TC sends Collection Agency after me

rule911 · Post by **rule911** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:46 pm

I've been talking to TC Medical office about this... and they have been very helpful and nice...

I wrote a letter to Collectcorp. With it my proof of payment from 6 months prior. I faxed it to them so they have it in writing. Their fax number is 416-961-2037.

After they had all my paper work, I've been calling, their number is 416-961-9622. The number on the letter they send out does nothing.

I have not got an answer from them yet, so I will continue with my daily calls.

I encourage all, in writing, to contact Collectcorp with your issues.

Best of luck!

trey kule · Post by **trey kule** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 2:55 pm

I encourage anyone who has already paid NOT to contact the collection agency. contact your MP or the minister of transport and let them contact the collection agency.

It is the only way change will really happen.

niss · Post by **niss** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:08 pm

PLEASE PEOPLE! EVERYTIME YOU PAY A LITTLE OF TREY KULE DIES!!!

sorry.....lol

trey kule · Post by **trey kule** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 3:15 pm

Way to go Niss. Now the money will start pouring in.

dash8dave · Post by **dash8dave** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 4:28 pm

Hey I got one too. I thought I was special until I read this thread. Now that I am over 40 I "forgot" to pay the first one of the year.

I paid the next one however. Too bad I never received from TC a notice that I was in arrears (sp?) I phoned Mr. Heenan at 1 866 648-6161 but he never returned my call. Too busy trying to collect from all you other Av Canada deadbeats.

Meathead · Post by **Meathead** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 5:27 pm

I haven't recived any return email from the Minister of Transport, I was Chatting with a Flight Engineer that I used to work with. Letting him know that I got this letter and that if he hasn't paid his yet that he should expect his letter soon too. To that He said What $55.00 I have never had to Pay 55.00 for my medical after the fact. I looked more into It and he was right Flight Engineers that Need a Cat.1 Medical dont have to Pay this 55.00 fee, It is only pilots Im not sure but I think ATC need to have a CAT 1 Medical. If one is one here could you confirm this or not and if so do you need to Pay this 55.00 fee.

If the 55.00 fee is truly for "Medical Prosessing" or whatever the f#$% it is called then shouldn't every one that requires a Transort Canada
Medical have to pay this, lets say even Train Engineers and Ship Captains and the list could go on. Im am looking further into this whole Medical Prosessing Fee and why it seems at this point only Pilots are dinged with it.

CD · Post by CD » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:03 pm

Meathead wrote:Im not sure but I think ATC need to have a CAT 1 Medical. If one is one here could you confirm this or not and if so do you need to Pay this 55.00 fee.

ATC requires either a CAT 1 or a CAT 2:

CAR 404.10 - Medical Certificate Requirements for Personnel Licences

As you indicated, no medical processing fee for controllers:

CAR 104 Schedule IV Personnel Licensing and Training

CD · Post by CD » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:10 pm

Or, you could also get them on a technicality...

CAR 104.06(a) refers to the, "...processing of medical certificates referred to in item 20 of Schedule IV to this Subpart..."

CAR 104.06 - Payment

However, item 20 of Schedule IV actually refers to the fee associated with the approval of an aircraft maintenance engineer training course. It is item 21 that is the medical processing fee, and has been since items 1 and 2 were amended in September of 2004...

CAR 104 Schedule IV Personnel Licensing and Training

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:38 pm

send them hugs and kisses, kill them with love

cyyz · Post by **cyyz** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:43 pm

Meathead wrote: If the 55.00 fee is truly for "Medical Prosessing" or whatever the f#$% it is called then shouldn't every one that requires a Transort Canada
Medical have to pay this, lets say even Train Engineers and Ship Captains and the list could go on. Im am looking further into this whole Medical Prosessing Fee and why it seems at this point only Pilots are dinged with it.

As you indicated, no medical processing fee for controllers:

wow..... TC the low-lifes... So no wonder we pay so much, we have to be able to pay for NavCanada's employees, we have to pay for FE's and we have to pay for TC employees...

