• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

SISIP LTD 2002 - 2018

Status
Not open for further replies.
dennismanuge said:
2Cdo

Thanks for comment. I have no political agenda. The government of Canada, at the moment is Conservative. They have had they benefit of all the reports, recommendations, and a private members bill introduced by MP Peter Stoffer in the fall of 2006 that the majority of parliament voted "in favour of" to correct this issue and others. The conservative government did nothing. I dislike most politicians equally, regardless of their so called partiy labels. To directly answer your question, yes I started down this road with letters to the liberals when they were still in power. My first letter in fact was to Anthony Rota, Lib MP from North bay area. I have been called much worse than a mouth piece. That is a military label for someone who has the ability to think outside the box and stand up for themselves rather than follow blindly and not question, not learn, not grow, as a soldier, human being, or what have you. I did not get into this to make or win friends. What tires me more than anything is the amount of ignorant people that shoot off with-out knowing or seeing or asking about the big picture. Start from the first note ever written on this page....there were people on here speaking about me, my background, my wanting something for nothing. That I am still trying to collect SISIP LTD? I think not. I would gladly give my $10000 to any of the thousands of Vets out there who need it more than I do. I am standing firm on a fundemental issue of right and wrong. In this case the governments of Canada, be it the current Conservative government, or the Liberals of the past, have no respect or commitment to the very citizens of this country who need thier support the most. By highlighting or underlining something, I very much want people to take notice.  Rather than point the finger back at me educate yourself about the issue. All information is available. That is why i have included all that is above. Take or leave it, that is up to you, but folks who shoot from the hip with-out a clue....those people are my enemy. Wether they are a politician or an ex soldier or a civilian.

How long does it take to call, e-mail, write your MP? Is there anyone you served with or even perhaps yourself, that might seem worth fighting for? I know thousands that are!
Cheers

Rather long winded way to say no, but then why not just mention Government of Canada as opposed to pointing fingers as if this has only arisen since the Conservatives took over. As for being un-educated about the issue, nice try but you fail miserably. The insinuation that I don't have a clue also leads me to believe that I guessed correctly about an "hidden agenda". Hope everything works for you, even if you are a thinly disguised liberal. ;)
 
fighting ignorance and spinelessness takes alot of effort 2Cdo, sometimes alot of words. If it was too much for you to read in one sitting, my appologies. Good comeback though....you must know something i don't......about my hidden agenda and my political beliefs. like I said I have been called much worse by many and you did say mouthpiece, so i felt that was liscense to type. It is far easier to make accusations and discredit or distract, then to read and learn about something.

Obviously your a conservative who has had his feelings hurt.
Thanks for the best wishes, but I will depend on my supports and my legal team.
Cheers
 
Folks,

Let's knock off the name calling and mudslinging.

This is an important issue to all of us that have served, and we will only hurt ourselves if we allow this threa to go downhill.

I ask, as someone with an interest and as a Moderator.

dileas

tess
 
All

I think far too many have been far too nice for far too long. I am merely responding to all who have talked about me and this case on this means with out knowing me, my values, or even why I am doing what i am doing. I am helping them get their facts straight. If that offends some, that is truly too bad from where I am sitting. When someone brings it they better be prepared to take some of it back or get out of the way. This is exactly the reaction from most once the facts are laid out....to attack me, the case, whomever, if they don't agree. I have had enough of it. There are no hidden agendas, no political loyalties, except for me, my own MP, who is in fact Peter Stoffer, NDP, Sackville-Eastern Shore. That is my only political allegiance...wait and see what happens now having said that. I will be branded as a NDP. If your going to dislike me, I at least want you to have the necesary info to do so.

As for the name calling....my appolagies!

Dennis

 
dennismanuge said:
All

I think far too many have been far too nice for far too long.

dennismanuge said:
Hi folks

Glad you are discussing this, but those of you willing to settle for the government eating up what is rightly yours....grow a backbone and stand up for yourselves and if you are not willing to do so, stand up for those around you that can not stand up for themselves.

the 48th regulator said:
Dennis Welcome aboard, you are the person we have been waiting for on this thread.

Too much has been said about your situation and you cause, and some of us have been supportive of it.


You see, I was told exactly what you are fighting for.  The fact that I collect a VAC pension, that SISIP considers this an actual income.

Do I claim this pension on my taxes?  No. So then tell me how they are able to win the bid to be the supplier of our insurance, if they contravene the policy of our own government.

