if its hypothetical lawyers using 7.5 and 7.5 and 2.83 to get 17.83 why in medias eye they only charging 7.5

Teen,

Bigrex has a valid point

Its important to challenge positions so we all find out the truth or best interpretation on what is a complicated agreement we are supposed to accept or decline. That understanding we have been left to our own devises since no legal rep is on this site explaining from a legal perspective and not a slanted perspective what this all means.
One of my key points to judge is that we as a class who have a right under law to participate in the action which we have been left out of, and have had little to no time to digest and understand the proposal given to us. We require more time to get advise since we cant get an un biased legal comment on this site to save ourselves.

Unfortunately Teen, this is the time that the law firm needs to come on here and set the record straight, not through you by proxy The gag order is lifted so there are no excuses. Most everyone realizes that the proposal states 17.83% of retro, but it has been the press clippings stating that the lawyers are only asking 7.5%, that have some members confused, and obviously quite adamant in their confusion

Thanks teen,as I said before I hate math. nunbers were drivig me COUCOU. Leaving for halifax tommorrow morning,

Thank you Teen, a voice of reason

OK it's time to put this to bed. Greatfoot has interpreted the agreement and the answer will happen on Friday. So for everyone's health leave this issue alone!

Greatfoot, I feel I need to jump in here.

If you go to "leave no vet behind", there is a pdf file showing examples of settlement and fees. Please look at example member 2. This example is for 24 months retro in 01-02. (I can't cut and paste, so am retyping)

Amt Returned: 12120
Tax Gross up: 396
Interest to Feb 13: 5931

Lump sum total: 18447
minus Legal fees (17.83%): 3289

Pretax amt to mbr: 15158

So you can see right from McInnis Cooper's own example, members receiving 24 months retro with no going forward payments are scheduled to pay 17.83% in legal fees.

Hope this clarifies.

Sabrelove

.

No veterans organization can address the courts, since the organizations, even if they have class members among their membership, are not part of the class. They can send all the letters they want to the lawyers, but they do not and should not get passed to the judge. I would not want my voice overshadowed because the Legion supports the deal.

As far as greatfoots calculations, he has been corrected several times on different threads by different members. His numbers are completely wrong. If the deal is approved, as is, every class member will be paying at least 17.83% of all retro and interest for legal fees. I said at least because it works out to 15.7 for legal fees plus an average of 2% for HST, costs and disbursements, but could be more depending on the tax rates where you live.

.

Good point on the issue of Media and claims of 7.5% MFORS2222

i see your math is good for ongoing payment retro.... just dont understand you put zero for part of 24 month people thats not whats going on they are 17.83

1000 dollars for retro people(24months) at 17.83 fees is 178.30 but great foot you say retro people only paying 75.00..... where did my math go wrong

greatfoot, i know its simple math.... explain again the people with only 24 month retro getting charged the second 7.5 % they have no future payments
you say 7.5% x zero $=0 thats not what is happenening they are at 17.83

You would have to be a member of the class or request standing from judge to be a member of the class to have a letter accepted by the judge.

The Vets org I founded could not send a letter just because its founder was a member. R22R you are off base on this opinion also.

.