MOD trying to claim back compensation for two soldiers

[funkyrobot]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8171689.stm

So, is this the way they want to cut public spending?

This is odd because here they are trying to claw back thousands of pounds off injured British soldiers. Yet just on Sunday night that fool of a developments minister (Douglas somebody?) was harping on about a 250 million pound package to help Afghanistan rebuild itself??

Doesn't make any sense at all!

Edited by funkyrobot on Tuesday 28th July 08:52

[JMGS4]

While these labour scum are betraying our soldiers once again, they're filling their boots with up to £9000 p.a. expenses without any need for receipts. Sly barstards snuck that one in very sneakily at the last moment...
Time for a revolution methinks?!?!?!

[Spiritual_Beggar]

JMGS4 said:

Time for a revolution methinks?!?!?!

Cetainly is....

Will it happen?


Like hell it will. Not unless the British people decide to change and actually start acting like a community rather than looking out for No. 1 all the time.

[The Hypno-Toad]

And of course, they have the judiciary in their pocket so this will be the first of many.

In a perfect world, this will be the straw that breaks camels back and the military will stage a coup and force an election. What with this and the ridiculous bank holiday idea I'm steaming mad this morning.

Oh by the way, MPs have just voted themselves a new subsistance allowance for food to replace the expenses nonsense......£7000 per annum and still no need for reciepts.

GENERAL ELECTION NOW!!!!

Edited by The Hypno-Toad on Tuesday 28th July 09:37

[Tony*T3]

Those defence ministers linked to this are scum, pure scum.

Probably costs more to take it to court than the actual sum being recovered, too.

[Dixie68]

Doesn't surprise me unfortunately - the bloody MOD are pond scum.

[Hedders]

funkyrobot said:

Yet just on Sunday night that fool of a developments minister (Douglas somebody?) was harping on about a 250 million pound package to help Afghanistan rebuild itself??

Doesn't make any sense at all!

It makes perfect sense if you or your mates happen to own the companies you are giving 250 million of tax payers money to.

The system is fked.

[Oakey]

I don't agree with cutting compensation, however, one of these soldiers got £46,000 for being shot in the leg. Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive? Unless of course said bullet took his entire leg off?

[Tony*T3]

Oakey said:

I don't agree with cutting compensation, however, one of these soldiers got £46,000 for being shot in the leg. Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive? Unless of course said bullet took his entire leg off?

Why the fek do so many people in this country believe that joining the armed forces means you can expect to end up getting shot or killed on duty and not get compennsation for it when it happens? You dont join the military to get injured or killed. We're not a bunch of suicidal rambo types that sign away our future, our health, our very limbs and life for the country. The paying of £16k a year doesn't buy this governemnt x amount of young people it can write off as a loss like any other piece of equipment that gets 'damaged'. Its very hard to get reasonable life insurance as it is in the military without saying there will be no money to help those killed and injured carrying out their duty. Its such a cretinous belief its unreal, and yet so many people in the UK seem to think it. You'll be saying next that joining the police you can expect to get stabbed by a criminal or joining the fire brigade you can expect to get burnt alive. Stupid stupid belief by so many 'civvies'.

You dont join the forces to get shot at. You join the forces for a proper job, and to defend your country. Sometimes this entails getting shot at, most times it doesn't. When you do get shot, there is a covenant, an understanding, between you, your employer (the forces) and the country you serve that you will be looked after and that you will recieve help for your future needs. ITS A DAMN SIGHT LESS than some civvie can expect for getting their feelings hurt by their employer!! You certainly dont join the forces to get blown up by some IED that is hidden in some ste hole far off country in a war you dont really beleive in, or shot at by an enemy that doesnt follow the rules and conventions you have to live by. And theres the crux isnt it? This government knowingly and willingly sends its young men (and women) to fight in a war against an indeterminate enemy that they know wont adhere to even basic human rights. they know that a British POW is likely to end up being tortured and decapitated. they know that the enemy doesnt wear a uniform and will not look after the injured like we do. they know the enemy will use tactics that are outlawed by decent people. Yet they still send our young men to these st holes on YOUR behalf.

