Looking for clarification.

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Looking for clarification.

Post by armybulldog on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 09:48

Reading through posts on here and there is alot of acronyms being used that I have no clue what they are or what they are for.

RSIB
EIA
PIA
PIAS

Also which should I be going after.

I was released in 2008 and receive my military pension, VAC monthly and SISIP LTD.

TIA
avatar
armybulldog
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 34
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2015-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Guest on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 10:05

buds it all depends on your situation but if can no longer work you should be applying for:

CPPD- Canada disability
DTC- disability tax credit
PIA- permanent impairment allowance
PIAS - permanent impairment allowance supplement

EIA- exceptional incapacity allowance this was replaced in the new system by the PIA but it is still in effect so you can receive one ore the other  but not both if on the PA . you will require a 100% PA pension to be considered for EIA  .

RISB- retirement income security benefit more to follow on this as it has not been written up yet to my knowledge and sure hasn't been implemented yet so MTF on that.

hope this helps

propat

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Guest on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 10:13

AA - attendance allowance, I receive this but I know many , many veterans who have been told by cm that they can't receive this. Now with the new I love families and spouses respite benefit they say the AA is for PA only. Good luck getting that , many have tried to crack VACs dome of denial !

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by armybulldog on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 10:18

Awesome thanks for the info.

I'm in process of applying for the cppd.
LTD has informed me I have to. Lol.

Will definitely contact my CM at VAC about the PIA PIAS. I'm positive I received something from VAC about being totally disabled.

Thanks
avatar
armybulldog
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 34
Location : Ontario
Registration date : 2015-03-16

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by teentitan on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 12:26

Navrat there is going to be a ripple effect when the new PIA regulations are written up. When they loosen the definitions under the NVC about PIA then it will trickle over to the PA for the AA. I have been talking to the OVO and they are going to be very watchful to make sure when something changes in one act the other gets the same treatment.
avatar
teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3244
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Recon031 on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 16:42

Hey Ron , that's great News !

What Power does the OVO have to push for " EQUAL Benefits " though when it comes to standing up to the MVA O'Toole ?


For Country
Retired Army MasterSniper
Dave Fitzpatrick
family of .......7....... get er' done bye's !
avatar
Recon031
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 243
Location : Eastern Ontario
Registration date : 2013-07-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by georges on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 16:49

propat are you sure it takes 100% I am over 98% and I get the hole deal

georges
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 67
Location : Quebec
Registration date : 2015-02-24

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by teentitan on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 17:43

The OVO doesn't really have any powers but O'Toole wants the OVO involved when doing the administration to the NVC.

At least O'Toole is using his head and involving the OVO or he'd just get another bad report from the OVO if they botch it up!
avatar
teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3244
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Recon031 on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 17:56

Well Ron ,

It sounds as though Minister O'Toole is using his resources to their fullest potential !

& Thanks for getting back to me so soon .

For Country
Retired Army MasterSniper
Dave Fitzpatrick
family of .......7....... get er' done bye's !
avatar
Recon031
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 243
Location : Eastern Ontario
Registration date : 2013-07-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Guest on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 18:00

Georges sory buds it is not 100% for EIA but I think it was either a minimum of 97.5% or 97.5 % or higher . but since I was under the understanding that after a citrine percentage a PA pension would be rounded up to the nearest 5% I felt as many have in the past you would actually need the 100% as any award between 95% and 100% would leave you with 100% anyway .

guess ill have to re-read that legislation again to see where I may have went off and although im pretty sure its higher than 97.5% clarify that as well.

thank you for that geoges.

propat

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Guest on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 18:09

72. (1) In addition to any other allowance, pension or compensation awarded under this Act, a member of the forces shall be awarded an exceptional incapacity allowance at a rate determined by the Minister in accordance with the minimum and maximum rates set out in Schedule III if the member of the forces

(a) is in receipt of

(i) a pension in the amount set out in Class 1 of Schedule I, or


(ii) a pension in a lesser amount than the amount set out in Class 1 of Schedule I as well as compensation paid under this Act or a disability award paid under the Canadian Forces Members and Veterans Re-establishment and Compensation Act, or both, if the aggregate of the following percentages is equal to or greater than 98%:

(A) the extent of the disability in respect of which the pension is paid,


(B) the percentage of basic pension at which basic compensation is paid, and


(C) the extent of the disability in respect of which the disability award is paid; and




(b) is suffering an exceptional incapacity that is a consequence of or caused in whole or in part by the disability for which the member is receiving a pension or a disability award under that Act.

yup higher than 97.5 % or minimum of 98%

propat

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by pinger on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 18:18

Teen, you wrote " a ripple effect " in the context of pia. I would call it political/vac spaghetti.

