ARmy Rumour SErvice

**dingerr** · 10-04-2012, 17:18

Originally Posted by CO51xPRU

Hi dingerr - interested by your comment on PRUs north of the border. There's only one and I command it. Very interested to know more details about the shortcomings you've heard of; we think we give a good service as do the soldiers who leave us. Don't know about EScotia, I'm afraid but he should press his unit to get him transferred to the PRU if he's been long term ill.

You need to speak to the injured personnel within your PRU. My comment wasn't a slating or an opinion, it was a statement as a result of comments by some of those personnel at Headley Court.

**CO51xPRU** · 10-04-2012, 17:33

Originally Posted by dingerr

You need to speak to the injured personnel within your PRU. My comment wasn't a slating or an opinion, it was a statement as a result of comments by some of those personnel at Headley Court.

Got it - thanks dingerr. We can't always get it right for everyone, I know, but we do try our best - and we can only help if people wish to engage with us; not everyone wants to (and for a variety of reasons) even though they might be assigned to us. Dialogue/relationships with AFPS and AFCS can be a real challenge for some people and we've no way of influencing their decision-making; but we do have an SPVA rep collocated with us and so we can 'highlight' particular cases and ask for assistance, which has been a big help for some of those under comd of the PRU. EScotia should get his unit to request 'Unit Assist' status and maybe we could help look into this. Hope this is of use.

**Azrael2006** · 10-04-2012, 17:54

Originally Posted by CO51xPRU

Got it - thanks dingerr. but we do have an SPVA rep collocated with us and so we can 'highlight' particular cases and ask for assistance, which has been a big help for some of those under comd of the PRU.

When are PRU's going to link in with the Service Charities so personnel get assistance where required early? I know at places like Tedworth house every person gets there case looked at by a board consisting of service charities/welfare agencies and they decide what help is needed and who can provide what.

This should be seen as best practice and used as a default for everyone getting MD'd not just those going through Headley. Your not the first PRU CO I have mentioned this to....

**Azrael2006** · 10-04-2012, 17:56

Originally Posted by EScotia

Lower rate Care (but they acknowledged it will increase over time) and Higher rate Mobility. All backdated to 1 Jan when I applied.

for what its worth Congrats mate, I know you have fought long and hard for care and at least this is a step forward in the right direction.

I found the DLA aspect the easiest thing to achieve once the paperwork was completed, its just the SPVA that are still being shits some 2 years on.

**CO51xPRU** · 10-04-2012, 21:24

Originally Posted by Azrael2006

for what its worth Congrats mate, I know you have fought long and hard for care and at least this is a step forward in the right direction.

I found the DLA aspect the easiest thing to achieve once the paperwork was completed, its just the SPVA that are still being shits some 2 years on.

Hi Azrael2006 - we try & engage the charities/veterans organisations during the initial development of an Individual's Recovery Plan; if there's a need to support 'recovery' activity, we aply to ABF/H4H for funds to support it (courses, holidays, re-skilling cses etc). Very rarely are we turned away. We also have a pre-discharge case conference where these organisations are invited along (in the presence of the soldier) to discuss the longer-term transition needs and agree on support 'responsibility' where its identified and needed. Sounds ideal and I wish it worked for every case - it doesn't. But its what we aspire to and I hope that we're able to make the difference where we can. The encouraging thing from my perspective is the number of willing and supportive charities/vets organisations there are out there. And I agree that SPVA is a tough experience for some.

**Azrael2006** · 10-04-2012, 22:24

CO51XPRU I think you quoted the wrong bit, but hey ho this thread has far more important issues that need addressing.

I admire your enthusiasm for trying to do the right thing for the people on your books and your correct in that life is made a lot easier for people with the readiness of Service Charities to fund so many different things be they materialistic, training needs or just simple practical assistance.

I do wonder however where are current batch of wounded, sick and injured would be if it hadn't be for the media uptake of the plight of our people? Its amazing how much of our people's care is being funded by charity money and in my mind what is worse is that the MOD didn't even begin to sort its life out until 2007-2008 far too late for many of our boys and girls who had already been sidelined some 5 years previously for serving their country and getting the short straw... I wonder how quickly that funded will be cut, within a year of leaving Afghan? or will they do the decent thing and wait say 5 years before closing the purse so those in the system will get full benefit before their MD.

You will find a lot of people's bitterness stems initially from Units just not giving a damn, and literally binning them as they are often in the "all too difficult category" People being literally left at home for years without any contact from the Unit, not just that but the Units deliberately ignoring any contact they try to make. With the creation of SAM and Unit Health Committees in 2006 and then WISMIS(?) you would think that would have stopped happening.. Sadly not.... Units were given a chance as each system came into effect to "air their dirty laundry" and come clean, however people in the CoC were often found to be lacking in Morale Fibre and carried on hiding their dirty little secrets. Not so you say? I have personally heard it from both a GOC and the Service Complaints Commissioner within the last 6 months that it is still very sadly happening. Would be interesting to see how many units carry on with games like that, if it became classed as some form of defrauding teh MOD or gross misconduct and was an instantly sackable offence...

