Home Equity Assistance & "Military Families Pushed to Financial Ruin" (Merge)

[heavy reader]

A few other interesting points from an Access to Information request recently received (ATI Request # A-2010-00725).

TBS cannot provide their own criteria used to determine if an area is a "depressed market".

Second interesting point is there is only ONE email chain (heavily censored), concerning "Any request from the department of National Defence pertaining to consideration or evaluation of a "depressed market"". These were sent between Oct and Nov 2009.

The article provided in the post above  (Perspectives Vol 1, #5, May 2011) details some of the discussion between Treasury Board and the Canadian Forces Grievance Board. This article indicates one reason why those affected have not been reimbursed according to policy.  Are you ready for the rationale?

A staff officer at TB indicated that "there are no depressed markets in Canada". The article goes on to say that this statement was clarified to the board as follows:

"The matter had not been pursued given other more pressing priorities and TBS conviction that there simply isn't a big enough problem to justify a submission for a policy change".

I would like to say a few things about the Treasury Board's justification.

1/ This isn't a request to change the policy.  I met the Treasury Board requirements for 100% HEA loss. I would just like to see it followed through.

2/ Perhaps the staffer involved can conduct a conference call with my family to discuss why there is no money this month to do the fun things a family should do. Like eat, have enough spare change to put down their lame dog or allow dad some spare time away from begging for money from civil organizations to make payments on the outstanding HEA debt.

3/ Shouldn't someone have followed up since 2009?

 

[heavy reader]

Redress is up on the CFGB website.

http://www.cfgb-cgfc.gc.ca/English/2011-025.html

 

[wesleyd]

I am in a similar situation albeit not nearly as dire as yours. I have been posted inland after being in Halifax for 20+ years. (In my home for 10) I had my house appraised and priced it accordingly when listed. Home equity assistance will not help me as I have lived in my home for too long to sell below original sale price. However I do have to purchase a home when I move at current market prices. I am now well below appraised value and still no offers. I have read the NJC directive, there is a link to it on the secure Brookfield site, on moving and there is a directive regarding HSA (home sale assistane). It states that if the property sells for less than 95% of appraised value they will make up that difference up to 15K from core. I have asked several dozen times for Brookfield to look into this to no avail. Why would the CF elect not to include this in its own IRP? It would seem more appropriate given current market fluctuations and would help people that have been in their homes for longer than the average.  I think rather than update the current HEA policy it should be scrapped and have this policy or something similar to it instated. It is just very dissatisfying to see other public servants getting benefits while we do not. We all have the same employer. I wish you luck with your redress.

 

[captloadie]

Your problem is vastly different then those posted in this topic. Heavy reader has taken an actual loss. He is out money. You on the other hand are only out "profit" or equity. Why should the tax payer offset your perceived loss on an investment? I sold my house 4 years ago for 20K under the appraisal. What did I expect get out of IRP? Nothing. And why? Because the house sold for 20K over what I had invested in it.

And you don't have to buy a house. You want to buy a house. You could rent, try for a PMQ, etc. 

 

[sig327]

Here's another poor (literally) soldier getting screwed.

I was posted after buying in Edmonton in 2007. I tried everything I could to get the posting cancelled, it ended up delayed for 3 months because of all the admin I was creating, was even told I could be looking at jail time if I delayed any longer (BS if you ask me). My units RSM marched me in and gave me a harsh lecture about the trouble I was creating. His exact words "no one ordered you to buy a home".

Whatever, I'm done with the military now, I'll be out in September and going back to school and also out $60,000.

%$&# You military!

 

[aesop081]

%$&# You military!

See ya, don't let the door hit you on the way out.

 

[PMedMoe]

Whatever, I'm done with the military now, I'll be out in September and going back to school and also out $60,000.

%$&# You military!

I thought you were done back in 2006:

I just signed my second BE a few months ago(big mistake). And now I want out, My initial BE isn't even up untill April. If I put in a VR now, what kind of time frame can i expect before it's all done with? Is there anything i could say that would make the process go quicker?

:

 

[MJP]

Here's another poor (literally) soldier getting screwed.