Recon, you wrote " What Power does the OVO have to push for " EQUAL Benefits " though when it comes to standing up to the MVA O'Toole ? "
Let's remember what happened to Pat Stogran and that the OVO's office was established by Harper in the first place.

Just waiting for dust to settle.  pinger.
avatar
pinger
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 1208
Location : Facebook-less
Registration date : 2014-03-04

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by Guest on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 18:33

georges

under

SCHEDULE I

(Section 21)
SCALE OF PENSIONS FOR DISABILITY

it shows 98%-100% are to be payed at the 100% rate.

so if your particular disability or disabilities is over 98% you are actually receiving a 100% pension.

thanks for the extra reading thou buds its always good to refresh some stuff.

thanks again

propat

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by teentitan on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 22:51

Pinger one thing you need to remember Pat Stogran was the first Vet Ombudsman but he was an "attack" oriented Ombudsman.

Pat brought vet problems out into the public.  Guy just brought the 'rock solid' proof to what Pat brought into the spotlight.

Guy Parent is a strategic Ombudsman.  His approach is bring a 3rd party to "prove"  NVC benefits, grants, awards are not sufficient.  A better approach then 'attack' and a tactic I know pisses off the bureaucrats because they cannot argue it.  Believe me in my years of being an advocate I have seen bureaucrats look at reports and say "That's your opinion".  But make that opinion an outside 3rd party and the bureaucrats can't argue or shrug off the report.  They have to prove it's wrong.  And guess what....the actuarial Guy did on the NVC was an actuarial the bureaucrats tried to ignore because it was a direct hit and it wasn't ignored because the Standing Committee and Harper challenged them to prove it wrong.

Reality check...Pat was not/not fired!  He did his 3 year term and was not renewed.  Simple as that.  No malice.  No discrimination. No intentional wrong doing.

If anything, and THIS IS MY OPINION, Harper saw that Pat was not living up to the Veterans Ombudsman that he thought would be effective against the VAC bureaucracy.  Hiring Pat was a spur of the momen decisiont by Harper and he realized it wasn't the right hire. Fire and brimstone was not the right choice for a Veterans Ombudsman.

An effective Ombudsman is not someone who takes the uniform off on a Friday and walks into being the Veterans Ombudsman on Monday.

An effective Ombudsman is a person who has been a VETERAN for more then 72 hours.  And before anyone rips me apart I TOLD PAT STOGRAN THIS TO HIS FACE WHILE HE WAS THE VETRANS OMBUDSMAN.

If anything Pat now knows a level head is better then a heads on attack when dealing with the bureaucracy of VAC.

Guy's term as the Ombudsman is over this year, 2015.  If Harper wants to keep the ball rolling to improve veterans lives then renew Guy for another 2/3 years.  AGAIN THIS IS MY OPINION.  I am not campaigning for Guy I am campaigning for veterans!
avatar
teentitan
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 3244
Location : ontario
Registration date : 2008-09-19

Back to top Go down

Re: Looking for clarification.

Post by RCNRetired on Wed 18 Mar 2015, 23:22

Where i respect what you say Teen, i must say the the OVO in my opinion has no authority, they may bring common sense to the equation there is not much they can do when VAC screw us over. sure they can bring it to there attention but if VAC say go away that is all the OVO can do. I have used the ombudsmans office three times, all for pretty straight forward issues, all three they apologized for their lack of authority other then to advise VAC. If government want to walk the walk rather than just talk then make the office the same statue of others ombudsmen.

RCNRetired
CSAT Member

Number of posts : 31
Location : Vancouver Island
Registration date : 2014-10-25

Back to top Go down

Page 1 of 2 1, 2  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum