• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Why have I effectively lost my pension?

#1
Many of you are aware of my circumstances, but just for clarity.

I recently left the Army after 26 years and 9 months.

I was injured in service and received a level 1 tariff award.

On leaving service I receive a 100% Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) and a medical discharge Service Attributal Pension (SAP). (As well as the lump sum)

Regulation states that a person cannot be compensated twice for the same loss. This means that my GIP is abated by my SAP, for example if the GIP is £40,000 and SAP is £10,000 a person would receive £30,000 GIP Payment and £10,000 pension payment.

The purpose of GIP is to compensate for the loss of earnings because of the injuries sustained, it is based on your final salary times an age factor. When 100% is awarded it is recognised that injuries are so severe that a person would be unable to be employed again.

My argument is this.

If I had not been injured and completed more than 22 years service I would be entitled to my full pension. I would also (in theory) be able to get gainful employment, receiving a wage and my Army pension.

Therefore should this not be reflected in the compensation payment and pension, I can understand why it might be different if someone has not completed 22 years.

One thing to point out is that both the GIP and Pension are tax free.

I’m not going to die in a ditch over this, nor will I be destitute, it just seems unclassified and I wondered what others opinions would be.
 
#2
Many of you are aware of my circumstances, but just for clarity.

I recently left the Army after 26 years and 9 months.

I was injured in service and received a level 1 tariff award.

On leaving service I receive a 100% Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) and a medical discharge Service Attributal Pension (SAP). (As well as the lump sum)

Regulation states that a person cannot be compensated twice for the same loss. This means that my GIP is abated by my SAP, for example if the GIP is £40,000 and SAP is £10,000 a person would receive £30,000 GIP Payment and £10,000 pension payment.

The purpose of GIP is to compensate for the loss of earnings because of the injuries sustained, it is based on your final salary times an age factor. When 100% is awarded it is recognised that injuries are so severe that a person would be unable to be employed again.

My argument is this.

If I had not been injured and completed more than 22 years service I would be entitled to my full pension. I would also (in theory) be able to get gainful employment, receiving a wage and my Army pension.

Therefore should this not be reflected in the compensation payment and pension, I can understand why it might be different if someone has not completed 22 years.

One thing to point out is that both the GIP and Pension are tax free.

I’m not going to die in a ditch over this, nor will I be destitute, it just seems unclassified and I wondered what others opinions would be.

I have no answers but it certainly appears to be wrong and needs addressing.
 
#4
Many of you are aware of my circumstances, but just for clarity.

I recently left the Army after 26 years and 9 months.

I was injured in service and received a level 1 tariff award.

On leaving service I receive a 100% Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) and a medical discharge Service Attributal Pension (SAP). (As well as the lump sum)

Regulation states that a person cannot be compensated twice for the same loss. This means that my GIP is abated by my SAP, for example if the GIP is £40,000 and SAP is £10,000 a person would receive £30,000 GIP Payment and £10,000 pension payment.

The purpose of GIP is to compensate for the loss of earnings because of the injuries sustained, it is based on your final salary times an age factor. When 100% is awarded it is recognised that injuries are so severe that a person would be unable to be employed again.

My argument is this.

If I had not been injured and completed more than 22 years service I would be entitled to my full pension. I would also (in theory) be able to get gainful employment, receiving a wage and my Army pension.

Therefore should this not be reflected in the compensation payment and pension, I can understand why it might be different if someone has not completed 22 years.

One thing to point out is that both the GIP and Pension are tax free.

I’m not going to die in a ditch over this, nor will I be destitute, it just seems unclassified and I wondered what others opinions would be.
How much cash are you getting?
 
#6
Many of you are aware of my circumstances, but just for clarity.

I recently left the Army after 26 years and 9 months.

I was injured in service and received a level 1 tariff award.

On leaving service I receive a 100% Guaranteed Income Payment (GIP) and a medical discharge Service Attributal Pension (SAP). (As well as the lump sum)

Regulation states that a person cannot be compensated twice for the same loss. This means that my GIP is abated by my SAP, for example if the GIP is £40,000 and SAP is £10,000 a person would receive £30,000 GIP Payment and £10,000 pension payment.

The purpose of GIP is to compensate for the loss of earnings because of the injuries sustained, it is based on your final salary times an age factor. When 100% is awarded it is recognised that injuries are so severe that a person would be unable to be employed again.

My argument is this.

If I had not been injured and completed more than 22 years service I would be entitled to my full pension. I would also (in theory) be able to get gainful employment, receiving a wage and my Army pension.

Therefore should this not be reflected in the compensation payment and pension, I can understand why it might be different if someone has not completed 22 years.

One thing to point out is that both the GIP and Pension are tax free.

I’m not going to die in a ditch over this, nor will I be destitute, it just seems unclassified and I wondered what others opinions would be.

You have a made a fair point mate, and should be compensated as you say, along the lines of the average wage with a cost of living increments per year.

You should speak to the professionals as you may have just started something here?

Scroll down to find average salary v years of experience

Average Salary UK | Average Wage UK
 
#7
Like I’m going to say on an open forum. I will say the total is less than my Army wage, but tax free.
I was just going to tap you up for a tenner, my best mate.
 
#10
Whatever you're getting it's f*** all for what you've been through.
 
#11
Shocking. When you consider 'parachute payments' doled out to countless, useless Politicians after their collective failure to be re-elected (even after a Parliamentary 'career' spanning 5 years or less), then I concur with others. The rules perhaps dictate what you've described but it doesn't make it right. The bean counters are twats.
The very best of luck securing what you deserve and have earned during your service to the Country.
 
#13
Dingerr, have you thought of running this past a lawyer? Obviously I haven't got all of the details but something smells like Billingsgate on a hot afternoon.

No way should you loose your pension!
 
#14
As we all know, you are not entitled to too much of a good thing, its not fair play.
 
#17
I can't understand why they think the regular pension and the medical pension are compensation for the same thing!

The medical pension is compensation in relation to the loss of bits and the regular pension is what you have earned as part of your pay agreement.
 
#18
Dingerr, have you thought of running this past a lawyer? Obviously I haven't got all of the details but something smells like Billingsgate on a hot afternoon.

No way should you loose your pension!
I can’t see where I would have a claim, AFCS and invaliding pensions are a Legislative measure and the wording is quite clear, a Court can’t ignore the legislation and substitute its own decision, it can only interprete the legislation to best effect, which isn’t possible in this instance as the wording is clear.
 
#19
I can't understand why they think the regular pension and the medical pension are compensation for the same thing!

The medical pension is compensation in relation to the loss of bits and the regular pension is what you have earned as part of your pay agreement.
They deem both GIP and med pension to be compensation.
 
#20
Here’s another, unconnected issue to ponder.

If you are accepted into RH Chealsea you forego your pension.

If you are in receipt of GIP you have to forego the GIP, no one can tell me if a person has to give up both GIP and pension.

That would be a substantial amount and unfair if other inmates give far less for the same benefits.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top