As you have said, two ombudsman have declared this to be wrong.

Now me, I have a lot more to fight.  I just received the letter stating that since my injuries occurred before 1999, there is a clause that states, because I did not pay into SISIP, I am unable to claim.  Fair enough, I did not pay into it.  However, when I was injured I did pay into it, and was denied then.

Am I going to fight it?  Hell ya!  I look at what you are trying to do, and again, $10,000 is not that much, but it is the principle.  Should we grow a spine and do this?  Maybe your post will help others to do this.

But what I have to say brother, is you are preaching to the quire here.  This site is in no way associated with DND, The CF, or SISIP.  All privately owned.  We abide by the rules that any soldier follows, and that is what keeps this site above and beyond others.


Again, thank you Dennis, and all I ask is that you become an active member here.  We need the input of someone that is working to make a change for the better for all of us that have, are, and will serve.

dileas

John Tescione aka tess

As you know, having served, we all look at everything with a grain of salt.   So you are going to get people who question you.  Rather than coming back and swinging, you have to take a breath and realize that everyone of us, included you have a jaded outlook on the system. 

We have negative views of those who, even try to, fight that system.  As you have experienced.

Again, I look forward to your infput here, and hope you did not just come here to only clear your name, but to help those of us that need the advice on fighting the system to correct any wrongs done to us.

dileas

tess
 
ceasefire
Tess is right. Like most of you I suspect, I have had to claw,scrap, dig in, and swing hard to get where I am at, personally and legally. WHen people I do not know question me or my motives, there is no doubt that I become defensive and offensive. Take care gents. It is not about me or my name, it is about righting a wrong.
Pro patria
from my friends at 3RCR
Dennis
 
Dennis, I to will apologize. Like Tess said some of us look at things with a jaded eye, myself included. If I wrongly interpreted your letter, it was done using only what you wrote. I honestly don't know your politics but your letter could have been seen as a smear against the Conservatives only and not about your pension situation. Again, I strongly wish you all the best in your fight. Personally I have had no problems with VA or any level of government (both Conservative and Liberal), maybe I'm one of the lucky ones in that regard. :salute:

But I think I've identified your real problem,
Pro patria
from my friends at 3RCR
;)
 
2Cdo
Thanks. I too understand your point in reference to the way that letter was worded. However, I am glad I got the chance to explain that it was not the conservatives alone, but previous governments as well. As mentioned, my passion can help me and it can hurt me. I truly do appolagise for coming off so stubbornly and strongly. We are all brotthers and sisters here, same as when those of us were still serving bonded and banded together. This has been a long difficult struggle, and publicity wise we are not where we want to be reference the average Canadians awareness and education level on this and other Vet issues. I am very open and willing to accept input from anyone. We have tried W-5, Fifth Estate, McLean's. etc....to get national air time to really be able to explain. Part of the problem is with the different orgs involved, ie VAC, SISIP, DND, CPP, and percentages and formulas, it can be difficult to explain quickly to the average person. Some national airtime and a patient media member would go along way for boosting support, I believe. Another idea that has bounced around has been to target a high profile Canadian to educate and get to lobby on our behalf. Don Cherry, Rick Mercer, are a few names we have bounced, but being on east coast it is hard to approach or even know how to. We are scatterwed pockets all across the country barely connected by e-mail and internet and with folks in different stages of mentel, emotional and physicall illness, rallying people and even having people well enough to assist is hard. There are many out there doing great work, Sean Buyrea, Perry Grey, CJ Wallace, and others

And all of you, who are discussing. I guess again it is a long winded way of yelling for help! Thanks for your patience and willingness.

For any of you or those you know, here is my contact info:

Dennis
dmanuge@eastlink.ca
dennismanuge@hotmail.com
Dennis.Manuge@cdha.nshealth.ca
(902) 827-4807

Stay well!

Dennis

 
Old thread, new developments...

I couldn't find this particular event on the forum anywhere-my apologies if it has been posted elsewhere and I missed it.

The transcript of the proceedings for the March 5, 2008 meeting of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs can be found at http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/2/parlbus/commbus/senate/Com-e/vete-e/03evc-e.htm?Language=E&Parl=39&Ses=2&comm_id=79.

A portion of that meeting was spent discussing the SISIP situation discussed in this thread:

Senator Downe: The second omission from your statement, and something this committee will look at, concerns complaints we have heard about the Service Income Security Insurance Plan, SISIP. What is your government's position on deducting the pain and suffering payments from the disabled veterans' long-term disability plan?

