From: Canuck57@nospam.com   
      
   On 11/12/2012 5:43 AM, Alan Baggett wrote:   
      
   > The court also noted that the Crown may have decided to disallow the claim   
   because of the extended time during which the travel took place and the high   
   value of the expenses that were incurred. It also argued that the husband's   
   presence was not    
   necessary in the wife's recovery.   
      
   What a bunch of CRA sociopaths.  Doesn't need to be present for   
   recovery?  Come now.....   
      
   Just more morally corrupt CRA.  Its all about screwing the little guy.   
   --   
   Liberal-socialism is a great idea so long as the credit is good and   
   other people pay for it.  When the credit runs out and those that pay   
   for it leave, they can all share having nothing but debt and discontentment.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)