RAF officer found guilty of fraudulently claiming £83,000 in school fees.

[NutLoose]

See the link, the rather sad part comes at the end.

Jonathan Walker, mitigating, said that Healy, who admitted fraud, may have qualified for CEA had he applied truthfully for the money.

Because he looked after his boys for a significant period of time during holidays it is likely he would have been granted CEA, Mr Walker said.







https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/crime/commander-at-raf-fylingdales-intelligence-base-in-yorkshire-fraudulently-claimed-ps83000-for-his-sons-private-school-fees-and-is-now-in-disgrace-and-working-as-a-train-driver-4036527

Flight Lieutenant Wesley Healy, 41, was on the first line of defence if ballistic missiles were fired without warning a (https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/people/space-junk-dead-satellites-and-a-plane-called-cosmic-girl-all-in-a-days-work-at-raf-fylingdales-3914096)t both the UK and the US.

However a military court was told that he is now an apprentice train driver after his high-flying RAF career was derailed by top brass who uncovered his £83,000 scam.

Healy admitted claiming an allowance given to RAF families which allows them to educate their children in private boarding schools, despite knowing he no longer qualified for the lucrative perk.



Healy and his wife Tracey separated, which meant the newly single officer no longer qualified for public money to put his two sons through an expensive private education.

But just three weeks after their divorce became final, Healy applied for the cash and claimed they were still living together.
​​​​

​​​​​​​

[MPN11]

Still happening after all these years! You would like to hope people had learned from all the previous cases that hit the Media, and many others that didn't.

The OH was MoD Desk Officer for Allowances back in the days of Adastral House. Oh, the tales she could tell!

[212man]

after his high-flying RAF career was derailed by top brass

​​​​​​​not sure that statement is compatible with “41 year old Flt Lt”

[charliegolf]

Roughly how many postings were available to him in his specialist role which might have caused 'discontinuity' in his children's education?

CG

[langleybaston]

A slight tangent if I may?

Discontinuity is not the same as detriment in all cases.

Provided the parent[s] are posted in the summer holidays [and in my case I volunteered for every accompanied overseas posting thus], a change is as good as a rest. Our four offspring gained enormous life experience following the flag. Schooling at Gutersloh and JHQ was good in our three tours. They turned their noses up at boarding, did very well academically with science and medical degrees and had good careers before retiring on excellent pensions.

The one downside was a daughter who returned to UK a year before GCSEs to find "we do Spanish and Russian here" after her German and French!

[m0nkfish]

Ironically he will probably earn more as a train driver.

[Ninthace]

Roughly how many postings were available to him in his specialist role which might have caused 'discontinuity' in his children's education?

CG
Unless things have changed, posting even at SO3 does not have to be within specialisation.

[trim it out]

Another officer found guilty of CEA fraud? They need to find an NCO claiming CEA to guide them through the process seeing as they keep getting it wrong :rolleyes:

[whowhenwhy]

Unfortunately, having known the individual in question from a previous posting, this kind of behaviour has not come as a particular surprise....

[Krystal n chips]

Ironically he will probably earn more as a train driver.

Well he is at the moment....a lot may depend on whether he mentioned this not so little scam to his current employers.

[cynicalint]

The reporters missed out on "Tipped for promotion" phrase....

[Bob Viking]

Another officer found guilty of CEA fraud? They need to find an NCO claiming CEA to guide them through the process seeing as they keep getting it wrong :rolleyes:

Do you mean someone like Sgt Limbu who was also found guilty of fraudulently claiming CEA?

Why must some people always boil it down to an ‘us vs them’?!

BV

[charliegolf]

Cos we is iggorant enlisted riff-raff wot is expected to be devious, whilst you chaps are meant to be the noble backbone of the service, devoid of any and all character defects. Such as fraudulent behaviour or crawling through a lady officer's window uninvited.
Additionally, officers appear to cheat CEA more often than others.

CG

[India Four Two]

Cos we is iggorant enlisted riff-raff wot is expected to be devious, ...

​​​​​​​Oh dear, 'ow sad, never mind.

[212man]

The reporters missed out on "Tipped for promotion" phrase....
Yes, although they used the mandatory "top brass"

[NutLoose]

They also missed out of the discarded childs shoe, to indicate there is a school nearby or that the story contains information about a school.

[higthepig]

Exactly what whowhenwhy said, a natural with a headset on, but a complete admin vortex with it off.

[trim it out]

Do you mean someone like Sgt Limbu who was also found guilty of fraudulently claiming CEA?

Why must some people always boil it down to an ‘us vs them’?!

BV
That was quicker than I thought for a nibble :E

It's a well known fact that CEA fraud is an officers' sport, as I'm sure your googling proved while searching for a case of the enlisted filth being caught :ok:

It would be so much easier if people just screwed the nut and didn't commit the fraud in the first place. Yes, it's terrible your marriage has broken down, but don't ruin it for the rest of us because of the perceived shame at having to take your kids out of a posh school. It's a great perk in a job that is having every other perk eroded slowly but surely (as I'm sure you agree Bob, having recently banged out?).

[212man]

Yes, it's terrible your marriage has broken down, but don't ruin it for the rest of us because of the perceived shame at having to take your kids out of a posh school.

I’m pretty sure it was nothing to do with “shame” and everything to do with trying to minimise the disruption to his kids’ lives and ensure continuity of education to avoid any impact on their exam success. They were already having to cope with the trauma of divorce.

