout? Because IMO, the COLA calculations plus interest would be far more detailed than simply looking at a person's file and comparing how much they were paid against how much they were supposed to get paid, due to the fluctuating nature of the CPI.

Agreed Dave as I have stated before this whole process has been load of BULLSHYTE and as far as I am concerned I do not see things coming to an end anytime soon.

I've tried but all the press is interested in is to put someone being screwed over by CRA in the spotlight which will only upset that vet even more. The press wants "shock" news not real news.

And this story isn't shocking enough for them. Hell look at Equitas and the pro bono work...barely mentioned in the news.

Here we go again ....... 1st , we get raped for  $ 34,000,000.00  Million Dollars ............. & now we're about to get " Gang Raped "
by the same institution , a 2nd  time for our little cola adjustment .

GREED ! GREEED ! GREEEEDY Little Bxxxxxxx !

McInnic / Cooper .........When Will The ... GANG RAPING END ????????????????  

Hello , CTV National News !  Forum Master , Ron , you Sir , are about the " Best Spokesperson " we have on here , with your Knowledge & Wit , you would do us a Great Service , to bring this to a National Level , to the 34 Million Canadians .... who need to hear this !

Your thoughts Ron ? 


For Country
Retired Army MasterSniper
Dave Fitzpatrick
family of .......7......get er' done bye's

The never ending saga continues

Well originally MC wanted to charge us 15% in legal fees. This wasn't all that appreciated on this site and a lot of us voiced our opinions about it.

Yes it pissed off the law firm and the plaintiff but know what?

They are showing just how petty they are to bill us and NOT TELL US IN PLAIN FECKN' ENGLISH WHO IS GETTING A COLA TOP UP!!!

So to the lawyers handling the Equitas lawsuit pro bono BZ gentlemen...BRAVO ZULU!!!

Yes Firebird...doing better than most.
Sap

It all sucks but it is better than 74% of the world.

Exactly!!! Thanks for saying what most are thinking Trooper. Bad enough we only get 74% of what is owed, less 8% fees, less 0.083%processing, less $19.00 for handling...then taxed at 20% to boot!! Hurry up and get this done. It almost makes me feel dirty...
Sap

For what it's worth, apparently the Monthly processed COLA from Manulife is being done at random.

Let me just say this with respect to how I feel about the way in which this COLA is being handled.
First off I don't have - or didn't have a problem paying my 8% in Legal fees for my retro received in 2013.
I would also say - or repeat what I have always said that I am grateful and happy with MC in the way they handled our Law suit.
I am also grateful for them ( MC ) working, and getting the COLA for us.

Now this is where I draw the line in being happy about the COLA payout - or dropping my level of appreciation for the Law firm.
I paid my fair share of Legal fees for my 2013 retro - in fact I think we all did.
Now I probably will not be on the list for the COLA payout - that is fine by me - however many others will be, and they all will be paying fees on their amounts.
So I ask myself this, with all of the millions of dollars made to MC in the 2013 retro payouts, again, I would say they earned that money, many others would disagree with me on that, that's alright with me, as it is only my opinion, you would think that's where it would end ? After all, they got their money, and we got ours.
I cannot help but say that applying a second fee to the Veterans for the COLA payout is just not right - this should have been a ' PRO BONO " job done by our Lawyers.
This second fee charge is not good, and it does not look good, again, both the Law firm, and the Veterans have completed the bulk of the Law suit in 2013, why even consider charging us a second time, when they made millions on us the first time ?
You all can call it, as you see it, but this is the way I feel, and see it.

To me the best way this could have played out is to have Manulife complete all of the COLA retro's, as they are currently doing, deposit them into our accounts, Manulife send each member the proper paper work for the calculations, along with sending a copy to MC for verification.
This would have showed good will on MC's part, and make it much easier on each Veteran receiving the payments.
No fees, just the withholding of tax by Manulife.

Just my opinion...........

Thanks for the sitrep Sparrow! We can all start this rollercoaster again.
Wheeeeee!(keep arms and legs inside the ride at all times)
Sap

Yes, more than likely we will hear from Members here next Week receiving their COLA - The question still remains, will the Members who have had a reduction in their Monthly payments be fully exempted from receiving a COLA payment ?

Solid info there sparrow - Thanks.............

No APP - No purolator - just the good old regular mail......