This neglect just warms people bitterness and hatred to the system up, once the SPVA (AFCS and WP) gets a hold of them, they are often deliberately given tariffs way below what they are entitled to, if they haven't been refused outright by the SPVA in the first place. You then have to fight tooth and nail for up to 3 years for something that should have been awarded in the first place. Bearing in mind, the Service Person is probably struggling with both an MD, their treatment, civvy street, housing and just plain old daily living all at once and are definitely not in the best place to have to put this fight on. Many just give up and go away quietly or accept some lower tariff and that is plain and simply why the SPVA are hated because they make people lives truly miserable for the sake of saving some money... and they wonder why so many end up alcoholics, homeless in prison or just seriously messed up.

To that end CO51XPRU can you please start a separate sticky within Welfare of how you personally or your staff or even just the PRUs around the country can help people. There is a lot of information and knowledge that needs to be shared with people, rather than your posts get lost within the AFPS thread. and using your PID as a username will allow some of the big and bold who frequent these forums to see how wonderful you are as well... ;)

**EScotia** · 10-04-2012, 23:04

Originally Posted by CO51xPRU

Hi Azrael2006 - we try & engage the charities/veterans organisations during the initial development of an Individual's Recovery Plan; if there's a need to support 'recovery' activity, we aply to ABF/H4H for funds to support it (courses, holidays, re-skilling cses etc). Very rarely are we turned away. We also have a pre-discharge case conference where these organisations are invited along (in the presence of the soldier) to discuss the longer-term transition needs and agree on support 'responsibility' where its identified and needed. Sounds ideal and I wish it worked for every case - it doesn't. But its what we aspire to and I hope that we're able to make the difference where we can. The encouraging thing from my perspective is the number of willing and supportive charities/vets organisations there are out there. And I agree that SPVA is a tough experience for some.

And knowing that, having had to do all my own research thanks to an extremely unresponsive and unhelpful unit, and finding it was not available to me after 36 years is it any wonder why I and many like me are angry and bitter?

I'd love to see the % of those who find the SPVA anything other than a tough experience. Having posted in a number of threads to do with MD etc. it's amazing how many find SPVA anything other than helpful!

**Azrael2006** · 10-04-2012, 23:40

Originally Posted by EScotia

I'd love to see the % of those who find the SPVA anything other than a tough experience. Having posted in a number of threads to do with MD etc. it's amazing how many find SPVA anything other than helpful!

yeah, how many of us have received a customer satisfaction survey off of them ;)

I put in a complaint only for someone to write a 4 page response back to me which while relating to my case had next to nothing to do with my complaint! Anyway, complaint is ongoing so I won't detail it on here as of yet.

**EScotia** · 13-04-2012, 15:44

Some info on abatement of AFCS benefits to take account of civil damages, straight from the horses mouth so to speak.

Abatement is based on the principle of common law that an injured party should not be compensated twice for the same loss. The legal authority for this is in Article 40 of the AFCS Order 2011.

Common law damages usually include an amount for pain, suffering and loss of amenity and is sometimes referred to as general damages. This broadly equates to the lump sum benefits payable under the AFCS. The sum paid under this heading is adjusted against any lump sum paid under the AFCS as the two sums provide for the same purpose.

Where awards under the AFCS are at tariff level 11 or above a Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) may be payable. GIP is a replacement income payable for life covering both earnings and pension. Awards of civil damages may include loss of earnings or loss of future pension, and any compensation paid under these headings are adjusted in respect of any GIP payable. As GIP is not payable until you leave the forces there is no overlap with loss of earnings whilst still serving – for example in the form of allowances for deployments, specialist duties and so on.

Where the amount of common law damages for loss of earnings/pension exceeds the equivalent benefits payable under AFCS, the GIP will be reduced to nil. This is calculated by “de-capitalising” the award of damages by dividing the lump sum over the life expectancy of the claimant.

Aspects of the settlement covering, for example, care, physiotherapy, aids and appliances, accommodation adaptations, etc will not be taken into account. This is because such items are not covered by the AFCS.

Where an award of benefits under the AFCS is paid before a civil suit is settled, SPVA will notify the solicitor acting for the MoD so that they can take the award into account when negotiating the settlement.

I'm not sure about a pension being taken into account when calculating the GIP because the way I see it you have already earned the majority of the pension they then use to make your compensation look bigger than it actually is!