Author Topic: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?  (Read 2379 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Milhouser911

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,895
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Good day gentlemen. 

I recently submitted a request for clarification on a BGRS policy that states that in order to qualify for dual residency allowance, your house has to be listed at or below the appraised value. 

https://www.canada.ca/en/department-national-defence/corporate/policies-standards/relocation-directive/clarification-bulletin/2010-4-principal-residence-marketed.html

This policy was issued in 2010, and grieved in 2012.  In 2013, the CDS's office issued the below response.

https://www.canada.ca/en/military-grievances-external-review/services/case-summaries/case-2011-131.html

The response was that this policy was issued without treasury board approval, and should be immediately removed from circulation, and that BGRS should go back and find everyone that was denied this benefit because of it and pay them.

I pointed out that the policy was still being used in 2017, and again in August when I released and was putting together my IPR claim and plan.  Yesterday I received a response, by the CDBA MWO:

"ALCON,

Apologies for the delay in our response.

It has been confirmed that Clarification Bulletin 4 is still in effect and was approved by Treasury Board, who are the approving authority for the CFIRPD dated 19 April 2018.  The statement “The principal residence listing price does not exceed the appraised value established in accordance with article 8.2.05 of the CFIRP” replaces the highlighted text below.

Section 1.4 – Definitions of the CFIRPD dated 19 April 2018 provides the following definition of “Actively Marketed”:

Principal residence – actively marketed    A principal residence will be considered actively marketed for sale when:
• The principal residence is continuously for sale except for brief interruptions (e.g. to change brokers or listings) through a licensed real estate agent (realtor);
• The principal residence listing price is consistent with the appraisal paid by the CFIRP and the conditions of the market;
• The CF members are acting in good faith to dispose of the residence; and
• No reasonable offers have been refused. Résidence principale – Démarches de mise en vente active
"

I have...well, quite a few reservations about this response. 

For starters, the CDS response to the grievance was an order to remove this policy "amendment bulletin" from circulation, which was never done.  Instruction was also given to stop using "bulletins" to make changes, and instead amend the actual policy documents, which was never done.  The CFIRP was updated in 2018, and this policy amendment was not included.  The response claims that this bulletin was approved by the treasury board, but I believe that would require it to be re-issued in its approved form, and not simply approved while in use, after the fact.  The wording of "Still in effect" bothers me, because it was ordered to be removed from use, which would theoretically require its re-issue to be effective.

In addition, here is the logical argument against this policy:  Since the TB is paying out up to $30k losses on homes, this GUARANTEES that the TB will be paying more money for every single posting where houses aren't moving quickly.  They'll pay both TDRA, and they'll pay for the loss against this house, which is absolutely guaranteed in todays housing market since you can't list above the appraised value.  In addition, the appraisal frequently comes with a marketing strategy - It's a goal price for the sale.  You can't leave yourself any room to haggle and save the TB some money.

Finally, when I listed my home, I was using the most current available information.  I listed above the appraised value, and it's been on the market for almost 2 months.  Now I can't claim TDRA for those two months.  I did my research, requested clarification on this topic before the house ever hit the market, and followed the policy and information available to me. 

How do I grieve this situation as a released member?

Thanks for reading,

Scott

Online SeaKingTacco

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 165,690
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 5,785
  • Door Gunnery- The Sport of Kings!
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #1 on: November 06, 2019, 17:39:11 »
Short answer is that you cannot grieve once you are released. IIRC, QR&O 8.07 is the reference (just google CAF grievances- the answer pops right up).

