Legal Fees (Assorted Topics)

What's wrong Robbie, don't you want to hold my hand like the pic of Nav and Supreme? Where is the love? Lol.

Ok blow the mushy crap boys lol

You're right. they should have seen it when CSAT, and its predecessor, first started. No posts for days then someone would post something and then everyone would chime in. and since there were so few of us registered, when someone said something otherwise ambiguous, everyone knew exactly who it was addressed to. The way I look at it, some of my most heated arguments and physical confrontations have been with my own brother, but at the end of the day he was still my brother and I love him, and now I consider my fellow CSAT members as unofficial Brothers and Sisters, and one day could be calling them down to the lowest and the next putting myself at risk defending them against attack from our common foes.

Rex and I are always good, were old members from long ago, everyone who knows us and that were part of the original 6 lol know what were like, right Rex

No worries. there is no animosity on my part, just healthy debate, which is the type of banter I wish we would see during Question Period. Point, counter point, counter-counter point, and leave it up to the viewing public to decide which side had the more convincing argument.

Rex and Supreme if you guys could redirect that energy and maybe butt heads a little less we might enjoy the battle more but to be honest getting a bit much, just saying troops be cool man, excellent work you are doing but come on nice and easy see, yin and yang actually got along don't know about yang and yang though but Zhu Youlang now there was a man would lived by a code and died by a code. Oh yeah on track again, peace brothers

Rex yes I did say that the only ones that could possibly recieve damages. And that the only ones that could possibly get damages were ones with PTSD, but it would have been a massive fight. What I am saying is its very hard to prove. That's it that's all.

I believe damages weren't considered because it was time for MC to collect , like a payday loan , on their return! Because MC being one of the biggest, smartest law firm around, why , then, in the intial lawsuit did they ask for damages! Just for fun , No , they knew that we had a chance and deserved it but instead settled for a scholarship program headed by one of the negioators

Well I gotta give this one to supreme, Rex in that we did not ever table damages because MC knew before hand that the GOC would have laughed our suit out the door and held this whole matter up so long in the court system that we could have faced many scenarios in victory but it would have been a defeat much worse than we are receiving today. As far as pain and suffering the pain and suffering here is from the communication side of the suit that in itself is not going to win anyone over fan wise but this is not a popularity case. Initially when I agreed (who am I kidding 3B medical release qualified me) to the suit I read the portion of the memo from MC and it actually stated damages so in my opinion that word did indeed give many members a false sense of hope for more than just receiving their LTD payments back. Now back to earlier posts from any of us, the whole SISIP MC gauntlet is about how we perceive a word or a phrase that is what bugs the fack out of me. Ask yourself did you sign a life insurance policy, yup, did you become a member of a class because of that policy, yup did you understand every word in either the 901102 policy as clearly as you understood every word in the class action suit nope and guess why your not lawyers or policy makers who speak a language so unique to society that even other lawyers can not understand the language. Having said that do you see lawyers and policy makers living in trailer parks or better yet under bridges and dying in our city streets nope, why you ask because they are hired by people like us to redefine phrases and perception into dollar figures just like the policies you sign in life are intended to line the pockets of the one handing you the pen. So finally ask why we got what we got, answer because your stories influenced a compassionate Judge, it was not because you outwitted a lawyer group or slug shite with the GOC it was because you united under one common principal, sorry to say but it was simply throwing your hands in the air and surrendering to policies that forgot to honour a phrase or word here and there an interpretation that over 9000 members did not understand. The sad thing about this class action even down to the last hours the word games continue the only thing that would make this even more real is to hire Vanna White and watch her slowly and agonizingly turn over each and every letter that spells SCREWED

Supreme, in one post you say that only those suffering from PTSD/OSI could be awarded damages due to stress caused the clawback, but then you say that damages wouldn't be awarded to those with PTSD because the pain and suffering was already there. What about those class members who don't have mental health issues? Do you think that they haven't experienced stress and hardship because of the clawback or during this whole process? What about the class members who lost their homes because they couldn't afford to keep paying a mortgage, or those Veterans who had family leave them because they were tired of arguing about limited finances. What about those class members who couldn't afford to send their kids to university, or were denied loans because they didn't have enough "disposable" income. At one point I couldn't even buy a trailer that I had chosen because the park owner didn't think I could afford the monthly lot fees. Every class member was affected by the clawback in some meaningful and tangible way, other than stress, and it is for those reasons that we should have been awarded damages. I mean if someone who went to a residential school 30 years ago can be handed over $10000 for every partial year they attend the school, in tax free damages, without having to prove they were adversely affected or even treated badly, and up to an extra $100000 if they were abused, but Veterans who were forced into near poverty for decades, by a unlawful government policy that stole tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars, get nothing more than the money that was already owed to them?

Damages would have been easy to assess if they truly wanted to. Since the clawback was based on the amount received from VAC, one way the damages could have awarded was as a percentage of what was deducted, like 10%, so if you had $1500 deducted every month, the damages amount would be $150. Then add .5% for every additional year beyond the initial 24 month coverage. This would ensure that those who had larger amounts clawed backed, and for longer periods of time would receive more in damages, as they were affected more.

Sorry a new problem added to a existing one I meant...I'm tired

Those are specific illnesses, easily proven. The mind is a difficult element Rex, Pain and suffering, mental illness are totally different batches of apples. PTSD is already existing with Sisip. Each and everyone would have to be looked at with a fine tooth comb for related pain and suffering and the relationship to existing trauma already experienced, sorry but your wrong buds. One who has a medical mind condition, it is a very hard thing to do to prove that the pain and suffering isn't the PTSD. Try and separate the two! A new problem added to a new one. I guarantee that the GOC would strike back and use the existing condition of PTSD as the cause and that the pain and suffering was already there and evident. Separate the two. How? by every individual examined thoroughly. The tainted blood and residential school cases, none of them had medical mental disabilities prior to the class actions. Your wrong Rex. Put yourself in the GOC's corner, I'd have a hay day with damages and denial and if I was the plaintiff's lawyer my exact defence for damages is that were already dealing with damaged Veterans that suffer anxieties, depression etc. One thing to remember, although you reference other cases, these cases are precedence with regards to other cases but other cases are not the same in origin as well as the conditions of the people prior to the incidents that brought the case to a class action and in court. Every case has a different Factum!
Supreme out

Supreme, you are wrong about damages not being awarded in cases like this. The settlements for both tainted blood and residential school cases were completely comprised of amounts for various types of damages. There had been no money stolen from any of the individuals involved with those cases to be returned, so their settlements, (which were considerably higher that the SISIP case) was solely for the pain and suffering they endured at the hands of the GoC or their agents. Their settlements were also completely exempt from tax and the GoC paid for their legal fees. And it's because our settlement didn't include any of these three factors, that I consider the settlement negotiations a failure of monumental proportions for out legal team.

K9 do you have any info on the taxe penalties. Have you begone the process?

In the end, WE are the only ones getting the bad deal. Lawyers will earn, I don't know how much more an hour then what they were due, but it is all a big joke and it smells bad. The GOC won more then 17 percent more in tax then what would of been payed if they would have given our money years back, they made millions of interest, they will do around 25 percent back on the 850 000 000 or more they will have to give back.
They made us pay millions in lawyers fees instead of folowing the advise of the Chamber and Ombudsman and even SISIP's advise.
So in the end 60 percent of most of our money will be gone and that leaves us with the 40 percent of what was owed. But the good thing is that the money coming forward, for whatever years we have left in front of us wil mostly be ours.
I really don't think I'll be around in 20 years but it would of been nice to have a change from liftime SISIP to 65 grandfatherd!
Plus the 67 to 65 change.
We get ... All over. No one to protect us, we are so lucky to have been in the CAF!!!! What a joke. Same with VA that now looks controled by the Blue Cross and the NO policy.

Why not have those .... In Ottawa put a vote that they have the right to put to sleap any Veteran that they feel cust them to much, they are probably working on it.

Finnally, lawyers are all the same, and their was only one Mother Theresa, now, all the folowers have bank accounts with direct deposit and it is not for chariti's, excuse my English and Iphone, just a bit of frustration tonight, free speach but no free tax evasion here.