We ask for the medical file and the service file when we review a certain condition, so when the person applies with a condition, we review the file. Hearing aids are not a good example, but if a person says, “I hurt my back”, we'll go through the file to ask if they have met with a doctor, and because of your back is there a form in there that says you had an accident, which we can look at? If the forms are there, it's quite easy. If the forms are not there, we'll look at other evidence. Did you serve somewhere that would make us believe that?
What we've implemented since July is that our adjudicators are now calling the individual before saying no. It's been a bit of a culture change, I will admit, but now they're calling the individual and saying, “Michel, I see you've applied because of a bad back. I can't find anything in your file. Can you substantiate your claim because there is nothing here. Can you get us something?”
Instead of having them go through all the levels of appeals.... And it's hurting my stats a little bit because I have to put the file aside and they have 90 days to answer, so it's not automatic. We're really trying to get to that yes.
But if at the end of the day the soldier cannot demonstrate that it was service related, that there is nothing on the service file or the health file or the psychiatric file—there are three files we work with, depending on the case—then the answer will be no.