Having divorced when my kids were 10 and 13, this was also an issue I faced (keeping them in school, not claiming CEA). Thankfully I was well enough paid that I was able to keep them in their schools, whilst also paying alimony and child support! Very painful, financially, but worth it in the long run.

So, I sympathise but don’t condone.

[Two's in]

I'm sure many of us have the salutary tale of the perils of fiddling, but the most important lesson should be as far as the Service is concerned, falsifying a claim for ten quid will have exactly the same effect on career and prospects as falsifying claims for £83,000. It's not the amount, it's the act. We had a Sergeant-Major in Germany, who was to put it mildly, was a screaming knob. He claimed for DM300 worth of petrol to go to Bavaria over the Christmas break, forgetting he lived opposite the Pay Sergeant, the same Pay Sergeant whom he frequently gave a a hard time to, who also noticed he didn't leave his house over the Christmas period. The subsequent Courts Martial sentenced him to 6 months in Colchester Military Corrective Training Centre (The Army nick) reduced to the ranks, and dismissed on completion of sentence. All for 300 Deutschmarks (about £75 at the time).

[ShyTorque]

I worked with a warrant officer MAOT who found himself in front of a courts martial after “disposing” of a quantity of unused drum stock Jet fuel into his domestic central heating tank. He might have got away with it had he not rather blatantly ordered his driver to deliver it and do the deed for him!

[trim it out]

I’m pretty sure it was nothing to do with “shame” and everything to do with trying to minimise the disruption to his kids’ lives and ensure continuity of education to avoid any impact on their exam success. They were already having to cope with the trauma of divorce.

Having divorced when my kids were 10 and 13, this was also an issue I faced (keeping them in school, not claiming CEA). Thankfully I was well enough paid that I was able to keep them in their schools, whilst also paying alimony and child support! Very painful, financially, but worth it in the long run.

So, I sympathise but don’t condone.
A fair point. But changing schools is not the end of the world and they don't all end up on the dole or joining ISIS. It's a perk of the job and he wouldn't have been the first to leave the service in order to support his kids.

Are the clerks getting disciplined for their oversight too? His PStat would have changed post divorce so could have joined the dots and saved all this bother....?

[NutLoose]

I’m pretty sure it was nothing to do with “shame” and everything to do with trying to minimise the disruption to his kids’ lives and ensure continuity of education to avoid any impact on their exam success. They were already having to cope with the trauma of divorce.

Having divorced when my kids were 10 and 13, this was also an issue I faced (keeping them in school, not claiming CEA). Thankfully I was well enough paid that I was able to keep them in their schools, whilst also paying alimony and child support! Very painful, financially, but worth it in the long run.

So, I sympathise but don’t condone.

But the kicker comes at the end of the article, he may have still been eligible for it.

[212man]

A fair point. But changing schools is not the end of the world and they don't all end up on the dole or joining ISIS.

I know, I went to 7 schools, 3 of which were secondary, including 6 BFES, but in hindsight I’d rather it had been just 2. Hence my desire to maintain stability for my own kids.

[charliegolf]

Two's In

...but the most important lesson should be as far as the Service is concerned, falsifying a claim for ten quid will have exactly the same effect on career and prospects as falsifying claims for £83,000. It's not the amount, it's the act.

This. Every recruit used to have sit through a brain-deadening sesh on personal finance, and the take away was: fastest way to clink- steal money from the Queen. No ifs, no buts. Nobody ever does it by accident, and no one, 'didn't realise'.

CG

[langleybaston]

Is there not a mechanism, a protocol, regarding authorising claims?

As a civil servant line manager, i recall being required to authorise each and every claim in longhand: "to the best of my knowledge and belief I certify that the duties for which this claim is made were authorised and executed"

or some such format.

I resolutely conformed to this for 17 years, knowing my neck was on the block, rejecting dozens, and in many cases referring them upwards for scrutiny.

[PPRuNeUser0211]

Two's In



This. Every recruit used to have sit through a brain-deadening sesh on personal finance, and the take away was: fastest way to clink- steal money from the Queen. No ifs, no buts. Nobody ever does it by accident, and no one, 'didn't realise'.

CG
this is demonstrably incorrect. There is a key threshold (probably somewhere in the million quid mark) above which you're not a criminal, you're a defence contractor....

[tucumseh]

Is there not a mechanism, a protocol, regarding authorising claims?

As a civil servant line manager, i recall being required to authorise each and every claim in longhand: "to the best of my knowledge and belief I certify that the duties for which this claim is made were authorised and executed"

or some such format.

I resolutely conformed to this for 17 years, knowing my neck was on the block, rejecting dozens, and in many cases referring them upwards for scrutiny.


Indeed. And part of that was checking the entitlement. But then a month later Claims would phone you and say 'not entitled', because their 'desk instructions' had modified the MoD Manual. It's silly fiddling the system, but on the other hand you're very often left out of pocket going about government business. I recall a rejection because an RN chap hadn't taken the most economical route from Yeovilton to Edinburgh. He was told to hitch it up the M5/M6/M74 the next time, and had a photo taken at the Taunton junction! That nonsense came to a head after a young 16-year old admin girl from London was booked into a cheap hotel in Glasgow that rented rooms by the hour. Her dad wanted the Secy of State's balls on a plate.