Offline garb811

  • MP/MPO Question Answerer
  • Directing Staff
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 111,445
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,877
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #2 on: November 06, 2019, 17:53:34 »
...
In addition, here is the logical argument against this policy:  Since the TB is paying out up to $30k losses on homes, this GUARANTEES that the TB will be paying more money for every single posting where houses aren't moving quickly.  They'll pay both TDRA, and they'll pay for the loss against this house, which is absolutely guaranteed in todays housing market since you can't list above the appraised value.  In addition, the appraisal frequently comes with a marketing strategy - It's a goal price for the sale.  You can't leave yourself any room to haggle and save the TB some money.
...
How do you figure that? The fallacy in your statement is that you are assuming that the payout is based off of the "loss" being incurred from the difference of the appraised value of the house compared to what you are able to sell it for.  This isn't what the loss is calculated off of, it is the difference between the price that you paid for the house compared to the price you are able to sell it for.
Quote
8.2.13 Home Equity Assistance (HEA)
A member to whom this Directive applies is entitled to be reimbursed for any financial loss incurred in relation to the sale of their principal residence if:

- the closing date for the sale is on or after 19 April 2018; and
- the sale price is less than the purchase price paid by the member.
The reimbursable amount is equivalent to the difference between the original purchase price and the sale price minus any reduction in the sale price that is identified in the agreement of purchase of sale and attributable to anything in the principal residence that required repair or replacement.
All kinds of people sell below the "appraised" value and still turn a profit.
He's old enough to know what's right
And young enough not to choose it

Offline Milhouser911

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,895
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #3 on: November 06, 2019, 19:22:27 »
How do you figure that? The fallacy in your statement is that you are assuming that the payout is based off of the "loss" being incurred from the difference of the appraised value of the house compared to what you are able to sell it for.  This isn't what the loss is calculated off of, it is the difference between the price that you paid for the house compared to the price you are able to sell it for. All kinds of people sell below the "appraised" value and still turn a profit.

You're right, I'm assuming shorter postings.  In my case, when I purchased 2 years ago the appraised value was 360, now the appraised value is 346, just a function of the market as it stands.  House is in substantially better shape than it was at the time of purchase.  Realtor recommended I list for 370.  I have no problem "actively" marketing, and trying to turn a profit, as long as one isn't stubborn and expecting TDRA for a year without a price movement.

I don't think anyone in a posting under about 5 years is going to be able to get what the house was appraised for at purchase.

Offline CountDC

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 29,700
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,580
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #4 on: November 08, 2019, 13:02:33 »
You're right, I'm assuming shorter postings.  In my case, when I purchased 2 years ago the appraised value was 360, now the appraised value is 346, just a function of the market as it stands.  House is in substantially better shape than it was at the time of purchase.  Realtor recommended I list for 370.  I have no problem "actively" marketing, and trying to turn a profit, as long as one isn't stubborn and expecting TDRA for a year without a price movement.

I don't think anyone in a posting under about 5 years is going to be able to get what the house was appraised for at purchase.

I am thinking most will be able to get what they paid which is what matters.  Profits is a nice bonus.
“non-commissioned officer (NCO)” means a member holding the rank of sergeant or corporal.

QR&O's

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 510,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,835
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #5 on: November 08, 2019, 13:34:06 »
Note that the CDS has no authority to amend CBIs or CFIRP.  He lacks requisite authority to direct any changes to those instruments.  Any such change is clearly, per the NDA, under the authority of the Treasury Board.

I suspect there exists a delegation from the TB ministers to the Secretary of TB or the CHRO per FAA 6(4) and 6(4.1) that permits one of those two individuals to issue direction such as the Clarification Bulletin in question.


Quote
12(3) The Treasury Board may make regulations

(a) prescribing the rates and conditions of issue of pay of military judges, the Director of Military Prosecutions and the Director of Defence Counsel Services;

(b) prescribing the forfeitures and deductions to which the pay and allowances of officers and non-commissioned members are subject; and

(c) providing for any matter concerning the pay, allowances and reimbursement of expenses of officers and non-commissioned members for which the Treasury Board considers regulations are necessary or desirable to carry out the purposes or provisions of this Act.
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline Milhouser911

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,895
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #6 on: December 14, 2019, 12:23:14 »
dapaterson:

From what I have gleaned from this experience is that the CFIRP is administered by DCBA.  I don't know where DCBA lives on the org chart, but my understanding is that DCBA is responsible for CFIRP, and in order to make changes, DCBA needs to run the proposed changes through the treasury board for approval.

