SISIP COLA RETRO (Assorted Topics)

thank you k-9 and digger.

propat

Hey Teen I used no dirty words other than "dirty" itself lol and yup the ole saying "Clear as Mud" brother because I ain't doing this shyte again. I was told it was the way Rex explained it but then I was told that was way to simple, then I sent this out and was told What The Fack is that, and this guy is a lawyer you go figure. So in a simple tone "I GIVE UP" . Night Irene

Hey everyone, how are you all? So is this latest refund based on the gross refund amount or net??? THere is quite a difference..money in the bank anyway it works out. Also does the adjustment to our monthly LTD start right away after the court approves it in Jun 2014 or is it Jan 2015 as it appears our refunds start to go out?? Any help would be much appreciated..
Hope this text finds you all well..Frankie AKA Sue

Hey Robbie if you told K9 that the explanation is as clear as mud I concur.

K9 if Robbie said some words not allowed on CSAT could you let me know so I can bust his chops? Thanks

Oh and Thanks for the info man.

Merci mon amie celui ce est très clear comme sol terre lmao

Hello all, here is what I got from the law firm, it is in french but if noone translated it when I get back home later this afternoon from the H. I will translate it, the paragraphes in reference are the same as in the letter.
Pour faire suite à notre conversation téléphonique d’hier, j’ai consulté l’avocat au dossier, Maître Dan Wallace, pour obtenir des explications concernant l’Avis préliminaire. Voici un compte-rendu des paragraphes suivants de l’Avis:

1. Les rajustements au coût de la vie ont été appliqués à chaque année, excepté pour les années 2002, 2004 et 2007.

2. Tous les membres recevront 74% du montant qui leur est dû pour les années mentionnées au paragraphe 1.

3. Ce paragraphe s’applique aux membres qui ont reçu des paiements en trop et qui ont dû rembourser ces trop-perçus, ce qui ne semble pas s’appliquer à votre cas.

4. Je ne crois pas que vous nécessitiez d’information sur ce paragraphe qui est assez clair.

5. La police d’assurances du RARM a changé à partir du 1er décembre 1999.
Exemple de calcul pour les membres libérés le 1er décembre 1999 ou après :
Ex : Salaire mensuel x 74% de votre salaire = $___ x rajustement du coût de la vie en 2002, 2004 et 2007
Exemple de calcul pour les membres libérés avant le 1er décembre 1999 :
Ex : Salaire mensuel moins montants reçus de Régimes de pension du Canada moins revenus d’emploi ou autres programmes x 74% de votre salaire = $__ x rajustement du coût de la vie en 2002, 2004 et 2007.

6. Les années concernant les pourcentages d’intérêts correspondent à la date à la quelle vous auriez commencé à recevoir des prestations d’invalidité à long terme. On m’informe que le RARM n’est pas tenu de payer des intérêts pour les années précédant le 1er février 1992.

Nous espérons que ces informations répondent à vos questions.

Good question Rex...maybe we should ask the law firm if they could use their "blue collar" words to the class.

Puddleduk2, that actually makes sense. I know during the initial lawsuit, every time the scope of the lawsuit increased, the new class members had to be given the opportunity to opt out. So since this decision would basically increase the scope of the class to everyone who had any sort of other "income" deduction from their SISIP benefit, since it's inception, they all have to be granted the same rights to opt out.

As far as Facebook is concerned, there was some bad blood between the two sites during the lawsuit, that has obviously continued in the minds of some of their posters. Because they often did not show respect to other Veterans with differing personal views, is one of the reasons that I stopped visiting their page.

Only those new members added to the class action have the right to opt out by what I read in the proposed settlement,

 I am under the understanding that the majority of members here are already in the class and may not opt out at this point.

 I am not on the Facebook site, so cannot comprehend any previous member of the class action that can impact it at this point.

I thought this whole thing was because they found out SISIP was only calculating the COLA based on the after deduction amounts, instead of the 75% amount. Meaning that if your SISIP benefit was $3000/month, but your PA pension, and CF pension equaled $2900, the COLA was only applied to the remaining $100, instead of the full $3000, as per the what was stated in the actual policy.

Yeah. From what I read it seems we were only getting 74% of our LTD instead of 75%. So I'm just "guessing" that we each get 1% of our retro.

Less legal fees ofcourse.

I think we can expect 1% of your retro payment???

Don't take this as solid intel call it a shot in the dark.

If this is what happens, the words ( DRAG-ON ) comes to mind.

The Court will vacate
this order if more than 10 Class Members have opted out
by the conclusion of the Opt Out Period and the Defendant elects in her sole
discretion to end the Agreement. The Defendant shall give written notice of her
election to the Court and Class Counsel
no later than 5 days after the expiration
of the Opt Out Period. If this Order is vacated, the parties shall be returned to the
position they would have been in had this Order not been issued.

"The parties shall be returned to the
position they would have been in had this Order not been issued".

Digger's, It means that if more than 10 people opt out, the current proposal order will not stand, and a new proposal will be negotiated.



I think !!!