I was posted after buying in Edmonton in 2007. I tried everything I could to get the posting cancelled, it ended up delayed for 3 months because of all the admin I was creating, was even told I could be looking at jail time if I delayed any longer (BS if you ask me). My units RSM marched me in and gave me a harsh lecture about the trouble I was creating. His exact words "no one ordered you to buy a home".

Whatever, I'm done with the military now, I'll be out in September and going back to school and also out $60,000.

%$&# You military!

While I sympathize a little with folks that were posted in and bought houses in that timeframe and then are subsequently posted out sooner than they expected thus taking losses, I have none for you.  You lived there already but made the decision to buy during a period of artificially high house prices.  The army certainly didn't make you buy a house and to a degree is not responsible for the financial decisions that you make.

That  and your only other post here on Army.ca was asking how to release ASAP in 2006, so the intention to get out was before you bought a house in 2007.  Methinks you just want a better excuse for blaming the military for your woes and release...

 

[sig327]

Your going to bring up a post over 5 years ago when I was young clueless private. I guess you all have a perfect history of no mistakes or regrets. I wish I was in the same boat. Things turned around since then and I was happy I decided to stay, I bought because I wanted get out of the shacks and settle into my career.

I don't want to drag this thead off topic anymore, there's lots of good info here. I probably should have chosen my words more carefully but I was a little heated when I wrote it. If you want to kick me while I'm down just do it through PMs

 

[MJP]

Your going to bring up a post over 5 years ago when I was young clueless private. I guess you all have a perfect history of no mistakes or regrets. I wish I was in the same boat.

First, I never admit to being perfect and am far from it.  But then again I don't going around blaming the military for my financial decisions.

Second we don't know you except through your posting history here on Army.ca.  From that we make inferences that may or may not be right.  We can only work with what you give us and since as you haven't given any context to your recent post except to tell us how the army "screwed" you how did you expect us to react?  Maybe suck back come and make a logical post outlining your situation and we can collectively help you.  Posting crap just gets crap in return.

 

[Pistos]

And now for something completely different...

In April of last year I applied for 100% HEA.  We (my wife and I...mostly my wife) compiled a fairly thick tome in which we laid out a case arguing that our market should be classed as depressed.  After submitting it through the proper chain we waited and hoped...hoped and waited...and waited...and inquired (several times, to no avail)...and waited...and lost hope...and waited...inquired several more times (achieving similar results as previous)...and waited...and finally abandoned all hope.

Several days ago, fully 15 months later, out of the blue I received a memo thru my IRP relocation coordinator from a Lieutenant-Colonel - Director Compensation and Benefits.

"As per article 8.2.13, [my] request was forwarded to TBS
> for review and consideration declaring [my market] as a
> depressed market region on 30 Jun 10.  TBS conducted a thorough
> analysis and review of [my] HEA request and they have deemed
> [my market] a depressed market area.  As such, [my] request
> for 100% HEA reimbursement from Core is approved.  BGRS shall readjust
> [my] core and custom envelops accordingly.

Yesterday Brookfield contacted me and I went into their office to sign claims.  My office, being short-staffed and consisting of newly minted reps has a senior adviser from out East training and helping them get caught up. She was flabbergasted; in her experience she had never seen this approved.  We chatted for a bit and she talked me through the claim, explaining all of the numbers and how they were derived. 

One thing I noticed is that there were no capital improvements included.  When we were selling the property {standard} HEA used up all of my custom envelope so they handed back my original capital improvement receipts because there was simply no money to entertain them. With this approval, all of the HEA previously taken from custom reverted to core, freeing up my custom envelope for things such as said capital improvements. However, since it's been over 2 years from the time my file was opened it is now closed and my agent is unable to process additional claims.  Turns out I need to shoot of a memo to DCBA asking for an extension and requesting my file be reopened.  I remain hopeful as this is certainly an extenuating circumstance. 

I could have my HEA money as soon as tomorrow.  I will certainly be pursuing capital improvements funds but if nothing comes of it I am still quite happy with the response received.  What I was expecting was a standard "There are no depressed markets in Canada". Just to find that my application was indeed read and considered was gratifying, the favorable result was the cherry on top.