In this case, DCBA issued a clarification without TB approval.  This was grieved, and the CDS ordered the "clarification" removed from circulation, and directed DCBA to make changes to the CFIRP by amending the policy, not by issuing "clarification bulletins".

Are you saying the CDS has no authority over DCBA, or are you saying that he has no direct control over CFIRP?  The former would imply that any grievances with reference to the CFIRP can be safely ignored, and we as members have no route to address issues with its application.  The latter would just mean that the CDS can direct that DCBA does things and that they are required to be responsive to him.

I honestly don't know how this works, and I'm trying to figure out where the disconnect lies.  The Grievance External Review Committee designated this TDRA issue with the CFIRP as a "systemic issue" in 2015, and nothing has been done.  In my phone calls with them, they have said that DCBA routinely ignores the results of grievances and suggested that the only way to have this issue addressed was to go through my member of Parliament. 

In short, if the CDS stated that the clarification bulletin was to be removed from circulation and that any changes made to CFIRP need to be made through policy rather than clarification bulletins, does that statement have any force? 

-Scott

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 127,081
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,459
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #7 on: December 14, 2019, 14:27:36 »
He's saying that if TB issued the clarification bulletin, then the CDS has no authority to rescind it. And he's right on that part.

However, I just looked at a few other clarification bulletins and the releasing authority for all of them is DCBA, including Clarification Bulletin #4.

So I don't know how you can call BS on these folks when they say that it's been approved by Treasury Board. I would certainly at least ask them to substantiate that given that clarification bulletin itself indicates that it has not been. Unfortunately my dealings with DCBA so far has convinced me they are one of the most incompetent groups of people in the CAF and if you show them in black and white they will dig their heels in and make up some completely random, baseless claim to support their position.

I'm doing a grievance for $0.56 in the new year just because I've realized there is literally no other way to correct the mistakes this organization makes other than grievances. And even then, they dig their heels in and undermine the direction they are given, perhaps in this case and also in a recent case that I am tracking.
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline dapaterson

    Halfway to being an idiot-savant.

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Myth
  • *
  • 510,110
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 17,835
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #8 on: December 14, 2019, 14:49:07 »
Warning: Government management boring post to follow.

Treasury Board is a statutory creation under the authority of the Financial Administration Act (FAA).  Therefore, you need to read the FAA and related regulations to understand who can do what, where, when and how.

FAA 6 permits delegation of certain authorities to certain personnel.  For example,certain powers can be delegated to the CHRO:

Quote
Delegation to Chief Human Resources Officer

(4.1) The Treasury Board may, subject to any terms and conditions that it considers appropriate, delegate to the Chief Human Resources Officer

(a) any of the powers or functions in relation to human resources management, official languages, employment equity, and values and ethics that it is authorized to exercise under any Act of Parliament or by any order made by the Governor in Council; or

(b) any of the powers or functions in relation to employment that it is authorized to exercise under the Public Service Employment Act.

Reading further, FAA 11 speaks of the the HR management responsibilities of TB.  (Within this context, the CAF is considered as falling under the definition of public service)

Quote
11.1...
(d) determine and regulate the payments that may be made to persons employed in the public service by way of reimbursement for travel or other expenses and by way of allowances in respect of expenses and conditions arising out of their employment;

My understanding is that a valid delegation exists, empowering the CHRO to provide clarification and interpretation of certain policies, and that on some occasions translates into direction issued to organizations responsible for the administration of those policies.  Thus, the CHRO can issue direction to DND (in this case, through DCBA, a directorate under the Director General, Compensation and Benefits (DGCB), a DG under the Chief of Military Personnel) to clarify policy intent.  Thus, as long as they have valid direction from the CHRO (who holds valid delegation from the TB ministers / TB president), DCBA may issue clarification on that authority.


