I smell a fiddle

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by kennys-go-nad, Nov 19, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uklatest/story/0,1271,-4624991,00.html

    words fail me :roll:

    Thousands spent on MoD war buy-back
    Press Association
    Friday November 19, 2004 7:18 AM

    The Ministry of Defence spent thousands of pounds buying back old vehicles for the Iraq war that it had sold off at a fraction of the price, it was revealed.

    And despite spending thousands more upgrading them, the vehicles did not get to Iraq in time and were returned unused to be sold off again at a massive discount.

    The incident was revealed in a National Audit Office report on "urgent operational requirements" - a quick way of buying equipment that is needed in a hurry.

    The MoD sold the ageing six-wheel vehicles for £3,000 each. Needing them quickly for Iraq it bought them back for £17,000 each. It spent a further £18,000 upgrading them, only to eventually sell them off unused for about £6,500 each.

    The episode is just one part of a mainly positive report which says the MoD spent £658 million on UORs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    The report says they are a necessary and increasingly important tool. And it praises the MoD for its "impressive ingenuity" in delivering urgent requirements for troops.

    The chair of the House of Commons' public accounts committee, Edward Leigh, commended the MoD. But he said an impending war did not give it a "blank cheque" for equipment.

    Mr Leigh also criticised the MOD's "relaxed approach" to keeping and reporting information on its spending.

    © Copyright Press Association Ltd 2004, All Rights Reserved.
  2. Hehehehehe,

    some little 2nd hand car dealer is laughing all the way to the bank.

    Imagine if he had bought 100 of them for 3K, then sold them back for 17K.

    That is a 1.4million profit,

    and then to buy them back already upgraded for just 6.5K

    what a feck up. Get rid of the defence procurement dept and put in place the sort of system that tesco et al use. Problems solved with no extra expense!!

    agent smith
  3. Not the first such story in the history of the MoD and certainly won't be the last. The story of the army having to buy back all the Humber 1 Ton Armourd Cars "Pigs" that they had just sold off when the troubles in NI started up in 1969. They did of course get another twenty years service out of them so it's possibly a bad example :?
  4. what vehicle were these? Fuchs?
  5. It's the sort of story line you would give to Arthur Daley in Minder and people would laugh because it was ridiculously funny. There has to be a cheaper and more efficient system of war stocks?
  6. I'd be interested to see if the same 2nd hand car dealer is related to or a good mate of someone in procurement. :x :twisted:
  7. No it wasnt Fuchs, as we still have all the ones the germans gave us.

    aging six wheeled vehicles, can only think of Saracen, saladin or Stalwart, of these can only see a role for Saracens. There is an out fit in Singapore doing refits for the far eastern market, so this may not be as far fetched as it first seems.
  8. http://www.nao.org.uk/pn/03-04/03041161.htm

    All-Terrain Mobility Platforms are sixwheel vehicles, ideal for tackling sand
    dunes. The Department has 65 Mark 3 versions procured using the normal
    procurement process at a cost of around £57,000 per vehicle. More had originally been planned but budgetary constraints led to a reduction in numbers.

    Fifty five of the 65 Mark 3s were available and deployed with 16 Air Assault Brigade to Iraq.

    When the decision was taken to approach Iraq from the south, through desert terrain, an Urgent Operational Requirement was raised and approved to procure more All-Terrain Mobility Platforms.

    The Department was not able to procure additional Mark 3s in the required timescale. It therefore decided to buy back 30 Mark 2 versions that had previously been disposed of for around £3,000 a vehicle because they were at the end of their useable lives and no longer complied with health and safety standards.

    The buyer had refurbished the vehicles for resale and the Department was able to buy them back at a cost of around £17,000 per vehicle. The vehicles were then further modified to health and safety standards by the Army Base Repair and Overhaul Organisation (ABRO) at an additional cost of some £18,000 per vehicle.

    The refurbished and modified Mark 2s were available to be delivered to Iraq in March 2003. At that time they were prioritised to be sent by ship and they arrived in April. By then, the operation had moved ahead more rapidly than expected and 16 Air Assault Brigade had completed their deployment
    and returned to the United Kingdom. The Mark 2s were subsequently returned to the United Kingdom unused. They are being sold because the costs of maintaining them to a deployable standard are considered prohibitive. The first batch of 12 to be sold raised an average of £6,500 per vehicle.

    Not like a journalist to select the best bits of a report to get the biggest impact is it??
  9. Thanks, yeoman. I can't imagine Saladin, Stalwart or indeed Saracen being wanted. Maybe cross-country tactical logistic vehicles for Air Assault Bde? No doubt someone will know.
  10. During GW1 we were stuck as the HMLC (High Monility Load Carrier) DROPS varient (the Foden version) had not yet entered service due to technical problems, and the army had retired the Stalwart the year before.
    To make up the shortfall in decent rough terrainlogistics vehicles we purchased a whole load of American M548 tracked load carriers. It does not surprise me that Stalwarts may have been re-pruchased as these load carriers were sold off in the years after and the Foden DROPS has been down graded from being classed as high-mobility.
  11. jeez ! and they want to cut troops to save money ? something is seriously wrong and a major reform is needed of the procurement services is needed , instead of the troops.

    the russian used to keep all the old stocks of weapons/tanks/planes etc in warehouses mothballed ready for a any future war, the reasoning behind this was back up when all the newer tanks/weapons gets destroyed and lost , they bring these old stuff out along with the older troopers who had previously trained on them , while the enemy wil have run out of trained troops and weaponry/tanks.
    maybe something could be learned from this
  12. You've obviously never heard of RAB, or Resource Accounting and Budgeting. Basically. the defence budget is money that it 'lent' to the MOD by the Treasury. Just like a bank loan. Therefore the department has to pay interest at 3.5% on ALL of its capital. This includes tanks, helicopters, ammunition etc, and, more importantly, everything we hold in stores. So, when the defence budget is under pressure, as it is now, no one wants to hold stores on which you are paying 3.5% interest on its value. So you get rid of them.

    Of the departmental overspend identified by the PAC, 43% of it was made up of this capital charge. So, if we don't hold enough stocks of equipment. Blame the treasury.
  13. crap spy
    i haven't heard of RAB, this is just a another fcuk up that needed to be sorted out. the priorities are all wrong
  14. Crapspy is right except I thougtht RAB was 6%. No one gets away with excess stock anymore and the NAO report gives the logic behind what actually happened rather than the journo cherry picked report.
  15. I know, but remember the OPSEC requirements before TELIC. The Government hadn't made a decision (had they :wink: ), so nobody could do any decent UOR action. I suspect that is what caused this debacle.