What to do when your disability percentage is above 100%?

[Words_Twice]

I have searched the boards for an answer, to no avail. My VAC case manager couldn't give me answer. Does this Equitas action address this particular situation? Is anyone here in a similar situation? I am currently at 126%, could go higher due to a reassessment. Any suggestions?

 

[RobA]

Pretty sure there's nothing that CAN be done.

There's no limit to how high your disability can go, but they strictly cap financial benefits at 100%. So a guy with 100% and 300% both get the same disability award.

I'm at 100% and would prob  be higher but my case manager said it would be pretty pointless to get a reassessment as it wouldn't affect anything with regards to benefits.

The equitas lawsuit might help, but until it's settled nothing to do yet.

 

[Teager]

I don't think the Equitas lawsuit would help. They are simply wanting to raise the amount of compensation for your injuries/illness so you could still max out the amount. Although if you have multiple conditionsor ones that have worsened even if you are claiming a condition after hitting the 100% mark you will still get medical coverage for that condition and any daily living aids you might need.

 

[Words_Twice]

Unfortunately, I believe you are both correct. I understand there are approximately 100 members who are over the 100% mark. I always thought the number was "sort of" arbitrary, in that it is quite a bit less than the upper limit for pain and suffering that the Supreme Court established (and periodically increases as a COL adjustment) years ago. Why not use the SCC figure as a guide? Presently, that SCC limit is around $360,000 (2015). I did not receive nearly that much. It seems unjust that average Canadian citizens have the right to argue before the court for that amount, while injured soldiers have no choice but to accept the limit that VAC establishes.

 

[RobA]

I believe that's the main contention of the equitas lawsuit, and since it's filed on everyone's behalf I think a judgment for the plaintiffs would help everyone.

For example,  if they DO raise the award to $360,000 my guess is they would pro rate everyone with a disability award. So they'd take what you've been paid, subtract it from what you'd be owed under the new system, and pay you the difference.

Just my opinion,  of course, it might not go down like that at all, but that's how I see it playing out.  IF they win, that's a big if. The lawsuits on hold right now but I have to imagine it will restart.

I don't think a few dozen guys getting the CIB is going to be enough to get them to drop the lawsuit.

 

[dunlop303]

If that does occur it would be interesting and would set quite a precedent. Currently, as the maximum goes up naturally nothing is prorated.

 

[blackberet17]

Not entirely sure what the aim of the original question is.

Once you hit the maximum 100%, you have hit the total amount payable for your pensioned/awarded conditions.

However, this does not prevent you from applying for reassessments or even for new medical conditions not previously awarded/pensioned. Treatment benefits are tied to the conditions for which you have received an award or a pension. If you have medical conditions which are related to service factors, or which are the consequence of a medical condition for which you are already in receipt of a pension/award, submit an application. Should you receive a favourable decision, that "new" condition will now receive treatment benefits, such as reimbursements for drug costs.

Further, there are other benefits available once you reach the 98-100%, such as Exceptional Incapacity Allowance; Permanent Impairment Allowance; Earnings Loss Benefit; Clothing Allowance; etc.

 

[Words_Twice]

To answer your question, more money. I thought you have gleaned that. I have no problem at all asking for more of it. Do you?

 

[Words_Twice]

I don't want to come across as a mercenary who is all about the dollar. I have had a pretty good go with VAC, despite being declined many, many times over the years (since 2008). Once you are "in", they treat you very well, in my experience. All I am saying is that these upper limits have to be justified using prescedents from our legal system, or Workers Compensation figures, or better yet, the figures our NATO allies use to determine what a fair payout is for their injured troops. I think the lump sum payout is fraught with pitfalls, handing a $150,000 cheque to a 22 year old with unresolved psychological issues is a mistake, but if that's the way it is going to be, pay him what a sawmill worker would receive for the same injury (at the very least!). What troubles me the most is that I received the same 100% payout figure as soldiers who had lost multiple limbs. While I am screwed up physically, I pale in comparison to what those individuals have suffered. Pay them a hell of a lot more(my preference), I will be content with what I have.

 

[blackberet17]

If your goal, as stated, was more money, it was not indicated as such. Your original question, subject line of this panel, didn't. It appeared to ask for COAs or additional info.

My response provided COAs and indicated the additional benefits and allowances currently available to those who are at the top of the scale.

Comparing VAC's compensation system to those of our Allies is a difficult game to play. Dollar figures, while important, do not represent the total package available to Canadian soldiers, nor what is offered by Britain or Australia. The VAC dollar figure, when looking solely at the current maximum paid out at 100% under the CFMVRCA, which is $306,698.21 for 2015, is higher AND lower than other NATO comparables. This article <a href="http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/benefits-for-wounded-canadian-veterans-do-not-stack-up/article23381161/">here</a> is not a complete picture of the benefits available.

I think the majority of us will agree the lump sum benefit is indeed fraught with pitfalls, which has been well discussed on this forum (see http://army.ca/forums/threads/106421/post-1179188.html#msg1179188). And there is a strong push to have the top of the lump sum come more in line with Workers Compensation.

Will it happen any time soon?

I keep hoping, every time there's a Minister's announcement...

 

[Words_Twice]

My apologies Blackberet, you are absolutely correct, and your points well taken. I was having a rough day when I replied.

 

[blackberet17]

Words_Twice, no apologies required. I can empathize with the frustration. I apologize if I came across defensively.

Folks, if ANYONE has any questions about VAC and its processes, or the Table of Disabilities, or what have you which is VAC related, please, post them to this area, and I'll do my very best to provide you with an answer or some guidance.

If you are uncomfortable posting it, PM me and, with your permission,  I'll repost it, keeping your name quiet, but so all may benefit from the questions and answers.

I've been with VAC for over ten years now, and with the PRes for just over five. I see both sides of the coin regularly. I will never hesitate to support a comrade who is struggling with the red tape they are facing. I can't cut it myself, but I might have some insight which may be helpful in dealing with it.