Looking back at this Sisip Class Action Law Suit.

This is how I see it,
BLINK, WTF, BLINK, WTF, DENNIS WHO, LAWYERS HELPING VETS, DENNIS WHO, OH YA THAT GUY, THANK S FOR NUTHIN, CSAT VETS HELPING VETS, LAWYERS HANDS ARE FULL, STILL WANT MORE MONEY, GOC SAYS "WE LOVE OUR VETS", BLINK WTF NO THANKS NO SORRY< BLINK WTF END OF STORY.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT I DID SAY THANKS TO DM and NO LIKE BUTTON FOR MC, CRA IS CRA. LESSONS LEARNED, DO NOT REPEAT BLINK WTF AND MONEY IN THE SAME SENTENCE LOL it tends to hurt ones ass. Cheers troops happy new year.

Here is the way I look back at the whole Law suit.

I am sure others don't see it my way, that's cool, it is just my view.

For me personally I cannot say anything negative against Manulife.
In my experience having been part of this Law suit, Manulife treated me extremely well.
I cannot think of one fault in the way in which Manulife handled my file, and in the way in which they answered my calls.

Now I am sure that some have had problems in dealing with Manulife, that has been brought up here a few times claiming that Manulife miscalculated their funds which resulted in them owing money back to Manulife.
In some cases the amounts were substantial.
Now I cannot help but feel for these individuals, and I most certainly would not fault them for being angry towards Manulife.

I think it's important for all of us to understand what the mandate is for Manulife/Sisip with respect to how we view the whole Sisip Law suit.
The LTD is a Treasury board supported plan, in other words in is run by the CDS/GOC.
Sisip in cooperation with Manulife administers the plan for the CDS/GOC.
In short in my view if I was to fault anyone here, it would not be Manulife, it would be the GOC.

As far as our Legal team goes, and I am just speaking for myself, as I am aware of the amount of negativity brought forward towards them, by others.
Again, I cannot say anything negative about them with respect to how they handled things.
It is my view that the tax implications that we incurred were not in any way caused by our Legal team.
My reason for stating this is simple, you all remember during the negotiations MC did in fact raised the tax concerns on our behalf to the Defendant.
This is where the Law firm was put in a difficult situation, they learned that the whole retro agreement would be put in jeopardy if they continued down that path, which in my mine left them with no choice but to drop it, or continue and risk the whole agreement.
I would strongly disagree with anyone who would have chosen to continue that path.

So for me, it is not the Legal team that is responsible for the tax implications, it is the GOC.

So this is only the way in which I feel, and or see the whole Sisip suit looking back at it.

No comment on the CRA, you all know where I stand with them.

From what I understand Manulife took over Maritime life who held the Sisip contract. Now in the big picture when a large company takes over a smaller company it can assume its liabilities which shareholders carefully investigate. the players in this law suit all appear to be from the Nova Scotia area. the secrecy and black out of information to vets was prevalent. the settlement was less then satisfactory in my opinion. Huge losses for vets on interest , tax implications etc. amounted to pennies on the dollar that was actually owed to vets. Was this just a big game between all players to satisfy a takeover by Manulife. Were all players secretly aware of the outcome from the beginning. the cola lawsuit seems to be an avenue to clean up maritime lifes miscalculations. In my opinion Manulife will walk out with a clean contract with the treasury board and CDS. Us vets were just a pawn in the big picture that lost a lot of money .and many stress related sleepless nights . Now I may be wrong and sincerely apologise to said players if I am. If it walks like a duck quacks like a duck......the end.