[sitigeltfel]

"he is now an apprentice train driver after his high-flying RAF career was derailed".

Back on track then!

[realECMLdriver]

Great. Without wanting to sound too controversial, our industry bleat on about the driver selection process being so thorough and how we're hand picked for the role. However the amount of liars and/or thieves who've slipped through lately amazes and worries me. Even more so that they all seem to have some sort of service background.

I'll now duck for cover...

[vascodegama]

Indeed. And part of that was checking the entitlement. But then a month later Claims would phone you and say 'not entitled', because their 'desk instructions' had modified the MoD Manual. It's silly fiddling the system, but on the other hand you're very often left out of pocket going about government business. I recall a rejection because an RN chap hadn't taken the most economical route from Yeovilton to Edinburgh. He was told to hitch it up the M5/M6/M74 the next time, and had a photo taken at the Taunton junction! That nonsense came to a head after a young 16-year old admin girl from London was booked into a cheap hotel in Glasgow that rented rooms by the hour. Her dad wanted the Secy of State's balls on a plate.

One of the benefits of late is the availability of electronic copies of the rules. Previously it could be hard to get chapter and verse but now it is readily available to all. I took pleasure in pointing out their own errors to those that were telling me I was wrong.

As for the main theme, I can think of a few claims that have sailed very close to the wind.

[BEagle]

Photocopiers....??

[Krystal n chips]

Indeed. And part of that was checking the entitlement. But then a month later Claims would phone you and say 'not entitled', because their 'desk instructions' had modified the MoD Manual. It's silly fiddling the system, but on the other hand you're very often left out of pocket going about government business. I recall a rejection because an RN chap hadn't taken the most economical route from Yeovilton to Edinburgh. He was told to hitch it up the M5/M6/M74 the next time, and had a photo taken at the Taunton junction! That nonsense came to a head after a young 16-year old admin girl from London was booked into a cheap hotel in Glasgow that rented rooms by the hour. Her dad wanted the Secy of State's balls on a plate.

Whoever came up with that was clearly a close relative of a certain SNCO at Abingdon....our hero had diligently calculated the shortest distances between every airfield 71 MU could possibly visit and proudly rejected 1771 claims which exceeded his calculated mileage..sadly, he forgot to include something called variables..in those days. road works / diversions were not as publicly available as they are now....."every little helps" as they say and, unfortunately, he had no way of proving otherwise.

As an aside, when I applied for PVR and he asked why, well more demanded why, when I replied "it's called freedom of choice, you may have heard of this concept somewhere ? "....the facial expression, and the silence, were a joy to encounter.

The Germany travel claims.....unlike the numb from the neck up RSM, it was "far from unknown" shall we say to submit one, just the one, to supplement the bank balance....Munich and Hamburg were "very popular destinations ".

" One of the benefits of late is the availability of electronic copies of the rules. Previously it could be hard to get chapter and verse but now it is readily available to all. I took pleasure in pointing out their own errors to those that were telling me "

True.

In a different era, the arcane Admin world used all their genetic duplicity to ensure the RAF funds were not depleted...tr tried to.

First visit to Memmingen from Bruggen... put in a claim and the smug, pressed shirt, perfect haircut git says "it's a Nato base, so you are only entitled to DM 25 "...when questioned, much indignation resulted, but we thought, sod it. Next visit, one of the troops comes back with ?..DM250 !....spot the slight difference here...off we went, claimed, and mentioned the aforementioned scrooge...at the this point, said Cpl produces some obscure AP.. offers his opinion as to his colleague, and shows us chapter and verse, in writing, what we are officially entitled to....DM500 came in useful

[MPN11]

Our Area Radar Course assembled at RAF Sopley, and we were sent off to SHQ for Arrival Processing, including processing our Fs1771. The SNCO behind the desk looked at a couple as said "OK, please all start again with a new form. You are also entitled to ... blah blah blah." We were entitled to all sorts of bits and pieces we'd never heard of! The joys of a small Unit!

[BEagle]

Some years ago when the Earth was still cooling, I was told to go from Brize to Ramstein and back for a 'TLP planning conference' as the Spams couldn't just ring us up and ask, it seems...

Investigate cost of travel. Drive to airport, flight to Frankfurt, hire car....£LOTS. Very £LOTS, it seems. Drive from home to the tunnel, then on to Ramstein - much cheaper. The admin section was quite happy with this.

Investigate accommodation. Last bloke just checked the cost of a cheap hotel nearby, Spam chum at Ramstein confirmed they're always full, so that's what I told them. "No Sir, sorry, but there's a new 'T-letter' about that - we need evidence that there's no room on base".

Drive over to Handbrake House to discuss the issue. "You have to ring Ramstein", they say. So I borrow their phone...as I know that the military systems couldn't (in those days) access Ramstein accommodation office direct, so the cost of the call will go down to Admin Wing, not the squadron.

Click, buzz, whirr..."This is the Ramstein accommodation office, you are number 12 in the queue, please hold and we will deal with your call as soon as possible....". After about 30 minutes, "Sir, no, we have no accommodation, you will need to speak to Wiesbaden. " "Can you transfer me?" "Sorry, sir, I can't do that - but the number is ........." Which turns out to be an Autovon number, so another battle to get hold of the Wiesbaden number follows.