Mr. Thompson: This issue has been around almost as long as Parliament. This is an issue many members have brought up to various governments, Liberal and Conservative, in terms of changes to the plan. Basically, you are talking about the word no one likes to use in politics — a clawback.

There are a number of reasons why it is a difficult one to move on. First, the front end of how you pay into these particular plans would have to be adjusted. It would be a restructuring, not just in Veterans Affairs, but across every government agency in the country.

That is an established practice which has been around a long time. It is a difficult one to argue publicly because you are saying, "Why should that be taken away? I am disabled, so I should get that little extra benefit."

The other thing is philosophically — maybe practically — some in the insurance business will argue that, if you make it lucrative for someone to have a disability, it has a downward effect on the program as a whole. You could argue that you would get a benefit over and above what you paid in for knowing that, at the end of your days, that system actually exists. Therefore, that clawback position exists and it would have to be adjusted — actually, the cost across government departments would be in the billions of dollars to readjust it.

If I attempted to make anyone believe we will be changing it, I would not be telling the truth. I doubt if this government could ever change that, knowing what we know and knowing what past governments have done and what future governments will do. It would take a complete overhaul of the entire system to allow that change to occur. It would be too expensive.


I've highlighted the parts of the discussion that have been considered offensive by many veterans. 

I find Mr. Thompson's claim that it would take an entire overhaul of the system to rectify this problem a little odd.

Isn't the problem already fixed?

Currently, lump sum VAC payments are not being clawed back by SISIP-the New Veterans Charter fixed the clawback situation.

The only thing the government has to do to make this whole thing go away is authorize a one time payout-and repay all those veterans
whose monthly VAC payments were clawed back by SISIP after 2001 (when they began allowing serving members to collect monthly awards), and discontinue clawing them back in future.

Is that too simple? What am I missing?

As for this "It would be a restructuring, not just in Veterans Affairs, but across every government agency in the country."-can anyone explain why we would have to change policies for every government agency in Canada?

The military release and benefits program is quite unique-and you can bet that no other governmenr agency has some employees receiving certain benefits, while others are excluded.  This is a unique VAC problem-the fix would be unique as well, I feel.

Bren


Bren
 
Picking the date of 2001 to backdate to shows one of the problems. If you give a benefit to one group in a given situation there will be other groups arguing how they have similar circumstances and should also be given similar benefits. They will also probably be right. This means considering the costs of possibly giving the benefit to all groups in similiar circumstances which means government wide.

How valid the argument is in this case I don't know.
 
Not sure if you folks have seen this, but it is a great comparison. Sorry about format.

OPINION
6 THE HILL TIMES, MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2007
Civil servants and soldiers:
some are more equal than others

