Thank you David for your reply:
Below I am going to try to lay out my thoughts about the last paragraph of your reply, wrt “really receiving a net disability”.
My situation is such that have not opted for the reduction at source of my CPP benefit. In other words, your comments can be recast as: “if due to you specific tax situation you end up not paying the full 20% (or whatever tax is applicable in BC) then you are not truly affected”
(I am not sure if I make sense 100% so let me know of any flaws in my reasoning)
From your feedback, I think I grasp that I should be focusing more on the CONTRA PROFERENTEM line of pursuit RATHER than alternative lines of attack where I state that if the insurance company offsets the GROSS CPP payments from my LTD payment, then my total income will take a hit due to being taxed on the CPP part of my income.
In other words, (and let me know IF I MAKE SENSE) if my ARGUMENT against the GROSS CPP being deducted/offset from my LTD income is the CONTRA PROFERENTEM one, then who cares whether I get to pay less taxes or not? That bit of potential extra income is due to TAX RELIEF (ie due to non refundable credits I may have) and not due in a direct manner to GOVERNMENT BENEFITS.
I looked at the calculation for the “monthly benefit PAYABLE” and it does not include tax refunds.
By this I mean that in the contract I could not find any mention of having my TOTAL ABSOLUTE INCOME FROM ALL SOURCES NEVER TO SURPASS THE 50% OF MY PRE DISABILITY INCOME THAT I AM INSURED FOR.
There are however, clauses to limit the income from multiple insurance/ benefit sources, including government benefits, such as CPP.
However, tax refunds were not included.
In other words, I do indeed HOPE that I can use my non refundable credits to actually avoid paying part of those CPP income taxes, but that is not a government benefit, it is just a tax situation, that could easily be different (ie I
could end up owing).
To conclude, does my reasoning make sense? Can I just make my argument against GROSS deduction based on case law supporting an interpretation of the ambiguity in my favor? Would you be able to point me to that case?
Thank you for your feedback.
PS: below I have the exact quotes wrt monthly benefits payable:
After disability benefits are payable for 24 months, the monthly benefit PAYABLE is the Gross
Disability Benefit REDUCED by Other Income Benefits, the calculation for Optimum Ability and
50% of Disability Earnings."
Any wage or salary for any work performed for any employer during your Disability, including
commissions, bonus, overtime pay or other extra compensation."