Click, buzz, whirr..."This is the Wiesbaden accommodation office, you are number 7 in the queue, please hold and we will deal with your call as soon as possible....". Another 20 minutes and finally..."Sir, no, we have no accommodation, you will need accommodation off-base."

So, over an hour of time wasted and a very expensive call to prove what the chap at Ramstein had told me earlier. But it satisfied 'the rules' - although the admin folk were getting as exasperated as I was.

Now we look at the cost of driving. Their 'shortest route' involved France, Belgium, Luxembourg and Germany and was only about 30 miles shorter than my proposed route which was all on French / German motorways. 4 countries, each with different currencies (this was before €) and different allowance rates, or just 2 - they could see that 4 would be 1771-hell for them, so agreed to my route.

Since the 'conference' was due to finish at mid-day, there was no way I could get home sticking to the 'MT working hours' rules in one day, so they agreed to me staying overnight in an hotel in Rheims on the way back.

All went well; my conference activity involved one phone call to Group, who gave me the answer immediately. This amazed the Spams as they would have needed to wake up some General in the Pentagon, rather than just ringing a Sqn Ldr at Group.

Finish conference, off to BX. Then on to Rheims. Reasonable night and a decent meal, then leave at 0830, belt along the motorway to the tunnel, buy a couple of cases of wine and catch the next tunnel train....home by 1330 (1430CET).

Submit F1771 and the admin folk are very appreciative that I'd made their work considerably easier - they had even spoken to the Very Blunt Ones at Binnsworth or wherever to tell them what a load of cobblers their 'T-letter' was and it was causing considerable difficulty. When the adminers get going, they can be pretty aggressive with their people when faced by external administrivial bull$hit, it seems!

Even with all the mileage, motorway tolls, the tunnel, 3 nights in 2 hotels and my allowances, the trip was still a couple of hundred cheaper than it would have been using the 'official' method. The admin folk had been very helpful, I'd had some pleasant nights and a useful BX / Duty Free session - a win/win result all round.

BUT that was around 30 years ago when we had some very helpful admin people on base who could - and would - make sensible decisions. Be nice to them, they'll be nice to you! No expensive central booking blah, no JPA (which, thank heavens, was long after my time; does it still exist?) - and a much higher quality of life.

[NutLoose]

An opposite one, posted back from Bruggen to Brize with all the baggage that entails as a Singlie.

We have arranged a flight for you from Hannover, you need to get a train from XYZ change XYZ and on it went, hours and hours of travelling with several suitcases full of uniforms and clothes etc.

But there is a station coach and trooper from Wildenrath the next day!

Yes we realise that but your posting date is…

But does it matter I will be on leave etc…

Luckily something happened so I left a day late, otherwise I would have had a nightmare trip.

[NutLoose]

Indeed. And part of that was checking the entitlement. But then a month later Claims would phone you and say 'not entitled', because their 'desk instructions' had modified the MoD Manual. It's silly fiddling the system, but on the other hand you're very often left out of pocket going about government business. I recall a rejection because an RN chap hadn't taken the most economical route from Yeovilton to Edinburgh. He was told to hitch it up the M5/M6/M74 the next time, and had a photo taken at the Taunton junction! That nonsense came to a head after a young 16-year old admin girl from London was booked into a cheap hotel in Glasgow that rented rooms by the hour. Her dad wanted the Secy of State's balls on a plate.

But who would bed check her?

[charliegolf]

this is demonstrably incorrect. There is a key threshold (probably somewhere in the million quid mark) above which you're not a criminal, you're a defence contractor....

Taken for granted when I posted. Apologies.:ok:

CG

[Haraka]

Beags . I had one cracker when I was due to go down from Wildenrath to Zweibucken to represent RAFG at a NATO Recce
conference in a two seat Harrier.
It went u/s just before take off. The pilot transferred to a GR3. So I grabbed his kit,. jumped into
my little Spitfire and hared off down the road South. to meet the deadline for the presentation.,
My retrospective travel claim was of course refused :) ( Unauthorised journey)
Apparently my use of a private car should have been conducted actually by RAF MT .............
PULL THE OTHER ONE!

[ShyTorque]

Having taken my option to part company with the RAF, a certain Group Captain station commander tried to block me from taking up a civilian job overseas that I’d been offered because as far as he was concerned, I should work for him right up until 23:59 on the day prior to my 38th birthday and the new employer wanted me there ASAP. QRs showed that I was entitled to leave some time in advance of my actual 38 point because I had a firm job offer (I think the rules allow as much as six months early, but it was a long time ago).

I did eventually manage to escape somewhat, early in accordance with QRs (I was still owed most of my annual leave, plus full entitlement of resettlement leave) and went off to complete a resettlement course some weeks before my actual retirement date. The resettlement course was overseas. I was entitled to Rate 1 subsistence allowance for the time spent there (28 days worth, iirc) - and it was a very expensive place. I took great satisfaction in submitting my claim for the latter, personally addressed to him, bearing in mind that it came out of his station budget. :E

[langleybaston]

Memory plays funny tricks [the older I get the better I was] but does not the good Rool Book have a preface [ours did] to the thrust that:

The spirit and intention of these orders is to take precedence over narrow adherence to the letter of the law?

And each section began with: the purpose of this instruction is .......

Hence, for example, I used the Red Dragon Pullman [from Cardif]f and the White Rose [from Leeds] services, 1st class, with car parking included, breakfast on the train inluded, dinner on the return included, and half day subsistence, all because it was cheaper than whatever the current rules said [my faithfull admin king discovered this pleasant way of saving Her Majesty a few bob]. I cannot for the life of me think what the official method entailed: a coach and four and overnight in town, perhaps?