There’s one thing a soldier manning
a machine gun in Afghanistan
and a civil servant manning a desk in
Ottawa or Gatineau have in common:
neither is likely aware of the details of
their long-term disability plan, at least
not until tragedy strikes.
But soldiers may be forgiven if they
assume that the military’s long-term
disability (LTD) plan is on par with the
civil service plan. Both civil servants
and soldiers have additional benefits
for work-related injuries. However, a
closer look at the LTD plans of both
gives a barometer of sorts as to how
the government compensates those in
public service, in and out of uniform.
Indeed, Prime Minister Stephen Harper
expressed the belief of the vast majority
of Canadians when he stated that
“military service is the highest form of
public service.”
Enter now the financial reality of
risking your life for Canada and the
world 24 hours a day. When comparing
the military and civilian long-term
disability plans one sees that the LTD
plans afforded to the civil service are in
key areas considerably more generous
than those granted to members of the
Canadian Forces. This situation appears
counterintuitive as it is widely recognized
that the personal lives of soldiers
on average endure greater strain than
that of most civil servants. It is in the
personal lives when LTD plans are most
relevant.
Should a Member of Parliament or
bureaucrat injure themselves falling
down the stairs of their basement or
cottage receive better long-term disability
coverage than a military person
disabled in a car accident driving home
late from the military base?
“This is a golden parachute that
they have compared to our lead
parachute,” says retired sergeant Ron
Cundell, a disabled Gulf War veteran
who lives near Barrie, Ont. “Their whole
disability benefits and pension plan is
so different from ours. I have had a lot
of my friends who are still in the Forces
call me and say, ‘We’ve got to educate
ourselves.’ ”
There are two plans for employees
of the federal civil service: Disability
Insurance (DI) for employees covered
by collective bargaining, and the Public
Service Management Insurance Plan
(PSMIP) for those in management
not included in collective bargaining.
PSMIP also has a sub-category: executives
with enhanced benefits. Mandarins
in the EX, SX categories as well
as deputy ministers, EAs to ministers,
Members of Parliament and Senators
have their long-term disability paid for
100 per cent by Treasury Board. Senior
Except for the benefit initially
calculated at five per cent
more than the civil service
plans, the Canadian Forces
disability plan falls short in
several important provisions.THE HILL TIMES, MONDAY, OCTOBER 8, 2007 7
OPINION
officers in the CF with the rank
of full colonel and above also
enjoy this ‘free’ benefit via the
Service Income Security Insurance
Plan LTD or SISIP.
On the other hand, federal
civil servants covered under
collective bargaining, pay 15
per cent of the premium. Treasury
Board covers the rest. But
what is truly unique about
the Canadian system is that
a member of the military is
required to pay out-of- pocket
to help cover the costs of their
own disability benefits, even
if that injury occurs while on
duty. Although other Veterans
Affairs benefits kick in
for duty-related injuries, in
the area of income loss, SISIP
is the ‘first-payer’ for LTD for
which the soldier also pays 15
per cent of their disability
insurance premium while Treasury
Board pays the difference.
On the receiving end, except
for the benefit initially calculated
at five per cent more than
the civil service plans, the CF
disability plan falls short in several
important provisions.
To begin with both PSMIP
and DI are not allowed to
deduct ‘Pension Act’ monthly
awards for pain and suffering,
but the military’s SISIP plan
deducts every dollar of the Veterans
Affairs monthly disability
award. This serves as an insulting
testament to the military
service of the more than 4,000
injured soldiers who are collecting
or have collected SISIP
LTD benefits since October 2000
and are therefore too disabled
to work.
“A VAC award is also
referred to as a gratuity and, by
definition, a gratuity means a,
‘Thank you in appreciation,’ ”
says Cundell. “So when Canada
and the government thank me
for loss of health and quality
of life to my face, the bureaucrats
are behind me picking my
pocket of that gratuity. So to a
disabled veteran gratuity has a
completely different definition,
compliments of the bureaucrats.”
“Something is wrong here,
very wrong,” says retired corporal
Kevin Landry a disabled
veteran who served as a driver
during the conflicts in Croatia
and Bosnia. “We don’t have the
right to public assembly or protest
in uniform and once we are
out we are scattered across the
country. If we were a smaller
country we would have gotten
together to have this problem
looked at.”
And in spite of the fact that
the current and previous military
ombudsmen have called
for an end to these deductions,
nothing has been done to
date. This, in spite of the fact
that the ombudsmen’s recommendations
were supported
by the Standing Committee on
National Defence and Veterans
Affairs not to mention a
majority of MPs who last
year passed the Veterans First
Motion which included the
requirement for the government
to “eliminate the unfair
reduction of SISIP.”
“Back when I was a sergeant,
if I made a promise to my subordinates
I either carried through
with that promise or I told them
exactly why I could not follow
through—I did not leave them
hanging and that is how I kept
their respect,” says Cundell.
Another hallmark of the
government’s disability caste
system is the fact that PSMIP
and certain senior military officers
also receive life insurance,
accidental death and dismemberment
and dependent’s insurance,
premiums for which are
covered 100 percent by Canadian
taxpayers. These plans
continue to be paid for by the
federal government even when
the executives must go on long
term disability. Canada’s disabled
soldiers receive nothing
like this.
While annual increases are
capped in both plans, the civil
service plan nonetheless allows
for 50 per cent more annual
increases than the Canadian
Forces’ plan which is capped
at two per cent. Considering
that inflation (Consumer Price
Index) has been above two per
cent in five of the past seven
years, the CF plan’s advantage
in benefit payout would be eroded
in short order.
Furthermore, federal
bureaucrats can continue contributing
to their retirement
pensions while on an LTD rehabilitation
program, a provision
not granted to our wounded
soldiers. For veterans such as
Cundell, whose medical condition
forced him to retire two
months shy of his full 20-year
military pension, this limitation
serves as an especially difficult
pill to swallow.
“You were told from day one
sign this paper and we will take
care of you if you get sick,” he
says. “Well you did not tell me
that it was going to be an adversarial
program that was going
to put the blocks on me every
time I turned around.”
Paradoxically, the civil service
plan does not deduct CF
retirement pension if awarded
due to a medical release from
the CF but the Forces disability
plan deducts this important
benefit. For Kevin Landry, fate
and government policy denied
him any opportunity to collect a
military pension.
“I failed my medical and I
couldn’t buy back my time,”
he says. “I did everything to
keep my job and still it wasn’t
enough.”
Corporal Landry was medically
released with six years
regular force service and six
years in the reserves. Since he
did not have 10 years in the regular
force, he did not qualify for
a Canadian Forces retirement
pension. Federal bureaucrats,
however, qualify for a retirement
pension after only two
years service if disabled.
Although qualification for
both plans does not stipulate
whether the disability is caused
in the workplace or not, there
is a dramatic difference in how
the two plans are administered.
Civil servants can still be
employed in their original position
on partial work hours and
collect LTD. Canadian Forces
members must leave the forces
first before collecting benefits.
There is no provision which
allows CF members to return to
work on partial hours and still
collect LTD.
Finally, Treasury Board
will step in and cover deficits
accrued by two of the four
disability plans they govern
(PSMIP, DI, SISIP and RCMP)
but this guarantee does not
include the plan covering Canada’s
soldiers.
It all boils down to compensating
risk. The investment
world understands this
very well: higher risk requires
higher reward. The investment
Canada’s government has made
in our soldiers has this fundamental
law backwards. Most
Canadians would easily dispute
that a desk-bound senior
bureaucrat in Ottawa or even a
rear echelon general faces more
risk than the frontline soldiers
in bases across Canada or in
Afghanistan.
“We have to go to war even
if it is against our will,” says
Landry. “There is a huge difference;
we are soldiers; but all
the while we in the most dangerous
jobs get screwed.”
SISIP refused to return our
calls to them on this topic.
Sean Bruyea is a retired captain
and disabled soldier who
served as an intelligence officer
in the Canadian Forces for 14
years. He is now and advocate
for other disabled veterans.
Robert Smol served over 20
years in the Canadian Forces.
He is currently a teacher and a
freelance journalist in Toronto.
news@hilltimes.com
The Hill Times
Continued from Page 6
Comparing Public Servants Public Service Management Public Service Disability Service Income Security
and Soldiers’ Benefits and Insurance Plan (PSMIP) Insurance (DI) Long Term Insurance Plan (SISIP) Long
Pensions Long Term Disability Disability (all federal civil Term Disability for Canadian
(includes those civil servants servants included in Forces (all CF personnel
in
in management not in collective bargaining) uniform)
collective bargaining)
Benefit Payable 70% Income 70% of Income 75% of Income
Salary rounded up to next Yes Yes No
multiple of $250 for
calculation of benefit
Maximum Annual Increase 3% 3% 2%
for Cost of Living
(Consumer Price Index)
Eligible for Retroactive Yes if salary increase applies Yes if salary increase applies No specific statement
Salary Increases before starting LTD before starting LTD in policy
Premium Free Yes: if MP, Senator, Director No: Treasury Board pays 85% No: Treasury Board pays 85%
and above, Governor General Member 15% Member 15%
and other “Executives” (see below) Yes- if Colonel or General
otherwise Treasury Board
pays 85% Member 15%
Deduct Pension Act No Only increases in Pension Act Yes
Monthly Disability Award Payments after Disabled
in Public Service
Deduct Canadian Forces No No Yes
Retirement Pension if
Medically Released
from Forces
Length of Rehabilitation 24 months but may be extended 24 months but may be extended 24 months but may be extended
Amount of Income $0 until 100% of Salary $0 until 100% of Salary 50% of income until 100% of
Deducted while reached thereafter every reached thereafter every salary reached thereafter
on Rehabilitation dollar deducted dollar deducted every dollar deducted
Allowed Back to Original Yes: indefinitely Yes: indefinitely No provision
Employment with reduced
hours while on LTD
Rehabilitation time counts Yes Yes No
towards Retirement Pension
Eligible for Free (employer If Executive (see footnote 2): No Only Colonels and Generals
paid) Life, Accidental Death Basic life-1 yr salary otherwise NO
and Dismemberment AD&D-Death $250,000 (same as civil servant
(AD&D) Insurance while on AD&- Dismemberment executive plan)
Long Term Disability up to $250,000
Eligible for Free If Executive: No Only Colonels and Generals
Dependents’ Life and Life Spouse: $5000 otherwise NO
Accidental Death and Life Child: $2500 (same as civil servant
Dismemberment while on AD&D Death Spouse: $5000 executive plan)
Long Term Disability AD&D Death Child: $2500
AD&D Dismemberment: up to
$5000 and $2500 respectively
1 Consumer Price Index above 2% past five of seven years.
2 Members of Parliament, Senators under age 75, Persons appointed
by the Governor in Council and classified in the DM, GX, EX,
SX groups, the Auditor General, the Chief Electoral Officer, the
Commissioner and the Administrator of the Northern Pipelines
Agency, Astronauts, Executive Assistants to Ministers, Senior
Defence Scientists, Lawyers, executives in Crown Corporations.
3 Death can be due to suicide.
4 Cause of death or dismemberment does not have to be employment
related.
5 Death can be due to suicide.
– Compiled by Sean Bruyea and Robert Smol
By ROBERT SMOL AND SEAN BRUYEA
Continued on Page 7
The other value of serving: Canadians, captain Guy Noury, top right, and Sgt. Jonathan Auger, centre, who are part of the Provincial Reconstruction
Team, speak with Afghan men in Afghanistan, pictured on Sept. 24, 2007. Afghan children, pictured on Oct. 1 in Mazra’eh, above left. Corp. Frank
Charly, pictured in Zhari on Sept. 24, and two young Afghan boys imitate the Canadian Forces photographer in Langley, Afghanistan, above right, on
Sept. 24. Columnists Sean Bruyea and Robert Smol say when comparing the military and civilian long-term disability plans, it’s clear the LTD plans
afforded to the federal civil service are, in key areas, considerably more generous than those granted to members of the Canadian Forces.
Photographs courtesy of Cpl. Simon Duchesne, Canadian Forces and DND
 
