Old claims vs new claims, can someone please explain...

Thanks, but the second disability is neither consequential to the first, nor a reassessment or the first injury ?

Well, actually Not really Teager.. if you read this, you can still get a claim under the PA ...

"Dual Entitlement - Clients Holding Entitlement Decisions Under Both the Pension Act and the CFMVRCA

   If a condition is ruled as consequential to a primary condition related to WWII, Korean War service, Royal Canadian Mounted Police service, or other service eligible under the Pension Act, the claim will be adjudicated under the Pension Act.
   If a condition is ruled as consequential to a primary condition related to Regular Force or Special Duty Service, the claim will be adjudicated under the CFMVRCA, even if the primary condition was ruled under the Pension Act, unless sections 42 or 56 of the CFMVRCA apply (see policy Dual Entitlement - Disability Awards/Disability Pensions)."

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/about-us/policy/document/1533

Ops forgot this part...

Though the claim can be determined under the PA... when they do the assessment %, it'll be based on the 2006 table of disabilities.

My knee's which are pensioned under the Old PA act, when I had a re-assessment done, the re-assessment was look at under the TOD of 2006, and not the on the 1996 TOD.
which I think is wrong, if originally determined under the 1995 TOD, the re-assessment should still be assessed using the 1995 TOD, not 2006
the 2006 TOD has been so reduced to like 1,3,7,13% items, were under the 1995 TOD since it was monthly the percentages were not as tight, since it's a monthly pension and
not a lump sum.

Any application made after April 1 2006 falls under the NVC regardless of time of injury.

I`m sure this has been covered 10 times already but I don't know where to find it -
Suppose a Vet is injured before 2006 and is medically released with a monthly pension of 50% for his injuries.
Years pass, and a new disability surfaces and a claim is submitted with VAC and granted for 10%.
If the proof of injury dated back to 2005, would the Vet`s monthly pension now be 60% or would it remain 50% and a lump sum payment of 10% is given because of new VAC rules that cam into effect April 1 2006?