Home Equity Assistance

100% Home Equity Assistance in CFIRP

Posts Tagged ‘hea

Once more, into the fray…with Michele Drapeau Law Office

with one comment

fed crt

Once again, after winning in Federal Court, our battle has been extended by Treasury Board Secretariat. We find ourselves having to take TBS back into Federal Court to finalize our claim for Home Equity Assistance. Our family has carried this load for 5 years now, won our grievances and won in federal court, but TBS continues to SPEND YOUR TAX DOLLARS denying our entitlements.

The only way we can get accountability is by voting, and taking them to court.

We are once again asking for financial support to assist with this legal battle, so that the TBS will be held accountable to follow their own policies, instead of getting away with the use of Blanket Denials for hundreds of Canadian Military families. Details available at www.healoss.wordpress.com

Donations may be made at: http://www.gofundme.com/2j18gw

Thank you so much for your continued support in this quest for Government Accountability.




Changes to the Relocation Rules on Home Equity Assistance?

with one comment

A friend noted that the CBI (Compensation and Benefit Instructions) have been quietly amended with regards to the Home Equity Assistance.  What do you think? Has anyone seen a change in the CFIRP policy or policy clarification notices?

2009 Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program

2009 Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Program-Dreamers and Doers Guide

208.97 – Home Equity Assistance

208.97(1) (Definitions) The definitions in this paragraph apply in this instruction.

adjusted purchase price

means, in respect of a principal residence, the price paid for the principal residence plus the value, as determined on the basis of actual costs for materials and professional labour, of any eligible home improvements determined under paragraph (6).

current market value

means, in respect of a principal residence, the value at the time of sale as determined by the Chief of the Defence Staff based on three appraisals.

eligible home improvements


  1. the addition of a garage;
  2. the addition of perimeter fencing;
  3. the addition of a deck or patio;
  4. the installation or paving of a driveway;
  5. necessary basic landscaping other than decorative;
  6. the finishing of a basement in a manner which adds living space to the residence; and
  7. the permanent addition of a bedroom or other living space.

principal residence

means a principal residence as defined in paragraph (1) of CBI 208.96 – Acquisition and Disposal of Residential Accommodation.

sale price

means, in respect of a principal residence, the final selling price.

208.97(2) (Application) This instruction applies in respect of the sale of a principal residence by an officer or non-commissioned member where, as determined by the Chief of the Defence Staff, the housing prices at the member’s place of duty have decreased by 10% or more between the date of purchase and the date of sale of the principal residence.

208.97(3) (Sale price lower than adjusted purchase price) An officer or non-commissioned member who is moved at public expense other than locally and sells a principal residence shall be reimbursed 90% of the difference between the sale price and the adjusted purchase price, when the sale price is lower than the adjusted purchase price.

208.97(4) (Sale price lower than current market value) Despite paragraph (3), when the sale price is also lower than the current market value, the Chief of the Defence Staff may limit reimbursement to 90% of the difference between the current market value and the adjusted purchase price.

208.97(5) (Appraisal) For the purpose of this instruction, the current market value and the value of eligible home improvements shall be determined on the basis of appraisals by licensed property appraisers appointed by the Chief of the Defence Staff.

208.97(6) (Under financial hardship) Despite paragraphs (2), (3) and (4), the Chief of the Defence Staff may approve reimbursement to an officer or non-commissioned member in any case that does not meet the criteria of this instruction when the Chief of the Defence Staff considers that the member would suffer undue financial hardship.

Written by Major Marcus Brauer

April 16, 2015 at 17:58


leave a comment »

As posting season is upon us, I have had multiple requests from military members who are expecting to loose a great deal of equity on their home sale. Luckily, the CAF has the Canadian Forces Integrated Relocation Policy which

Therefore, in order to gain access to government records you will need to fill out a request. You can do this online, or by mail by filling out this form http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/tbsf-fsct/350-57-nf-eng.pdf

Next: You may request information from both DND and TBS by sending requests to their ATI co-ordinator.

The DND forms get mailed to:

Director Access to Information and Privacy
National Defence Headquarters
Major-general George R. Pearkes Bldg.
101 Colonel By Drive
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0K2

and the TBS form gets mailed to:

Access to Information and Privacy Office
Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
140 O’Connor Street
8th Floor, East Tower
L’Esplanade Laurier
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0R5

Each request can cost $5, so include a cheque (usually reimbursed if you are requesting information about you only).

What to expect: I have experienced that each department will reveal different information to you. Often the ATI officer will call and ask to reword the request to save work/time, stand your ground and ensure you are NOT watering down your request. If you encounter long delays there is an office which can help resolve. For example, DND and TBS both withheld information from me using various excuses. Also information was blacked out or “under review” by another department, and never actioned. With the assistance of the Office of the Information Commissioner  you can get help with some of these roadblocks.