Status of Proposed Class Action: From Federal Court Docket, Halifax

Halifax 12-FEB-2008 BEFORE The Honourable Mr. Justice Barnes Language: E Before the Court: Motion Doc. No. 10 on behalf of Plaintiff for certification of a class action Result of Hearing: Matter reserved held in Court Senior Usher: Robert Robertson Duration per day: 12-FEB-2008 from 09:30 to 05:00 Courtroom : Courtroom - Law Courts Building, Halifax Court Registrar: Elizabeth Caverly 13-FEB-2008 from 10:00 to 10:55 Courtroom : Courtroom - Law Courts Building, Halifax Court Registrar: Elizabeth Caverly Total Duration: 1d 1h Appearances: Mr. Peter Driscoll (McInnes Cooper) 902.425.6500 representing Plaintiff Mr. Ward Branch (Branch MacMaster) 604.654.2999 representing Plaintiff Ms. Lori Rasmussen (DOJ-HFX) 902.426.4472 representing Defendant Mr. Jonathan Shapiro (DOJ-HFX) 902.426.4472 representing Defendant Comments: counsel provided further case law and speaking notes for ease of reference Minutes of Hearing entered in Vol. 768 page(s) 287 - 304 Abstract of Hearing placed on file

We expect his (Justice Barnes)written decision by Mid May, hopefully, at the latest on certification as Class Action.
 
In other news, Manulife has sent out a survey this month asking respondants to evaluate the SISIP Vocational Rehabilitation Program (VRP).  Dont forget to fill it in!
 
This message is sent on behalf of Peter Driscoll

SISIP Claw-Back Class Action Update


We are pleased to advise that the SISIP LTD Offset Class Action has been certified by the Federal Court of Canada.  The effect of the decision is that anyone who falls within the definition of the class is included in the claim against the Government of Canada unless they otherwise opt out of the court process.  Individual notices will be sent to those affected by the offset.  The class has been defined as follows:

"All former members of the Canadian Forces whose long-term disability benefits under SISIP Policy 901102 were reduced by the amount of their VAC Disability benefits received pursuant to the Pension Act (the "Class") from April 17, 1985 to date."

We attach an English version of the decision for your review.  We will circulate a French version once it is released by the Federal Court.