[Atlasisrubbish]

Do you mean someone like Sgt Limbu who was also found guilty of fraudulently claiming CEA?

Why must some people always boil it down to an ‘us vs them’?!


BV
True. Did you know CEA rules were changed to ensure just Officers and the odd anomaly we’re able to claim? One day the press will find us out!! Lol.

[Atlasisrubbish]

Do you mean someone like Sgt Limbu who was also found guilty of fraudulently claiming CEA?

Why must some people always boil it down to an ‘us vs them’?!


BV
True. Did you know CEA rules were changed to ensure just Officers and the odd anomaly we’re able to claim? One day the press will find us out!! Lol.

[langleybaston]

True. Did you know CEA rules were changed to ensure just Officers and the odd anomaly we’re able to claim? One day the press will find us out!! Lol.

I do not believe that.

A quotation seems in order please.

[Bob Viking]

I smell a whiff of porkie pies. Nice try though.

Having said that, 10% of fees is still a lot of money for anyone and can obviously be prohibitive for those on lower salaries. Especially if they have multiple children.

BV

[212man]

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1129723/20230101-JSP_752_v53_Jan_23.pdf#page600
On a tram without my glasses, but I’m sure this covers most things!

[MPN11]

OMG, that’s so simple! OH refused to read it just now … she says she had enough of that when at Adastral, and had all the details (as they were) in her head!

[PapaDolmio]

Hmmmmm,

Having never claimed it during my time I won't even pretend to know much eligibility and claiming it but I did used to wonder sometimes how people got it- I worked with a spec aircrew (or whatever they are called now) Sqn Ldr who claimed it for his 3 kids who had done 3 consecutive tours at the same station (but different units on the station) and had no chance of being posted anywhere else. Pretty sure the kids were at a school close enough to his home that they could have been taken daily.

There's always going to be loopholes- at the same unit I worked with 4 guys who all lived 30 miles from the station, all were on days permanently so they car shared but they all claimed 60 miles home to duty every day!

[vascodegama]

Hmmmmm,

Having never claimed it during my time I won't even pretend to know much eligibility and claiming it but I did used to wonder sometimes how people got it- I worked with a spec aircrew (or whatever they are called now) Sqn Ldr who claimed it for his 3 kids who had done 3 consecutive tours at the same station (but different units on the station) and had no chance of being posted anywhere else. Pretty sure the kids were at a school close enough to his home that they could have been taken daily.

There's always going to be loopholes- at the same unit I worked with 4 guys who all lived 30 miles from the station, all were on days permanently so they car shared but they all claimed 60 miles home to duty every day!

It all depends on whether the poster will sign the "mobility" form. To my mind those in receipt of CEA should be top of the list for postings that are out of the way!

As for example 2 that is fraud-the H2D form had a clear declaration which precluded that sort of thing, in fact I remember a CM of a Sgt and Cpl for exactly that; that said latterly they did change the rules to allow passenger mileage claims for H2D.

[The Oberon]

Interesting to see the H2D crop up. At Scampton in the early 70s, there was a large number of people lived in Saxilby village, private and hirings, the official MT route was a dog leg via Sturton village, 9 miles, but there was a "rat run" which was only 5 miles. Everyone I knew, all ranks, claimed the 9 miles but commuted via the "rat run".

[ShyTorque]

The RAF once put me in the position where I was posted from Hampshire to Yorkshire but couldn’t provide a MQ at the new station. I applied for a surplus MQ but the best the system could provide was one thirty miles further away from the station I was being posted from, which was pointless. To make it even more difficult I was then given notice to quit the original MQ because of a shortage at that station. We bought our own house in the local area of the new station. Two years later I was detached, then later posted back to the original station and as expected I couldn’t get a MQ there.

I then commuted by car from home on a weekly basis. Because the house we had bought was a very few miles short of the minimum distance for claiming motor mileage (less than ten miles, if my memory is correct) it was at my own expense. However, a colleague in a similar position then asked me to car share and I agreed. I used to drive past my house for another fifteen miles or so and drop him off at his own house, located very close to the Yorkshire base I had been posted from. He could claim motor mileage as my passenger because the distance was just inside the minimum.

It was around this time that I made my decision to leave the service at my 38 point, rather than continuing to a full career at 55.

[megan]

The military know how to look after their people. Living in married quarters (RAN) families were kicked out when sent to fight a war, if you were just going on an extended sea voyage you were OK. Only served as a Supplementary List Officer, nine years, retirement benefit scheme on going back to the civil world returned the payments you had made minus a handling charge. :mad:

[Countdown begins]

I smell a whiff of porkie pies. Nice try though.

Having said that, 10% of fees is still a lot of money for anyone and can obviously be prohibitive for those on lower salaries. Especially if they have multiple children.

BV
I’m not sure if there will be some truth to it. It comes down to your tour length, and I’m pretty sure enlisted assign for 5 years, and isn’t the CEA there for 2.5 year tours? Don’t quote me, though!

[NutLoose]

Housing brings to mind one of our guys at Brize, he had finally scraped up enough money to buy a house but was worried over being posted as he would naturally be skint for some time, so he contacted as it was then Innsworth to enquire through our boss and was told no chance of any posting on the horizon, house duly purchased in Carterton and looking forward to moving in... Posted St Athan!