Wow.. I'm amazed, this is disgusting...

xsbank · Post by **xsbank** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 6:48 pm

I wonder if they put the collection agency out to tender or if it was a buddy of Merlin Preuss? Maybe we should find out how they chose this outfit - can you spell 'sponsorship?'

I'm with you guys, tell 'em to pound sand and send your fax to the Minister and Harper if you're going to make the effort.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:01 pm

" I wonder if they put the collection agency out to tender or if it was a buddy of Merlin Preuss? Maybe we should find out how they chose this outfit - can you spell 'sponsorship?' "

When you have someone in the position of power that Merlin Preuss holds who is arrogant enough to write a letter to someone who is only asking for due process and his answer is dishonesty by people at the level of Regional Director Civil Aviation is quite satisfactory and he fully supports it anything is possible.

My question is how does he get away with condoning wrongdoing?

So no I wouldn't be in the least suprised to see someone getting a little graft in these cozy little deals.

flyincanuck · Post by **flyincanuck** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 7:36 pm

In addition to writing my MP, I have also elected to e-mail Kevin Psutka, President of Canadian Owners and Pilots Association...the largest advocate organization for GA in Canada.

I encourage everyone that has received the letter to e-mail Kevin as well:

kpsutka@copanational.org

Justwannafly · Post by **Justwannafly** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:38 pm

$55.00 x 9600 = $528,000

If you ask me thats more then enouph to pay for a lawyer....If Pilots are the only ones who have to pay this $55 fee its NOT fair!....also not fair to send pilots to the collections agency when they HAVE already paid this unfair tax....I think we should all pay our $55 BUT NOT to TC...we should pay it to a lawyer & take TC to court!!!

Where is COPA on this issue?

xsbank · Post by **xsbank** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 8:51 pm

Kick a pilot in the cacajuates and he goes meh.
Kick a pilot in the wallet and he goes um, uh, waitaminute.... meh.

Cod Father · Post by **Cod Father** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 9:15 pm

ski_bum wrote:I don't know if you can just fax it in without talking to them, but I don't really care. Fax# 1-877-766-7693. Giver! If they won't answer the phone, have shitty hours and don't return messages this may be the best way to get it in.

Hehehe, anyone got one of the fax machines you can rig up with an infinite loop of the same PFO message?

FlyYukon · Post by **FlyYukon** » Thu Mar 08, 2007 11:19 pm

Well, got my letter today. the only things that make it official seem to be my account number (made up from the invoice from TC), the amount oweing, and my name/address. funny thing is, I have all the supporting docs to prove payment. I will not call Collectcorp Inc. to solve this, I will make it Transport Canada's problem to fix, as it was their error.

Edit to add:

The main reason I am putting this in Transport's hands, is due to how many people in this small concetration of active Avcanada'ers have paid, and still recieved the letter. As well, with lack of warning from Transport Canada, and un-official looking document(s), I am not too trusting of this collectcorp with any more information from myself.

CD · Post by CD » Fri Mar 09, 2007 4:14 am

xsbank wrote:I wonder if they put the collection agency out to tender ...

See the links on Page 2 of this thread...

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:45 am

It is interesting reading through the tons of words in these government spin productions.

I chose this tidbit as an example of the wording used in these blurbs to explain how things work.

" 10.5 Selection
10.5.1 Requirements should be defined and specifications and estimates established before bids are solicited and contracts let, so that all prospective contractors are treated equally. In acquiring complex capital equipment, construction or services, other procedures may help control time, cost and performance. Some of these are described below. The procurement method chosen should be indicated, with supporting justification, when contract approval is sought, whether within a department or agency or from the Treasury Board. Adequate specification details should be available to all interested or qualified firms. "

The use of the word " should " leaves lots of room for the purpose of selective decision making on who gets these plumb contracts.....ask Shelia Fraser she understands the system.

Cat Driver · Post by **Cat Driver** » Fri Mar 09, 2007 8:50 am

delete