As always, if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at peter.driscoll@mcinnescooper.com



Ce message est envoyé de la part de Peter Driscoll

Mise à jour sur recours collectif


Nous avons le plaisir de vous annoncer que le recours collectif sur les déductions de paiements du RARM a récemment été certifié par la Cour Fédérale du Canada.  Cette décision de la Cour Fédérale a pour effet d'inclure dans l'action entreprise contre le Gouvernement du Canada toute personne à qui s'applique la définition du groupe de personnes similairement affectées, à moins que cette personne décide de se désengager du processus.  Une notification personnelle sera transmise à tout personne affectée par le présent recours collectif.  Le groupe de personnes similairement affectées a été défini de la manière suivante par la Cour Fédérale :

"Tout ex-membre des Forces Canadiennes dont les prestations d'invalidité de longe durée du RARM (Police 901102) ont été réduites d'un montant équivalent au montant reçu pour les prestations d'invalidité de l'ACC en vertu de la loi sur les pensions (le "groupe") entre le 17 avril 1985 et aujourd'hui."

Nous attachons à cette communication la version anglaise de la décision de la Cour Féderale pour votre considération.  Nous distribuerons la version française de cette décision lorsqu'elle sera disponible.

Si vous avez des questions, n'hésitez pas à me contacter à l'adresse suivante : peter.driscoll@mcinnescooper.com



Kristine Hunter
Paralegal

tel 902.444.8400 x8140 | fax 902.425.6350

Purdy's Wharf Tower II
1300-1969 Upper Water Street
PO Box 730 Halifax NS B3J 2V1

 
Follow this LINK to find out about this CLASS ACTION SUIT AGAINST SSIP posted verbatim from their site (2008.0615):


SISIP LTD Class Action


Manuge v. Her Majesty the Queen
Federal Court of Canada Number T-463-07


The Class Action:

The Class Action was initiated in March of 2007 on behalf Dennis Manuge and all other disabled veterans whose SISIP Long Term Disability Benefits are reduced by the amount of the monthly VAC Disability Pension they receive under the Pension Act.

On May 20, 2008, the Federal Court of Canada certified the claim as a Class Action and defined the Class as follows:

All former members of the Canadian Forces whose long term disability benefits under the SISIP policy number 901102 were reduced by the amount of their VAC disability benefits received pursuant to the Pension Act from April 17, 1985 to date.

The effect of the certification of this claim cannot be understated. Upon certification, the claim changed from one individual pursuing litigation against the Government of Canada alone to in excess of 4500 disabled veterans pursuing the Government of Canada for their collective losses.

How Do You Participate In The Claim:

If you fall within the definition of the Class, you do not need to do anything to participate as you are automatically included in the Class Action. Each individual member of the Class will receive notice of the claim and an opportunity to opt out of the litigation should the individual not wish to participate. Details as to how you opt out of the litigation will be included in the individual notice.

What Is The Action About:

Under the terms of the SISIP Long Term Disability Plan (“SISIP LTD”), the amount of VAC Disability Pension payable to a disabled veteran is deducted from the amount of SISIP LTD otherwise payable to the veteran representing 75% pre-release salary.

The Class Action challenges the authority of the Government of Canada to lawfully deduct the VAC Disability Pension from the SISIP LTD benefits otherwise payable and further challenges the offset as being contrary to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The claim also alleges breach of fiduciary duties, unjust enrichment, breach of public duty and bad faith on the part of the Government of Canada.

The claim is based on the information contained in the 2003 report of the DND Ombudsman entitled “Unfair Deductions from SISIP Payments to Former CF Members” which found the claw back to be “fundamentally unfair”.

Do I Have To Pay Legal Fees?

No. You do not have to pay any direct legal fees out of your own pocket to become involved in the claim. If the case is not successful, no legal fees will be charged.

By agreement with the representative Plaintiff, counsel fees may be calculated at a percentage of any amounts recovered. The legal fees payable to us as counsel to the Class must be approved by the Court. For example, if a settlement, voluntary payment or other benefit is obtained as a result of the class action, we will be required to apply to Court for approval of our fee that is consistent with the terms of the agreement reached with the representative Plaintiff or some lesser amount depending on what the Court decides to be fair.

This arrangement compensates us for the risk we have assumed in advancing the case and performing the legal work without a guarantee of being paid. We do not receive any money unless we are successful and even if the Class Action does not succeed, you are not responsible for any of the lawyers’ fees involved in the case.

Our Database of Class Members:

At present, we are creating a data base of individuals who may fit the definition of the Class. You may contact us to assist you to determine whether you are a Class member by contacting us at sisipclassaction@mcinnescooper.com. When contacting us, please provide:

Your name;
Your address;
Your dates of service in the Canadian Forces;
Your date of medical release from the Canadian Forces;
The date upon which you commence receiving a VAC disability benefit under the Pension Act;
The date you commence receiving SISIP Long Term Disability benefits;
The amount by which your SISIP LTD benefits were reduced by your VAC disability benefits.
F.A.Q’s

We are currently developing a webpage providing answers to frequently asked questions from members of the Class. We expect to publish this page shortly and this page will be updated as the matter progresses to assist you in understanding the process.

