Thread: Benefits cut for injured soldiers

I did have a look and couldn't see this posted elsewhere:

Daily Mail linky about soldiers being barred from claiming Allowance for Lower Standard of Occupation.

Look harder next time. C-

Same boring topic as yours

This is a copy of a letter I recieved from Kevan Jones last week;

Thank you for your letter dated 31 July........

We ask our Armed Forces to risk their lives for the safety of this country & the Government have a responsibility to do all they can to support them, & their families,when they suffer injuries in the line of duty. The underlying principle of the AFCS is that those most seriously wounded shouldrecieve compensation.It is important to maintain this principle & the fairness of the scheme & that is the purpose of the current court appeal case.

The AFCS is a relativly new scheme,but it is widely agreed to be be an improvement on it's predecessor.It includes a tax free lump sum payment which,for the first time,personel can recieve while they are serving.We also doubled the lump sum awards for the most serious injuries,raising the maximum lump sum payment to £570,000. All recipients,according to the severity of the injury,have recieved an uplift of between 10% & 100% of their upfront payment.All those who have recieved awards since the start of the scheme in 2005 have benifited from these changes.In addition to the lump sum,the most seriously injured recieve a gaurenteed income payment.These are tax free,index linked,and paid monthly for life.They can amount to hundreds of thousands of pounds over a lifetime.Unlike other schemes,awards undes AFCS are not capped.

We accept,however,that the are ways in which the schemecan be improved.In order to deal with this complex issue in the most sensitive,effective & fair way the secretary of state for defence announced in July 29 that he had decided to bring forward the planned review of the scheme.The review will be open & inclusive & begin immidiatly in consultation with stakeholders including Service Personnel & their families,the ex-service charities & independent medical & legal experts.In particularit will look at whether current awards adequetly provide both for the injuries sustained on operations by our servicemen & women,& for their recovery,

Iwould like to reassure you that the new arrangements will benifit those with claims under the existing scheme,including those mentioned in the current court cases,

I hope this informations is helpful.
Kevan Jones MP

Originally Posted by FiveAlpha

Look harder next time. C-

Same boring topic as yours

You honestly expect an ex-Artilleryman to look in a bit of the site called "The Cultural Corner"? Naive.... very naive. ;)

I didn't need to read the article all the way through - the accompanying picture (Ainsworth) said it all.

Good post 'craign' - there will be many, me included, who had not noticed this addition to the revolting 'Clown' Brown's catalogue of 'Hate the Army' rule changes.

Odd that this thread attracts so little interest.

For our disgraceful government to stop paying our Badly wounded soldiers a special £57-a-week allowance is totally disgraceful The cash helps them pay for basic essentials and stay above the poverty line as they struggle to cope with psychiatric as well as physical wounds.

Originally Posted by blisscey

For our disgraceful government to stop paying our Badly wounded soldiers a special £57-a-week allowance is totally disgraceful The cash helps them pay for basic essentials and stay above the poverty line as they struggle to cope with psychiatric as well as physical wounds.

If you feel so strongly, Chubb, give them your money.