Married Unaccompanied - Disturbance allowance

Discussion in 'Army Pay, Claims & JPA' started by G10HAIRCUT, May 11, 2005.

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. My wife is a seving crab (im army), when I was posted to Germany she got an RAF quarter at her unit in the UK. Upon return to the UK I moved into the quarter and was granted RPOD. I'll soon be posted over 400 miles away from the quarter (and wife) and will be moving into a civvie hiring on FIA. I dont pay quartering charges 'cos its in her name.

    Right then..... what am I entitled to? Ive asked my AO and he's told me to wait till my new unit takes me on strength, a heads up would help.

  2. As far as I am concerned you should be classed as INVOLSEP, therefore you should pay Married Unaccompanied Food Charges and no accommodation (I assume you will live in) and be entitled to claim GYH(P).
  3. Come on its not hard!!! Because you will be claiming FIA you will automatically have to pay Food and Accommodation, unless ofcourse you are over 37, then your accommodation charge will be waivered.

    INVOLSEP is quite uncommon these days, you have to have a strong case in order to get the status, Read Chapter 8 or 14 of the RAAC and it clearly defines the requirements for the status.

    You are not entitled to Disturbance either because althought you will be moving into a quarter, it's classed as Single Accommodation, thats why you will be paid 14.85 a day! Anything else?
  4. I think you will find with service couples it is very common nowadays.

    Nice to see information given out in a non condescending manner - go on deskjockey !!

  5. I wasnt aiming it at the person who posed the question, G10 in this case. I just wish those who do give out information are a little more concise!

    The thing is with service couples, the service has no obligation to post couples together although I am sure they do try! service couples should understand that prior to getting married

    Now that is what you can hang a sign off and call a bite.
  7. nice! arent you the big man! Ugg Ugg!!
  8. Deskjockey,

    Service couples are highly aware of the situation they are getting themselves into before they get married, and yet they still choose to. Its amazing, isn't it?

    Do you speak to people in the same manner as you post messages here? if you do I'd be surprised if you haven't been knocked out by now.

    I hope you weren't the person who suggested that I wasn't entitled to travel and accommodation to visit my child in intensive care when I was overseas (because I wouldn't have been entitled to it if I was in UK and my wife and I had chosen to have our baby in a hospital overseas which didn't have a special care baby unit). Neglecting the fact that we had both been posted there following two previous postinges where we had been involuntarily separated. [for your information I was entitled but because it wasn't in that clerk's comfort zone of knowledge he immediately went for the 'sucking-of-teeth-and-no-you're-not-entitled-sir-RAAC-sir-them's-the-rules' routine.]

    Or where you the clerk who filed the NOTICAS because you didn't question why the signal had been sent to you and assumed it was nothing to do with you because you didn't recognise the name:

    '123456 Capt X listed VSI'. Assumption on part of clerk - oh I don't know who he is, must be a mistake, must file mistake and make evry effort to ignore this, certainly won't inform cofc that an officer is VSI, must make every effort to make sure his NOK are not informed - I hadn't been taken on strength but my wife was serving in the unit I was about to be posted to.

    The frustration and anger that clerks with your patronising style ingender in people who you are required to provide a service for is corrosive.
  9. (edited by MOD to remove name)

    Thanks for the advice. From one condescending cnut to another eh?
    Cant imagine why your AGC Det weren't that helpful towards you.
  10. Jockey, it is such attitudes from any rank that makes us sometimes walk away rather than sit down and look at the problem. I agree wholeheartedly, but if we can rise above the normal attitude that confronts us in nearly all shiny/customer situations then we come out the better. Yes, we are here to serve the customer. Yes, we must obtain and hold our "customer focus" and yes it is frustrating. If only all ranks would leave their "f ing maureens" attitude in their respective places of work so when they came to seek advice etc they didnt immediately think that they will come away with nothing, and therefore are anti, then perhaps we could do better business.

    I am not posting on this board to become the burning light of defence in the clerical world, but defend where defence is due. If other capbadges could just have a little patience and perhaps listen to the advice/instruction given then perhaps the job may be done quicker and better.

    As to the problem with 1771s (Claims), I have installed in my unit a 3 day turn around for all claims. This is adhered too, but only if the soldier produces all relevant paperwork (receipts etc). Once that is obtained the pay clerks are duty bound to pay out the dosh within 3 days. It works and I have heard much fewer grumbles in my respective mess.

    In response to Barbs, I am sorry that the situation that you make ref to a) firstly occured and b) was not dealt with in a correct or timely manner. That was totally inexcusable. If indeed it was down to clerical error then those responsible should be dealt with.

    As a general note though, it does seem to me that the clerical staff do seem to be an easy target when sometimes the soldier needs to perhaps be a bit more pro-active at times.

    I await the slagging I am due to receive, but before you all do - consider my words firstly. 8O
  11. So much for my IT skills sorry posted same message twice. Await slagging off! 8O