So, you need information about your last relocation as you are expecting to take a large (over $15,000 hit) on your equity? Here are some sample ATI’s for your use as you see fit:

“All memoranda, reports, emails, briefing notes, minutes of meetings held within DND and any letters to or  from Treasury Board for the period 1 January 2009 to 5 August 2012 on the subject of 100% Home Equity Assistance, depressed markets  or policy clarification as it applies to Edmonton and surrounding communities (e.g. Bon Accord, Morinville, St Albert).
DGCB definition of ‘community’ as it applies to the relocation policy used within IRP (e.g. E-mail Thursday, 5, July, 2012 09:43 AM LCol Gash-LCol Raney). Any communications between DCBA/DGCB and TBS demonstrating an effort to resolve the issue of defining “community” as it applies to the CF IRP. Spreadsheet, printout or any document that would show the number of claims submitted, and approved under the Home Equity Assistance (100%) between 1 January 2009 and 5 August 2012″.

Between 2006 and Aug 2012, all memos, reports, emails, briefing notes, minutes, internal and external correspondence regarding Home Equity Assistance, Bon Accord, {Major Brauer}, and the definition of ‘community’ as it applies to relocation policy.  Any documentation on depressed markets, and policy clarification of Home Equity Assistance administration of IRP”.

Drop a line if anyone needs further guidance/assistance. Do note that there are discussions that ATI requests may increase from $5 to $250 each. I myself have been advised that my last ATI would cost hundreds/thousands – but this is my information and I have a right to access it. Without having access to our own personal information, I would not have discovered that we were being cheated out of our entitlements!

Below is an excerpt from the Senate of Canada on the subject of access to our information:

“Access to Information Requests—User Fees

Hon. James S. Cowan (Leader of the Opposition): Honourable senators, my question is for the Leader of the Government in the Senate and pertains to the proposed increased user fees for Access to Information requests.

Last Thursday, Information Commissioner Suzanne Legault testified before the House of Commons Access to Information and Ethics Committee on the funding crisis facing her office. In response, a number of Conservative Members of Parliament proposed that the solution to the office’s lack of funding would be to increase the $5 user fee charged for ATIP requests. Erin O’Toole, Member of Parliament for Durham, recommended that the government increase the fees charged to ordinary Canadians from $5 to $25 for each request, and to $200 per request from businesses, including commercial news organizations. This would mean that Canadians would be paying $25 to learn whether Mr. O’Toole’s predecessor had charged $16 for a glass of orange juice.

The Information Commissioner made it clear that increasing the cost of ATIP user fees was not, in her opinion, a good idea. She said:

. . . it is not my office that is in a crisis, it is the fact that Canadians’ right to access government information is in jeopardy, that is the real issue . . .

When your Prime Minister came to power in 2006, he promised to usher in a new era of openness and accountability. His exact words were:

We promised to stand up for accountability and to change the way government works.

Can you explain why the government is even considering charging Canadians more for information which by law belongs to them? If the government does increase user fees, does this not negate completely the government’s claim to be more open and transparent and accountable than its predecessors?”


Canadian Human Rights Complaint-Major Brauer and the Systematic Denial of Relocation Entitlements

leave a comment »

Good evening all:

As it has been 4 years and 8 months since we were unfairly denied our Home Equity Assistance entitlements, it is time to get some closure. Tomorrow, I will be submitting my observations to the Human Rights Committee as a complaint. It is hoped that this external review will not be dismissed as were my “disclosure of wrongdoing” or “claim against the Crown”. Both of these were dismissed without investigation. The department of justice lawyer (a Major in the CAF) went so far as to state that this was a political, not a legal issue.

As my family continues to carry the debt and its horrible effects – it has cost us more than we could have imagined. I still have an opportunity to make things right for my family and for those who serve, but not without resolving this grievance. By communicating my Human Rights complaint, hopefully some of the effects of coming forward will be resolved and we can get on with the mission, and the family.

Wish me luck and please share.


Treasury Board Secretariat delays Home Equity Assistance decision

with one comment

Latest update from the Treasury Board of Canada…nothing. Not even an e-mail.

Federal Court Case was decided in May 2014, and TBS refuses to provide an update http://politwitter.ca/page,/videos/id/41803 .  Our entitlements have now been denied almost five years and we are getting very little support. We get no support from the legion, MFRC (aside from a Christmas hamper), or the government. We have received some assistance from my workplace, Jumpstart for Kids and our Church.

If you know anyone interested in historical material, antiques or military collectables, please see my personal items for sale. This is how we are currently supporting our family. Hundreds of items up to 65% off at http://stores.ebay.ca/UNDER-PRESSURE-ANTIQUES.  This is not a store, these are our possession for sale in order to buy time for TBS to abide by the Federal Court of Canada’s decision.

tony peaceMoney raised, buys us time.  Thank you all.


leave a comment »


Relocated Military Families remain without compensation after Federal Court win

leave a comment »

Attorney General

Tomorrow the Auditor General will be releasing their report on relocation of Canadian Forces Families. Our 4 1/2 year fight took us to the Federal Court of Canada. Our family was unfairly denied $73,000 in relocation entitlements. The government was taken to court and we won our case in Federal Court against the Attorney General (Peter MacKay). It was not the first time he was engaged on the file. Since he was the Minister of National Defence, Mr MacKay provided no assistance to our family, but rather the opposite. Now he is faced with a class action lawsuit from other CAF families.




As stated by the Hon Robert Chisholm, when will the government do right by the Brauer family? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ere8av_20J0

The latest update (24 November 2014) is that the Canadian Forces was (incorrectly) waiting for the CAF Ombudsman to contact the Treasury Board Secretariat for a decision hastener.

%d bloggers like this: