Its coming fast, lets start mailing the judge

K9, yes in those circumstances the Government agreed to do so. In this case they have not and, as outlined above, we cannot force them. If we could, we would. There will always be differences of opinion, but all we can do is use our best judgement based on our experience to date and the case law.

Sorry Bigrex, we have reviewed the Federal Court case law and determined we don't have a legal basis for winning that argument. If we did, we would make it.

bigrex wrote:That is funny 6608. Those rules from the federal courts are almost word for word covered in the quote I gave from the Ontario Courts Act, of which Peter said did not apply to our case. Most outsiders would consider forcing us to go all the way to the Supreme court, just to get certified as a class action, would constitute unnecessarily prolonging the court proceedings, plus the exceptional circumstances of disabled Veterans being forced to take the Government they once swore to die for if necessary, to court, just to force them to correct an unjust policy that they were fully aware of for years. To me and many others, our case blatantly meets the criteria for assigning costs to the Government.

Time will tell!

That is funny 6608. Those rules from the federal courts are almost word for word covered in the quote I gave from the Ontario Courts Act, of which Peter said did not apply to our case. Most outsiders would consider forcing us to go all the way to the Supreme court, just to get certified as a class action, would constitute unnecessarily prolonging the court proceedings, plus the exceptional circumstances of disabled Veterans being forced to take the Government they once swore to die for if necessary, to court, just to force them to correct an unjust policy that they were fully aware of for years. To me and many others, our case blatantly meets the criteria for assigning costs to the Government.

I will try to get the story rolling in Quebec, harper needs more support from this province, will contact Patricia Hélie from TVA and LCN. Wiil emphasize on the urgenci, for all to call up there local deputie, can anybody outthere create a online petition that can be sent to the goverment?? Let's put our heads together and get as many people involved trouthout the Contrie. All of us let's get this.
The few the proud

Navrat I'm glad you agree. Now I need your help. I am slammed with running VVi and gathering information. I need you to spear head this campaign. I expect everyone to help Navrat to make this happen...lets call this "Operation Education"

So in the immortal words of Larry the Cable Guy..."Get r' done!"

Good idea , Teen

Peter thank you for taking the time to explain legal proceedings for us non-lawyers.

Navrat you have, by far, the greatest passion that the GoC should pay for the wrongdoings that have happened to veterans with this SISIP clawback.

May I make a suggestion, and I really encourage everyone else to consider this as well...


Instead of writing to Judge Barnes seeking punishment to the GoC for what they have done go to the press.

Write letters to your local paper. Send a letter to the major newspapers, TV, W5, Fifth Estate. Public pressure is in this situation more productive then just sending a letter to the Judge.

If Jane & Joe Canadian read that veterans who were 'victims' of a bad insurance policy insisted and implemented by the TB have to pay a lawfirm to get what was their's to begin with their opinion/pressure on the Harper government is what they will listen to.

It is apparent most have faith in the NDP well pressure them and the Liberals to bring this issue up on the floor of the HoC during question period.

Start a public campaign under the slogan "Why do veterans have to pay to get what is rightfully theirs?"

So when the Judge in January says McInness Cooper will be paid $XXX Harper will feel the public heat and say "It is unfair to have our veterans pay for their benefits. So as an apology for the 40+ years of governments that allowed this to continue the GoC will pay the lawfirm."

Public pressure is a far better approach then bombarding a Judge who has his hands "legally" tied by the laws of Canada.

So Navrat start a new topic and everyone on the CSAT Forum help write the letters and get the campaign to educate the public. Let's direct our energy where it will be better utilized.

I do like peter's first post though
those are pretty wide lines to read in between but what i see looks good.

thanks again, peter

Peter, your a good fellow, and you talk and act and respect us and feel to me like a fellow veteran. This I will always respect you and your law firm for,I was hoping , just this one time, the GOC could show some heart and compassion regarding this case. This action could of repaired a lot between veteran and GOC . Now the RCMP has to go through the same thing and I can only prey that those veterans do not have to go though the stress we have. I am sure , Peter, I will be happy with the outcome, but with the GOC not even offering to cover legal fees will always leave a bad taste in our mouths, hell what am I saying, they would not even pay to bury half of us, Thank you , Peter , no more trouble from this vet

Navrat, I appreciate where you are coming from. All I can say is that we have made good progress in the negotiations on all issues we have raised in our previous memorandums. In a matter of weeks you will see this progress and I believe you and the vast majority of class members will be satisfied with the progress.

Peter, I understand that you as a legal firm can't change or alter the law regarding this, but if the GOC doesn't get punished for its actions then what, I understand also that you said damages are on going but in the past it was mentioned the GOC didn't want to pay that. Does the GOC believe they owe us anything? I just believe the GOC is getting off easy if they don't cover them, maybe in law they don't have to, but if they had any sense of honour this would be something they would have offered. I don't want you to think I don't believe you guys are owed for the great work you have done, but with the GOC not willing to pay anything besides what is owed, I believe is despicable . I hope they still read these posts and can go home at night to there families and say ,ya I had a great day at work, I feel great f------ veterans and theirs families.

Delaying court proceedings or triing to add some by inventing or using real proceedure uslessly is called CURULANCE in french. In this case, I do not think it can or may apply. Lawyer have to submit that curulance is used and then have to demonstrate it in court. It's one road nobody really wants to go down, for it will delay all ofher proceedings ontil the mater is solved. In many cases curulance is more than apparent. When I sued DND I was at that level in the proceedings. The only goog thing to come out of it was that the judge of the supprime court ordered doth sides to sit down and try to negotiate. We had a judge presiding the neg's and we still got scr----ed at the end. I guess his idle of acceptable terms were on as our. Make a long storie short, hope this one has balls!!!!!!!

Navarat, good question, but our "civil" court system is about recovery not "fault" or punishment generally. I would estimate that individual civil litigants are only ever looking at around 60% recovery on average. (In divorce proceedings I suspect less). And "blackouts" are common, in fact in most class actions no information flows to the class at all until a global settlement is reached. In this case we pushed as hard as we could to get out as much information as we could because we know how important it is and the stress it causes. So none of our memos. would have generally been circulated in any other case.

In advising you of this, I am trying to help you understand how "civil justice" works the best I can, but if you still have questions give me a call.

Regards,

Peter

Navrat, please make a list of your questions and give me a call, happy to answer all questions like this one. (The answer is, you never leave anything out, for example if we could fit in one of the exceptions on costs we would). We have covered all the questions off on how fees work on two previous occasions. I am sorry you cannot accept our opinion on fees, but we are pursuing everything we legally can. You will get a chance to make submissions to the Court. What I am trying to do is the manage expectations of all class members. The real question is, can I in law make the Government pay? The Rules say no.

Regards,

Peter