For reference, this was my first posting and my residence is that which I owned prior to enrolling.  It is located in rural Nova Scotia, over 200km from the nearest base.

 

[PuckChaser]

Maybe that just goes to show everyone that compiling the proper paperwork, and some patience can turn out in your favour.

Congrats on your reimbursement, as much as its easy to say "Army didn't tell you to buy a house", there's simply no PMQs available in most places and the rent market is extremely poor in smaller towns.

 

[heavy reader]

Congrats, although I wanted to be the one to "break the HEA" code.

I am certainly pleased that the TBS has relented and processed your application. Hopefully this will have a ripple effect for others in a similar situation. Your wife deserves a pat on the back as well.

Thank you for your update, I will send you a PM to discuss offline if you are willing.

Never give up...ever!

 

[heavy reader]

Update:

CDS has granted partial support to grievance. DCBA directed to send the request to TBS (as was mandated in relocation policy).  Going on to 15 months now carrying a growing debt of over 100K (the fun doesn't stop).

I understand there are 2 other (similar) requests at DCBA (after going to CDS thru Grievance process).  Anyone else having any progress with their situation?

 

[going_broke]

My community declined only 18%... sent file to DCBA with a request that TBS considers my equity loss as "exceptional expense" related to the move... 7 months waiting and counting..

Found an interesting piece of TBS regulations, on Ex Gratia payments. Here is what it says:

7.4 Ex gratia payment 

The Directive is not used to fill perceived gaps or compensate for the apparent limitations in any act, order, regulation, policy, agreement or other governing instruments-if, for example, a particular subject is governed by another instrument and that instrument does not provide for such a payment, the Directive cannot be used to expand that instrument and an exception to the governing instrument would need to be sought;

http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=17068&section=text#sec7.4

The way I read it, the TBS itself says - if the policy is deficient, then seek an exception to it.  So that's what I am doing.

 

[heavy reader]

Just found a few interesting articles about the individual public servant who is the sole and final decision maker on HEA 100% from core benefits, and who has unilaterally declared that there are no depressed markets in Canada. He is currently mentioned  for his role in the $1 Billion dollar relocation contract which is responsible to relocate all of our soldiers, sailors and airmen/women.

The news reported in November that, according to the Ottawa Sun, he was investigated for his part in bid rigging for the Royal Lepage Contract fiasco and also for running a religious charity which "declared almost $1.2 million in revenue from 2004 to 2010 ... spending $1.3 million in total but only $268,000 on charity projects", the news also reports that this charity is run from his Ottawa house, which used 80,000 of the funds.

I could go on, but the articles speak for themselves:

Have a look for yourself and decide if soldiers are being manipulated...

http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/11/02/charity-head-is-at-centre-of-bid-rigging-case

http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/11/23/tainted-civil-servant-didnt-evaluate-new-bids

Now, I find it rather difficult to have faith that my request for 100% HEA from Core will be assessed on its merits if these news articles are correct, as my file has gone from the CDS, to DCBA to...Mr Ram Singh, Office of the Integrated Relocation Program Project Authority and spiritual leader of Sai Nilayam.  Perhaps I should start praying to him.

I realize that the press is often misleading, I will continue to follow this story and post findings on the outcomes of the case as they become available. 

I welcome your comments.

 

[heavy reader]

Update on Ram Singh:

Looks like someone's going to be looking for a new line of work.

http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/12/08/judge-considers-sun-request-for-secret-evidence

 

[heavy reader]

CDS decision posted.

Good morning all.  CDS has ruled on my grievance.  Decision has been posted at http://www.cfgb-cgfc.gc.ca/English/2011-025.html


"Case # 2011-025

Home Equity Assistance (HEA), Integrated Relocation Program (CF IRP)

Case Summary

F&R Date: 2011-04-29

The grievor suffered a loss of $88,000 upon the sale of his home on posting. He was granted reimbursement under Home Equity Assistance (HEA) in the amount of $15,000 from his Core funding. The grievor provided a well substantiated application to the Director Compensation and Benefits Administration (DCBA) requesting HEA reimbursement for 100 percent of his loss from his Core benefit on the grounds that his community constituted a depressed market area as specified in the policy, the Canadian Forces (CF) Integrated Relocation Program (IRP) Active Posting Season 2010, section 8.2.13. The grievor’s submission included evidence that the real estate market in his community had declined by over 23 percent.