Contact Information:

As always, please do not hesitate to contact us at sisipclassaction@mcinnescooper.com should you have any questions.

 
YES, CONSIDER THIS A POLITICAL ATTACK!  THE CONSERVATIVES ARE FIGHTING EVERY STEP OF THE WAY TO PREVENT THE ENIVITABLE.  THE SISIP CLAWBACK IS JUST WRONG.  I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY?  I COMPLETED 3 TOURS (BOSNIA, BOSNIA,AFGHANISTAN)  I ENDED UP WITH MULTIPLE SURGERY'S, BROKEN BONES, PYSHCHOLOGICAL ISSUES AND THE LIST CONTINUES.  I DID EVERYTHING THE ARMY ASKED ME TO DO.  I'VE SLEPT IN TRENCHES AT -40, I'VE PARACHUTED AT HIGH WINDS, I RUCKED 1000'S OF MILES.  I'VE SACRIFICED MY FAMILY, BIRTHDAYS, HOLIDAYS, ATTEMPTED SUICIDES FOR WHAT???  I SAY SCREW THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING WHAT LITTLE I HAVE LEFT, OR ARE ENTITLED TOO, SISIP >:D  I REALLY HOPE IT DOESN'T TAKE ANOTHER PERSON DRIVING THROUGH HQ BLDG'S TO RESOLVE THIS.
 
This topic has been covered before.

MERGED: Bruce



Just a heads up; using CAPS usually indicates yelling...

15may27-caps-lock.jpg
 
ex-pat said:
YES, CONSIDER THIS A POLITICAL ATTACK!  THE CONSERVATIVES ARE FIGHTING EVERY STEP OF THE WAY TO PREVENT THE ENIVITABLE.  THE SISIP CLAWBACK IS JUST WRONG.  I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY?  I COMPLETED 3 TOURS (BOSNIA, BOSNIA,AFGHANISTAN)  I ENDED UP WITH MULTIPLE SURGERY'S, BROKEN BONES, PYSHCHOLOGICAL ISSUES AND THE LIST CONTINUES.  I DID EVERYTHING THE ARMY ASKED ME TO DO.  I'VE SLEPT IN TRENCHES AT -40, I'VE PARACHUTED AT HIGH WINDS, I RUCKED 1000'S OF MILES.  I'VE SACRIFICED MY FAMILY, BIRTHDAYS, HOLIDAYS, ATTEMPTED SUICIDES FOR WHAT???  I SAY SCREW THE INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR TAKING WHAT LITTLE I HAVE LEFT, OR ARE ENTITLED TOO, SISIP >:D  I REALLY HOPE IT DOESN'T TAKE ANOTHER PERSON DRIVING THROUGH HQ BLDG'S TO RESOLVE THIS.

Political Attack? Conservatives are fighting? Can you provide details on this statement?  I see this as another VAC issue that vets have had to fight over.
 
Good day gents

The topic has indeed been covered, however, there are 4286 of us that have not been heard, so whether it's Caps lock or actual yelling, the word must go out for as long as it takes. I did not get the quality legal representation that we have by sitting on my arse and by not jumping up and down and yelling to get us a certified Federal Court Class Action.

Keep up the good work in discussing, but pass on info as well.

Dennis
 
dennismanuge said:
Good day gents

The topic has indeed been covered, however, there are 4286 of us that have not been heard, so whether it's Caps lock or actual yelling, the word must go out for as long as it takes. I did not get the quality legal representation that we have by sitting on my arse and by not jumping up and down and yelling to get us a certified Federal Court Class Action.

Keep up the good work in discussing, but pass on info as well.

Dennis

Hi Dennis,

I think you misunderstood the "this topic has been covered before" post -- it was a comment essentially made by a member that called for a "merging" of seperate threads dealing with the same topic into one. If you now review that post, you'll find that Mr. Monkhouse did effect a merge.

But please, don't yell at us here ... yell at VAC if/when/as often as required ... but just remember that we are not VAC.

Info dessimination, and discussion, seem to occur pretty frequently on the site. You'll have no worries there.

ArmyVern
The Milnet.ca Staff
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top