Those class members who are not reinstated are getting hosed

Navrat are you actually sitting in the legion as we speak because I have never seen you in a mood like this, you gotta be drinking something different brother

Have just accepted the deal, E-mail firm 10 minutes ago, go luck to all.
I love Peter to!!!

I like splitting the legal fees up, Seal the Deal, I love Peter and Big Rex loves him Too!

Then maybe they should charge 7.5 on those only getting retro and a higher percentage on the retro of those who will be getting future benefits.

Yes, but when in comparison of total money earned from the lawsuit. I will be paying 17.7% of $35000 plus interest. while if someone who is owed $200000, in retro payments and interest, and could earn another $300000 in future payments, the legal fees will only represent 7% of the total amount earned.

I agree, but from the firm's point of view, doing it this way they get the total amount they are owed over the next 6 months or so and the calculations are all done on only one payment for SISIP...

If they did the 7.5% on everything.. SISIP would have to do the calculations for every check sent out and send the firm a payment every single month until the last current client turns 65... and every bursery paid would be shorted 7.5%...

I am not saying it is the right way to go, Just saying it is a lot easier to go with the % of lump sum from a logistical standpoint.

The best interest of the majority of the class is to pay the legal fees in one shot,
Seal the Deal, I Love Peter!

I realize that there were some members who were on a reduced SISIP, but certainly not 93% of the class. Maybe 20-25% at the most. Certainly not enough to justify screwing the majority of the class.

At least you bigrex got what I was saying.

Bigrex... don't forget all the people who were not Zero-sum, but were being still being clawed back a portion of their SISIP. I don't know how many there are, but they started getting their full amounts in June, and will continue until 65... so it isn't just the zero-sum people included in the "future payments" group.

That being said, it does seem unfair to the people who are not getting future payments to pay the same percentage as those who do. But I can see that the Law Firm would want their payment in one year, not coming in in drips and draps over the next 20 years or more.

Yes if you go back over 5 or years but below 5 years The lawyers fees starting away for your total retro .

Example quick calc
i was owed without interest 25000.00
i was owed with interest 26790.00
but i get back 22013.00 after legal fess a lost of $4776.00
then taxes as well see just 27 months retro is a total of 9.9% interest i get back.
but i lose 7.93% interest because lawyers fees are 17.83

It's nice to go back many years and give an example Peter yes lots if interest over time. But what about start in 2007, 2008, 2009 or
2010 like myself where your firm gets $ 4776.00 of my original claw back. leaving me with a lose of 7.93% and yes after all interests and top up.

I lose out and so due many other so we don't get 100% plus like other due

What a poor example looks great on paper everyone see a higher return and more than legal would be but what a crappy example still BS in my mind

The lawyers are acting as if they got mostly everyone reinstated, but that is a lie. There are at the most only around 1100 or so that can even apply to get reinstated. That is less than 15% of the total class. The other 85% are getting absolutely nothing in future payments, but we have to pay the same percentage on the retro payments so those who will be making hundreds of thousands in the future and don't have to pay fees on that money.