New General - Poor start!

CGS designate

  • Public apology would be enough.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Resign now

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • What a very silly poll , posted by someone less than informed

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#2
So, if anyone is worried about any claims they have made where they may have made "technical errors" when inputting it, ask your RAO to reclaim the amounts now.

Better that way than leaving them for the RAO to find and perhaps come to a different conclusion about their provenance.

Remember you have ticked the box to say you understood the rules and therefore ignorance is no defence and, next time before you enter a claim ask your Unit HR if you are eligable.
 
#3
On the old system you had to go through many stages of paperwork to claim back allowances that you were entitled to. Most soldiers couldnt be hassled with the paperwork for extra money that they were entitled to.

Now with JPA people are more aware of the allowances they are allowed to receive and it is easier to claim.

Yes there will be some persons who will abuse the system, but there are a majority of people who will use the system correctly.

If the soon to be CGS is more worried about JPA fraud (already subject to random audits) and petty pilfering than the troops on the frontlines of Afghan and Iraq then im more than a lil concerned!
 
#4
From what I've heard is more a matter of soldiers claiming their entitlements where in the past the 'system' had made it too difficult or obstructive to do so.

Sure there are undoubtably a few trying it on but that's not the whole story.
 
#5
A tad unfortunate that the first we hear of the Dannatt replacement is a critique of his own soldiers. I though he had better media skills than that. Certainly does not need to be in the public domain.
 
#6
nigegilb said:
A tad unfortunate that the first we hear of the Dannatt replacement is a critique of his own soldiers. I though he had better media skills than that. Certainly does not need to be in the public domain.
Curiously, the Telegraph quotes the Sunday Times website as their source.

I can't find the article on their site but I understand it was an internal letter from Gen Richards that was leaked to the press.

If it was, then the informer can hardly claim that it was done in the public interest so I jump to the conclusion that an exchange of money was involved.

Cpl Daniel James presumably has now got a solid alibi so I guess it was some other self-server.
 

Thud

Old-Salt
#7
Sunday Times certainly has it in.

As long as you have receipts for all transactions, any authority you had, and justification for the expenditure then there should be no worries really.
 
#8
nigegilb said:
A tad unfortunate that the first we hear of the Dannatt replacement is a critique of his own soldiers. I though he had better media skills than that. Certainly does not need to be in the public domain.
Even sadder that he implies that it would be rare for an officer to make such a claim. Seems to imply a 1970s attitude to rank.
 
#10
Is this not simply a case of the large pot of cash that everybody should claim from taking a hammering due to the fact that JPA does exactly what its supposed to, making it easier for everybody to claim back what their entitled to. That and a bit of digging around in JSP 752 and.....

In the words of Alan Partridge, quite literally, 'Cashback!'.
 
#11
JPA claims are still pretty clumsy and not at all user friendly....that said, still easier than trekking to the other end of camp only to have your claim rejected by an overly officious LCpl clerk...the rest of the public sector and indeed, the rest of the world, don't seem to have a problem with automated claims.

Can't help agreeing with other posters that people are now claiming what they are entitled to as opposed to not bothering...where was the evidence for the surge in fraudulent claims?
 
#12
nigegilb said:
A tad unfortunate that the first we hear of the Dannatt replacement is a critique of his own soldiers. I though he had better media skills than that. Certainly does not need to be in the public domain.

You mean silmilar to those skills that had the TA interpreter traitor working for him in Stan 8)
 
#13
skypilotuk said:
nigegilb said:
A tad unfortunate that the first we hear of the Dannatt replacement is a critique of his own soldiers. I though he had better media skills than that. Certainly does not need to be in the public domain.

You mean silmilar to those skills that had the TA interpreter traitor working for him in Stan 8)
Never mind his media skills. If he regards this as at all important then his priorities are worryingly misguided.
 
#14
Am I the only person that thinks the new CGS Lieutenant-General Sir David Richards is unworthy of his new post when his first action is to accuse his officers and men of defrauding the JPA system or is the principle of innocent before proven guilty no longer applicable in the British Army.

Contrast this wth General Sir Richard Dannatt's outspoken courage over the past few years when he has constantly challenged the politicians to give the Army a better deal.

Looks like the pendulum has swung back to the political toady!
 
#15
oldfart said:
Am I the only person that thinks the new CGS Lieutenant-General Sir David Richards is unworthy of his new post when his first action is to accuse his officers and men of defrauding the JPA system or is the principle of innocent before proven guilty no longer applicable in the British Army.

Contrast this wth General Sir Richard Dannatt's outspoken courage over the past few years when he has constantly challenged the politicians to give the Army a better deal.

Looks like the pendulum has swung back to the political toady!
Twot
 
#16
Would this be General Sir David Richards, and would this be something written well over a year ago in another post and which has only now been leaked?
 
#18
jim30 said:
Would this be General Sir David Richards, and would this be something written well over a year ago in another post and which has only now been leaked?
Quite possibly I didn't see previous post and Times report did not make it clear that it was written well over a year ago. However I think the point remains the current CGS has gone out on a limb for service personnel the incomming would appear to be more concerned about the number of stick-it notes used illicitly.

We will have to wait and see no doubt.
 
#19
oldfart said:
Am I the only person that thinks the new CGS Lieutenant-General Sir David Richards is unworthy of his new post when his first action is to accuse his officers and men of defrauding the JPA system or is the principle of innocent before proven guilty no longer applicable in the British Army.

Contrast this wth General Sir Richard Dannatt's outspoken courage over the past few years when he has constantly challenged the politicians to give the Army a better deal.

Looks like the pendulum has swung back to the political toady!
1. He's not 'the new CGS' and won't be until next summer.
2. He's not been a Lieutenant General for some time, certainly since he took up his current 4 star post (that means 'General'), as CinC LF.
3. How you can suggest someone with David Richard's recent operational experience is a 'political toady' is beyond me.
4. I'm with PAW. Also, I think you smell of stale wee - do you think you might be suffering Alzheimers and talking out of your arse?

Don
 
#20
[quote="Donny"quote]

1. He's not 'the new CGS' and won't be until next summer. I think you'll find that's what "Designate" means.
2. He's not been a Lieutenant General for some time, certainly since he took up his current 4 star post (that means 'General'), as CinC LF. Indeed since February - my mistake.
3. How you can suggest someone with David Richard's recent operational experience is a 'political toady' is beyond me. I fail to see this - I don't recall him sticking his neck out for troops during his tour but I'd be fascinated to hear what you're refering to
4. I'm with PAW. Also, I think you smell of stale wee - do you think you might be suffering Alzheimers and talking out of your arse? Do you not think that's a little childish?

Don[/quote]

The point was to contrast the present incumbent with the incoming particulalry in respect of the very different press coverage the two have attracted. In an intelligent manner, obviously beyond you. If you're serving I wish you well with your new (in August) boss.
 

Latest Threads

Top