Justice for the Wounded: Better payouts for injured troops

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by heard_it_all_before, Feb 8, 2010.

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. An interesting development, but does anyone know if it only covers compensation GIP's paid out under the AFCS or whether it also applies to the SIP's paid out under the older WPS...? Which considering that troops were deployed to both Telic and Herrick prior to 2005 I would like to think that it does.

  2. Anyone might think there was a general election coming soon.
  3. Too little, far too f^cking late.
  4. So you'd rather no change for the wounded?

    Knee jerk, gents.
  5. Of course we want better care for the wounded, but you do not give credit to those whose contempt and disregard for the forces has led to many avoidable wounds and deaths.

    They are only doing this because they want party political advantage, not because they care, once the election is out of the way, normal service will resume.
  6. Heard it all before just sums it up, we have heard it all before, at every general election in the last thirty years, so I wont hold my breath
  7. This review has been happening for months, it's not something Ainsworth has cooked up for a quick soundbite. The AFCS is changing for the better but you're not happy with that?
  8. No I'm not happy with it, so the review was started a few months ago, after 13 years in power and how many underfunded wars? How many dead, how many wounded? How many would have lived who are now dead had cyclops not slashed the helicopter budget?

    Remember all the legal battles by people like Ben Parkinson?

    Forgive my cynicism that they choose to do the right thing now, after battling against it for so long.
  9. The AFCS only replaced the War Pension in 2005 so that's hardly 13 years doing nothing is it? The review will also be retrospective so will apply to all payouts of AFCS.

    The AFCS is compensation for injuries only, so anybody wanting to sue the MOD for injuries caused by negligence can do and their payout (on winning) would not be capped by the AFCS tariff.

    I'm sure you won't let the facts get in the way of your frustrated ranting though.
  10. No amount of cash and crocodile tears can wash the blood from their hands.

    I'm sure you won't let the truth get in the way of party propoganda.
  11. Save your rantings please. Regardless of when it has been announced, regardless of how long it's taken and regardless of all the personal battles along the way, the thing people should be happy with is that finally they've all been heard.

    Nevertheless, it states that the policy is retrospective, but nearly all the recent cases have been dealt with under the new AFCS, so, the questions is: is there a limit to how far back that retrospective status go and will it cover the War Pensions awarded Pre AFCS..?

    If the answer is no and it only covers awards made under the AFCS, then it is merely an attempt to play up to the electorate and as such, an attempt to win votes. In comparison to payouts made under the newer AFCS, those payments made under the older War Pension Scheme were mere peanuts.
  12. The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme was, according to the MoD, always going to be reviewed at the five year point i.e. in 2010 but the review was brought forward last year after criticism (including by BAFF) of the Ministry's decision to appeal against compensation awards to two injured soldiers. Previous criticism (including by BAFF) of lump sum awards to the most seriously injured such as LBDR Ben Parkinson had succeeded in bringing about an increase to those awards, and the increase was made retrospective. For all its faults, the AFCS is still generally regarded as a significant improvement for the most seriously wounded compared to what was in place before 2005.
  13. How long do you think you can last before you get yourself so worked up that you have a great big rascist rant and get yourself banned again?


    and the others.

    No it will not cover the War pensions awards.
  14. So someone that lost limbs or suffered severe injuries prior to 2005 remains on pitiful payment...!

    Vote buying, springs to mind.
  15. I know what you're saying but where do you draw the line?