[charliegolf]

Housing brings to mind one of our guys at Brize, he had finally scraped up enough money to buy a house but was worried over being posted as he would naturally be skint for some time, so he contacted as it was then Innsworth to enquire through our boss and was told no chance of any posting on the horizon, house duly purchased in Carterton and looking forward to moving in... Posted St Athan!

Sig better investment than Saints though Nutty. Bummer mind!

CG

[Davef68]

This doesn't just happen in the military. In a civilian job, I was seconded to another office some distance away from my designated base, originally for 4 weeks but turned into 9 months. Terms of service were such that i could claim excess travel milage AND time for travel beyond my normal commute (as I lived further away). Now there were two routes I could take - back roads and suburban routes, which took 15 miles,. but 35 minutes or via the motorway at a distance of 18 miles, but only taking 20 minutes. I of course took quicker route, but after I returned to my normal job, I was visited by an auditor about my 'overclaim' of milage for the time of my secondment (I think it was about £400 in total).

Conversation went 'The distance between A and B is only 15 miles, rather than the 18 you claim' 'Yes but it saved 30 minutes travel time per day' 'But you should have taken the shorter route' ' But then you would have paid me for 30 minutes sitting in the car - and you pay me a lot more per 1/2 hour than £2.70 (4x45ppm). 'But you should have taken the shorter distance - we pay you whether or not you are actually working'.

Eventually an intervention from the Finance Director ended the nonsense

[212man]

This doesn't just happen in the military. In a civilian job

Indeed. When I first arrived in Aberdeen to start with a large offshore operator, my relocation package included two months in a hotel, with £18 per diem (1989). When I said I’d arranged a rental I was told “no per diem”. Given the timing meant I wouldn’t be paid for 7 weeks, this was irksome. No logic could prevail so, sad to say, I checked in and never stayed in the hotel!

[langleybaston]

It's all about different budgets with different managers I think.

MoD civilians in my time had a great time [not] with detachments because "Travel and Subsistence" had nothing to do with financial matters such as overtime [for juniors], long hours gratuity and shift/ weekend/PH allowances.
This in an era when many juniors had to rely on public transport, and many had no telephone. To ask an off-duty observer to turn out at no notice to cover a night shift for a sick colleague, pedalling 10 miles on a sh1tty night, and no recompense, was iniquitous. And yet I never knew of a failure to cover a shortfall. I wonder if today's youngsters would stand for it. In a way, I hope not.
There some grave injustices which simply invited dishonesty, with the inevitable consequences.

[tucumseh]

It's all about different budgets with different managers I think.

MoD civilians in my time had a great time [not] with detachments because "Travel and Subsistence" had nothing to do with financial matters such as overtime [for juniors], long hours gratuity and shift/ weekend/PH allowances.
This in an era when many juniors had to rely on public transport, and many had no telephone. To ask an off-duty observer to turn out at no notice to cover a night shift for a sick colleague, pedalling 10 miles on a sh1tty night, and no recompense, was iniquitous. And yet I never knew of a failure to cover a shortfall. I wonder if today's youngsters would stand for it. In a way, I hope not.
There some grave injustices which simply invited dishonesty, with the inevitable consequences.

Exactly LB. The nadir was when IPTs were resurrected in 1999. IPT leaders now had their own T&S budget, and routinely blew it in a couple of months by sending the world and his dog to minor meetings, on overnighters. When it ran out, the chair was told to cancel the meetings, even if they were (e.g.) Critical Design Reviews. Just sign the cheque and say the work is done and satisfactory. Finding themselves in a tricky legal position, the chairman would usually go himself but would have his T&S claim turned down. As he couldn't afford a hotel, it was often a 150 mile drive each way, days on end, for 0800-1800 days. AbbeyWood to Crawley is the one that comes readily to mind. As you rightly say, the financial pressure this caused on the family invited dishonesty, although I know of very few who succumbed. The saving grace was the company would feed and water you, and very often your opposite number there would put you up. (And in one case, have Kwik Fit get your car in order under their contract with them!) But then you'd be accused of....

[ShyTorque]

When the RAF brought in something called “NMS” (New Management Strategy), in the mid 1980s, finite financial resources were given to local commanders, rather than being held centrally. Essentially this meant that stations had to manage their own budget. Squadron commanders likewise. Responsibility obviously flows downhill (putting it politely).

Because no extra staff were given to manage budgets (and as far as I recall, no financial training was given to existing personnel) this resulted in a great deal of stress and a large extra workload for local units.

Our Squadron boss was seldom seen again - he seemed to spend most of his time in his office, rather than leading from the front.

I remember having a number of consecutive leave application passes rejected, meaning that I had been allowed only a small fraction of my leave allocation in one year. After an AOC’s visit two of us were called into the Boss’s office to explain why we had not taken leave; questions had obviously been asked by his staff. I reminded the Boss that it was because he had personally turned down my leave applications, or at least his signature was on them. He seemed rather embarrassed but nothing more was said.

I later discovered from a flight lieutenant navigator, who had been given responsibility for vetting certain parts of the unit budget, that leave passes had been turned down because money allocated for leave travel had been overspent! So staff leave was being sacrificed to avoid risking embarrassment over further overspend.