And dont even broach the subject of friendly fire and inadequate equipement.

What do you do for a living Oakey?

[chris_w]

Surely the cost of appealing these payouts will exceed what are, in reality, quite paltry sums? A moral and PR own goal, the only winners are the lawyers...

[Invisible man]

Taking the Queens shilling has for far too long been an excuse for not looking after our wounded. Bear in mind that an IRA bomber who blows his hand off with his own IED will be compensated much, much more than a squaddie getting both arms or legs blown off or loss of vision (about £500,000)
The Govt are getting an Army on the cheap, as John Major said, a decent Country looks after it's wounded, we do not.

[Dupont666]

I think so much of the MOD when you cant be arsed to send out the right equipment to the troops, buy faulty st that the americans wouldnt touch at an inflated cost and now wnat to reduce the ocst of a payout when injured in the line of duty...

According to current MoD settlements soldiers receive £57,000 for the loss of a leg and £285,000 for the loss of both arms or legs.

The MOD lose £300million due to crap book keeping:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politic...

Joint Personnel Administration system was full of errors with nearly 15% of payments - worth an estimated £140m and £155m of spending on radio systems used in Afghanistan could not be accounted for:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/816004...

fking disgraceful... yet the icing on the cake is this:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article39...

£250,000 for hurt fking feelings...

WTF!!

[ninja-lewis]

Oakey said:

I don't agree with cutting compensation, however, one of these soldiers got £46,000 for being shot in the leg. Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive? Unless of course said bullet took his entire leg off?

The possibility of injury, even death, is accepted. However, in return the Nation is supposed to care for them and their families in the aftermath.

The actual case here is about whether the MoD is responsible for the initial injury only or the complications arising from treatment as well. The last court ruled that to separate the latter from the former is absurd since those complications wouldn't have arisen if the injury had not been sustained. As for whether £48,000 is too high for a bullet to the leg: the MoD originally offered under £10,000 for their injuries. However, due to complications during treatment (infections etc) that stopped them from being able to use stop the limb, this was increased to £48,000 by the courts.

[Invisible man]

Oakey said:

I don't agree with cutting compensation, however, one of these soldiers got £46,000 for being shot in the leg. Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive? Unless of course said bullet took his entire leg off?

Being shot is, in reality, not as portrayed in the Movies. I'm not trying to appear condescending but a 7.62 passing a glancing blow is enough to cause massive trauma, something penetrating will destroy everything as it tumbles through and introduce contamination. A long range .5 will, if it hits you in the leg, probably rip you in half. Soldiers take the Queens shilling because they understand that, it is part of the deal, it's unique, you offer yourself up for this kind of injury.
That doesn't allow a bunch of lazy, self serving sharp suits to wash their hands of you should it actually happen

[mouseymousey]

Invisible man said:

Taking the Queens shilling has for far too long been an excuse for not looking after our wounded. Bear in mind that an IRA bomber who blows his hand off with his own IED will be compensated much, much more than a squaddie getting both arms or legs blown off or loss of vision (about £500,000)
The Govt are getting an Army on the cheap, as John Major said, a decent Country looks after it's wounded, we do not.

I don't get the bit in bold, could you expand on it?

[Invisible man]

mouseymousey said:

Invisible man said:

Taking the Queens shilling has for far too long been an excuse for not looking after our wounded. Bear in mind that an IRA bomber who blows his hand off with his own IED will be compensated much, much more than a squaddie getting both arms or legs blown off or loss of vision (about £500,000)
The Govt are getting an Army on the cheap, as John Major said, a decent Country looks after it's wounded, we do not.

I don't get the bit in bold, could you expand on it?

I can't find the link from work but it was LBCs show this morning and the guy standing in for N Ferrari was interviewing an ex Brigadier who said this......there's a link below to give some idea of the costs awarded to an injured soldier

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/5...

[Oakey]

ninja-lewis said:

Oakey said:

I don't agree with cutting compensation, however, one of these soldiers got £46,000 for being shot in the leg. Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive? Unless of course said bullet took his entire leg off?