The DCBA Relocation Adjudication Section denied the grievor's request on the grounds that the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) had determined that there were no locations in Canada designated with depressed market status.

The grievor disputed the DCBA decision, suggesting that DCBA had used a blanket TBS denial to turn down his request and reiterating that his community fell within the definition of a depressed market area according to the CF IRP. He also noted that he had advised his career manager that he had serious concerns with that posting because he simply could not afford the housing in that area and the Private Married Quarters had lengthy waiting lists and were not available. He further explained that the loss on the sale of his home had had a severe impact on his family and that he was very close to the point of bankruptcy. He also stated that if he were not granted 100 percent reimbursement, he may be forced to leave the CF.

As redress, the grievor requested reimbursement under the HEA for 100 percent of his loss, reimbursement for the interest he was paying on a monthly basis on the debt he had incurred in relation to the loss on the home and reimbursement of several other consequential expenses related to the denial of his original HEA application.

The initial authority (IA), the Director General Compensation and Benefits (DGCB) denied redress noting that the CFIRP directive represented TBS approved policy and that the Department had no authority to amend such a policy or extend a benefit beyond its prescribed margins. The IA explained that the TBS had declared that there were no locations in Canada designated with depressed market status for 2010.

The IA also stated that, since the grievance pertained to a matter prescribed by the Governor in Council (GIC) in regulations, the grievance file was returned without further action. She advised the grievor that a request to amend a policy or a TBS decision should be staffed administratively through his chain of command.

The Board disagreed with the IA’s decision to dismiss the grievance. The Board noted that it had previously stated, and the Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) had agreed, that it is open to a member to grieve the application of a policy or regulation to him or her personally.

The Board found that the grievor had submitted a valid grievance that ought to be judged on its merits.

The Board noted that the HEA policy in CF IRP section 8.2.13 required that DCBA forward to TBS a case for depressed market status built and submitted by a CF member and his or her realtor. Accordingly, the Board found that the grievor's file should have been forwarded to TBS. The Board indicated that, based on the evidence on file, the grievor's community fell within the HEA policy definition of a depressed market area, “... a community where the housing market has dropped more than 20%,” which would entitle him to reimbursement of 100 percent of his loss.

The Board recommended to the CDS that he direct that the grievor's HEA application be submitted to TBS with the full support of the CF, for consideration of the grievor's request for a depressed market designation and reimbursement from Core of 100 percent of the loss on his home sale.

The Board noted that there was no authority under the policy to grant the payment of interest nor any of the other out-of-pocket expenses which the grievor attributed to the denial of his original HEA submission, and as such, did not recommend that the CDS grant this portion of the grievor's requested redress.

CDS Decision Summary

CDS Decision Date: 2011-09-19

The CDS agreed with the Board's findings and its recommendation to partially uphold the grievance. The CDS directed the DGCB to prepare and transmit the grievor's HEA submission to Treasury Board (TB), in accordance with the CF IRP provisions, for evaluation of depressed market status. In the event that TB should not find in favour of this submission, the CDS invited the grievor to forward his file to DCCL for compensatory consideration as a claim against the Crown, with his full support.

Since there are now a number of grievances relating to CF members who have experienced severe losses in home equity as a result of being posted to and from the Edmonton area, the CDS reiterated his previous direction to the DGBC, as recommended by the Board in previous files, which is to continue to engage TB in vigorous negotiations. The CDS specified that the negotiations should be focused as follows:

a. to revisit the TB's determination that there were no depressed markets in Canada in 2010, including the definition of ''community''; and

b. to re-examine the CF IRP HEA provisions, in particular the 20% depressed market criteria and the $15,000.00 maximum amount reimbursable under the CF IRP core envelope.
"

As a result, the Treasury Board now has the file.  Hopefully we will hear good news in 2012.

 

[GINge!]

Good luck my friend. I hope your hard work pays off, not just for you, but for all the other folks who bought in 07 and sold in 09-10.

 

[heavy reader]

Update...none.

Decision remains at TBS for their action.