Assuming this is what happened, the problem may be in how this was communicated to the Grievance Board and then to the CDS.  A formal TB submission with formal approval by the TB ministers is not required as long as the CHRO holds a valid delegation in the area in which the CHRO gave direction to DND (through DCBA).

(There's the other underlying question of how this information was managed - the trail of authority in issuing the direction could likely do with clarification to avoid confusion in the future).
This posting made in accordance with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, section 2(b):
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication
http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/charter/1.html

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 127,081
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,459
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #9 on: December 14, 2019, 17:14:02 »
DAP, I understand how the authorities work. There is no evidence that suggests this came from the TB or someone with the authority delegated to them by TB, such as CHRO.

Thus, as long as they have valid direction from the CHRO (who holds valid delegation from the TB ministers / TB president), DCBA may issue clarification on that authority.

There is no evidence of that. If that were the case, then the clarification bulletin wouldn't say it's released "under DCBA's authority," it'd be released under CHRO authority.

Assuming this is what happened, the problem may be in how this was communicated to the Grievance Board and then to the CDS.  A formal TB submission with formal approval by the TB ministers is not required as long as the CHRO holds a valid delegation in the area in which the CHRO gave direction to DND (through DCBA).

The military grievance committee has generally been pretty thorough and bang-on in my experience. DCBA, however, has a track record of creating policy they have no authority to create. You're making an assumption that is not deduced from any evidence. All evidence is to the contrary.
« Last Edit: December 14, 2019, 17:16:47 by ballz »
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline Milhouser911

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,895
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #10 on: December 15, 2019, 20:44:53 »
So I don't know how you can call BS on these folks when they say that it's been approved by Treasury Board.

Ballz:  I call BS on it being approved because I can't imagine anyone in their right mind hearing "We've been ordered to remove this from circulation" thinking that means "get bulletin 10-4 approved and keep using it".  If nothing else, clarification bulletin #4 should have been removed from circulation, and clarification bulletin #5, with the exact same wording, should have been issued.  Or, when the TB modified and re-issued CFIRP in 2018, they would have added it if it were policy as per the CDS's direction.

I honestly believe this is at best a case of someone getting TB approval after the fact (like, when I got in touch with DCBA over it) and claiming it was always approved to cover someone's ***.

Offline ballz

    ...

  • Army.ca Subscriber
  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *
  • 127,081
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2,459
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #11 on: December 15, 2019, 20:54:03 »
Ballz:  I call BS on it being approved because....

You misunderstand me. I agree with you that it's probably BS. What I meant was that I don't know the *mechanism* for you to call BS on them... other than seeing a lawyer and taking the DND to civilian court.
« Last Edit: December 15, 2019, 21:41:29 by ballz »
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?

Offline Milhouser911

  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • 3,895
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 63
Re: Brookfield, CDS grievance, DCBA - How do I grieve now that I'm out?
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2020, 11:38:07 »
Latest update on the TDRA shitshow:

I received the following from ICCM:

"
However, I was able to confirm that the CDS did in fact issue a Final Authority Direction that Clarification Bulletin 2010-4 be removed (MGERC site has a typo that says 2012-4, but it is 2010-4 on the original Direction). I am unable to confirm if the reply to the direction, as our current tracker does not go that far back.

You should therefore be entitled to an adjudication through your local CFIRP coordinator. The bulletin provided as reason for denial should have been removed and the definition under CFIRP Section 1.4 Definitions should have been amended. You can include in your request for adjudication that DGCB can contact DGICCM for a copy of the FA Direction. I cannot provide you with a copy, under privacy constraints.

Should the CFIRP Coordinator refuse to accept your adjudication, have him/her contact me. If CFIRP still refuses, or you are unsatisfied with the response, you can then submit a complaint through the Ombudsman’s office.

"

So I think I'm on the right track.  I'll continue to post updates here as I get more info, but if you've ever been denied TDRA, then I think we've got recourse, it's just a matter of making the right people pay attention.  Hit me with a PM or message here if you want more direct info, contact names, etc.

-Scott