It was that same Boss who announced that the unit would henceforth work an early shift and a late shift, to gain maximum usage of the reducing number of aircraft available. After a couple of weeks we all found ourselves working both shifts.

More reasons why I took my option to leave. But at least it worked out well for said Boss, he later made Air Rank.

[Haraka]

Indeed ST!
How many of us did actually get our full leave quota, who were seen as " Key Players" ( often until F1369 time, of course :) )

[radar101]

IPT leaders now had their own T&S budget, and routinely blew it in a couple of months by sending the world and his dog to minor meetings, on overnighters

I recall an international planning meeting in the US about 2008 : My oppo and I were giving a major presentation to the meeting early the next day so we were allowed to fly premium economy. Two IPT staff (who were only there to observe) flew 1st class both ways - because they could!

[langleybaston]

Indeed ST!
How many of us did actually get our full leave quota, who were seen as " Key Players" ( often until F1369 time, of course :) )

Certainly not I.
In one post I had an official Deputy, experienced, trained, fully able and needing a stint as a boss for his CV.

My line manager formally approved my taking minimal summer leave one year in exchange for four weeks touring Europe the next.
You guessed. Change of line manager, who refused to honour the arrangement and was "surprised and disappointed" that I should consider it. The fallout included my deputy suffering a substantial delay for promotion on grounds of lack of relevant experience.

[ShyTorque]

Indeed ST!
How many of us did actually get our full leave quota, who were seen as " Key Players" ( often until F1369 time, of course :) )


Annoyingly, some staff seemed to live a charmed life when it came to “perks” like leave. I wasn’t amongst them.

Having taken my option at my upcoming 38 point, my previously impeccable but final F1369 report was altered to include a “2” out of 9 for loyalty because the small minded, peevish Staish was apparently so annoyed that I chose to leave during his watch, albeit perfectly iaw the terms of my commission, rather than take up the RAF’s offer of Specialist Aircrew.

[langleybaston]

Annoyingly, some staff seemed to live a charmed life when it came to “perks” like leave. I wasn’t amongst them.

Having taken my option at my upcoming 38 point, my previously impeccable but final F1369 report was altered to include a “2” out of 9 for loyalty because the small minded, peevish Staish was apparently so annoyed that I chose to leave during his watch, albeit perfectly iaw the terms of my commission, rather than take up the RAF’s offer of Specialist Aircrew.

Excuse ignorance, but does not the RAF have a right of appeal to a second reporting officer senior to the 1RO?

I ask because after many years my "fitted for further promotion" dropped from Yes to No on the grounds that I was soon to be in my final year. I pointed out to 2RO that this would be a strange unjustified blight on my CV and the report was changed to "fitted"
with a few explanatory caveats.
Not that I wanted another job, but pride was involved. 41 years' hard labour is enough for anyone!

[NutLoose]

41 years' hard labour is enough for anyone!

Squeezing the seaweed out on the line? :O

[ShyTorque]

Excuse ignorance, but does not the RAF have a right of appeal to a second reporting officer senior to the 1RO?

I ask because after many years my "fitted for further promotion" dropped from Yes to No on the grounds that I was soon to be in my final year. I pointed out to 2RO that this would be a strange unjustified blight on my CV and the report was changed to "fitted"
with a few explanatory caveats.
Not that I wanted another job, but pride was involved. 41 years' hard labour is enough for anyone!

The Station Commander WAS the second reporting officer. He downgraded the far higher score given by my Sqn Cdr, my immediate reporting officer.

As far as an appeal was concerned, I didn’t even consider making one; it was during my last few weeks of service and had no relevance to my subsequent civilian employment.

However, as I stated earlier, after my resettlement course I subsequently took some pleasure in sending him my claim for 28 days rate ones from one of the most expensive cities on foreign shores. In an envelope, marked “Personal, for…”

[radar101]

Having taken my option at my upcoming 38 point, my previously impeccable but final F1369 report was altered to include a “2” out of 9 for loyalty because the small minded, peevish Staish was apparently so annoyed that I chose to leave during his watch, albeit perfectly iaw the terms of my commission, rather than take up the RAF’s offer of Specialist Aircrew.

Yep same here - my Gp Capt did the same at the end of my 16 years.

​​​​​​​6 months later the Highly Loyal Gp Capt grabbed redundancy with both hand - and bu88er the loyalty.

[Krystal n chips]

Annoyingly, some staff seemed to live a charmed life when it came to “perks” like leave. I wasn’t amongst them.

Having taken my option at my upcoming 38 point, my previously impeccable but final F1369 report was altered to include a “2” out of 9 for loyalty because the small minded, peevish Staish was apparently so annoyed that I chose to leave during his watch, albeit perfectly iaw the terms of my commission, rather than take up the RAF’s offer of Specialist Aircrew.

You were far from alone here. HM Gulag St Athan...applied, and accepted for, 22 years, which meant you had to be fit and qualified for, further promotion.

Once this was confirmed, in goes the escape route application for a posting....however, such was the malice directed at anybody who didn't serve their sentence...the minimum term was about 3 years, some being very happy to convert this to life, and after being "advised" to retract my posting request, they produced something called an "X" annotation, never heard of this before, and, oh look, as you are "M.U. trained," off you go to 71 MU....who were genuinely annoyed, because, the Gulag had also dropped my assessments ...in the space of about two months. .