The possibility of injury, even death, is accepted. However, in return the Nation is supposed to care for them and their families in the aftermath.

The actual case here is about whether the MoD is responsible for the initial injury only or the complications arising from treatment as well. The last court ruled that to separate the latter from the former is absurd since those complications wouldn't have arisen if the injury had not been sustained. As for whether £48,000 is too high for a bullet to the leg: the MoD originally offered under £10,000 for their injuries. However, due to complications during treatment (infections etc) that stopped them from being able to use stop the limb, this was increased to £48,000 by the courts.

Ah, see, the article didn't explain those complications. Fair enough in those circumstances. A friend took a bullet in the ass (no joke), I don't recall whether he got compensation but as soon as it was sorted he was back out there.

ETA: I'm not even going to respond to Tony*T3 simply because he went off on a tangent implying I said they shouldn't be compensated when that's not what I said at all. Such an angry and bitter person, he really should calm down before he gives himself a coronary.

Edited by Oakey on Tuesday 28th July 12:49

[Tony*T3]

Oakey said:

ETA: I'm not even going to respond to Tony*T3 simply because he went off on a tangent implying I said they shouldn't be compensated when that's not what I said at all. Such an angry and bitter person, he really should calm down before he gives himself a coronary.

Edited by Oakey on Tuesday 28th July 12:49

no? thats a shame. I'm not on the verge of a coronary over this, but yes it is something that knarks me.

you said:

Oakey said:

Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive?

How do you expect people to react, and how have I misrepresented what you said? What sort of payout would you be looking for if you suffered similar injuries when you go to work tomorrow?

again, in a calm discussion kind of way, what do you do for a living? I now work in IT. If I was killed or injured doing my job I'd expect a considerable payout for me or my family. If I was mistreated by my employer to the extent that i was forced out of my job, I'd be suing them for compo. Cant see what difference being in the armed forces has on this, yet you seem to.

[NWTony]

In fairness to the MOD I think the payouts discussed are a lump sum, on top of which there is a military pension for life and other living expenses as well, so the total amount is significantly higher. If you are injured at work, you don't get to retire on a full pension AFAIK.

[Oakey]

Tony*T3 said:

Oakey said:

ETA: I'm not even going to respond to Tony*T3 simply because he went off on a tangent implying I said they shouldn't be compensated when that's not what I said at all. Such an angry and bitter person, he really should calm down before he gives himself a coronary.

Edited by Oakey on Tuesday 28th July 12:49

no? thats a shame. I'm not on the verge of a coronary over this, but yes it is something that knarks me.

you said:

Oakey said:

Surely if you join the Army you have to accept the possibility you're going to get shot at? And £46,000 for a bullet to the leg seems somewhat... excessive?

How do you expect people to react, and how have I misrepresented what you said? What sort of payout would you be looking for if you suffered similar injuries when you go to work tomorrow?

again, in a calm discussion kind of way, what do you do for a living? I now work in IT. If I was killed or injured doing my job I'd expect a considerable payout for me or my family. If I was mistreated by my employer to the extent that i was forced out of my job, I'd be suing them for compo. Cant see what difference being in the armed forces has on this, yet you seem to.

Tony, you said;

"Why the fek do so many people in this country believe that joining the armed forces means you can expect to end up getting shot or killed on duty and not get compennsation for it when it happens? "

I never said someone shouldn't get compensation or that it should be cut, merely that £46k seemed extremely high for a bullet to the leg. What wasn't made clear was the complications that followed that wounding. Sure, in cases where you can no longer use a limb properly, unable to continue doing the job, etc then fair enough people should be compensated fairly, but when it appeared to be just a bullet to the leg I'd have thought the £10k was adequate.

You really can't see the difference Tony? I think it's safe to say that in your job in IT it's extremely unlikely there's any risk of getting shot. Unless you're contracting in Baghdad or somewhere? In which case I'm sure you were made well aware of the dangers that could result in accepting that job? If you decide to become a soldier, or a fireman as you mentioned earlier, surely you accept those jobs come with some degree of risk, no? I.e, you're going to get shot at or burnt?