They did the same to at least three other people who wanted to get back into the RAF...rather than clock on / have monthly haircut parades in the hangar / along with pickaxe guard....which, came round " on a more than regular basis" for those of us who had made it clear we didn't join for any of the above reasons . You might have thought representing the RAF in the Inter Services gliding would have been looked on favourably....not a cat in hells chance as three of us discovered ...quite the reverse in fact !

As for CS claims, an individual I took over from kindly told me what I could claim for when I attended conferences etc as he, it seemed, felt it essential he attended as many as possible. Given these conferences / meetings were of no use, or value, to me, or the recipients thereafter, I smiled... nicely (ish)....and ignored his advice. I understand, after he left, an audit of his travels and claims was "revealing ". ...

[langleybaston]

Squeezing the seaweed out on the line? :O

And polishing the crystal balls ...............

[ShyTorque]

I always thought it was loose change jangling in the trouser pockets…

[langleybaston]

I always thought it was loose change jangling in the trouser pockets…

Too impoverished for loose change; the noise would be pocket billiards.

[NutLoose]

You were far from alone here. HM Gulag St Athan...applied, and accepted for, 22 years, which meant you had to be fit and qualified for, further promotion.

Once this was confirmed, in goes the escape route application for a posting....however, such was the malice directed at anybody who didn't serve their sentence...the minimum term was about 3 years, some being very happy to convert this to life, and after being "advised" to retract my posting request, they produced something called an "X" annotation, never heard of this before, and, oh look, as you are "M.U. trained," off you go to 71 MU....who were genuinely annoyed, because, the Gulag had also dropped my assessments ...in the space of about two months. .

They did the same to at least three other people who wanted to get back into the RAF...rather than clock on / have monthly haircut parades in the hangar / along with pickaxe guard....which, came round " on a more than regular basis" for those of us who had made it clear we didn't join for any of the above reasons . You might have thought representing the RAF in the Inter Services gliding would have been looked on favourably....not a cat in hells chance as three of us discovered ...quite the reverse in fact !

As for CS claims, an individual I took over from kindly told me what I could claim for when I attended conferences etc as he, it seemed, felt it essential he attended as many as possible. Given these conferences / meetings were of no use, or value, to me, or the recipients thereafter, I smiled... nicely (ish)....and ignored his advice. I understand, after he left, an audit of his travels and claims was "revealing ". ...

Ahhhh, , the dreaded X annotation . The other I seem to remember was a Q rating.

Chap at Odiham was having wifey problems due to the amount of detachments, N Ireland, Belize, Norway etc so was threatening marriage breakdown, desperately he applied for an environmental posting ( remember those ) and he got it, across the airfield to the other Puma Sqn, same sh*t, different badge… needless to say there was one pissed off man and even more pissed off wifey.

[oldmansquipper]

When the RAF brought in something called “NMS” (New Management Strategy), in the mid 1980s, finite financial resources were given to local commanders, rather than being held centrally. Essentially this meant that stations had to manage their own budget. Squadron commanders likewise. Responsibility obviously flows downhill (putting it politely).

Because no extra staff were given to manage budgets (and as far as I recall, no financial training was given to existing personnel) this resulted in a great deal of stress and a large extra workload for local units.

Our Squadron boss was seldom seen again - he seemed to spend most of his time in his office, rather than leading from the front.

I remember having a number of consecutive leave application passes rejected, meaning that I had been allowed only a small fraction of my leave allocation in one year. After an AOC’s visit two of us were called into the Boss’s office to explain why we had not taken leave; questions had obviously been asked by his staff. I reminded the Boss that it was because he had personally turned down my leave applications, or at least his signature was on them. He seemed rather embarrassed but nothing more was said.

I later discovered from a flight lieutenant navigator, who had been given responsibility for vetting certain parts of the unit budget, that leave passes had been turned down because money allocated for leave travel had been overspent! So staff leave was being sacrificed to avoid risking embarrassment over further overspend.

It was that same Boss who announced that the unit would henceforth work an early shift and a late shift, to gain maximum usage of the reducing number of aircraft available. After a couple of weeks we all found ourselves working both shifts.

More reasons why I took my option to leave. But at least it worked out well for said Boss, he later made Air Rank.

ah yes…”NMS” ….another wonderful idea (along with MDGs, out sourcing, relentless contractorisation, CoCo etc etc). I’m sure several promotions were reward for that initiative.

As an aside….

I recall being sent from t’HQ to a DA/EA meeting along with my boss. It was in Munich on a Wednesday and was to discuss (for 15 min tops) a seat mod proposal. The most efficient way was LHR to EDDM early morning, with the plan being to get to meeting at around 1100. Our Item was early on the agenda. We would discuss it, put the EA view then, leave and return by air to LHR in the early evening. A day out of the office. Lovely.

However comma - Air travel was rejected by senior management …”no money left in the budget”.

The meeting, however , was still deemed essential - so as not to hand over MoD decision making to our allies and fellow participants in this multi national project.

So, me and my boss, booked out a car (nice big estate) on the Monday morning. Day 1. Drove to Dover, ferry to Calais then night stop to the south east somewhere. Day 2 Drive on to Munich (finding accommodation was a real problem as there was a major ‘Messe’ in town - but we managed just in time to sample the Hoffbrauhaus and have a halbe haxe) Day 3 drive to the meeting to deliver the 15 min input, then leave after lunch. Drive North a bit. Night stop. Day 4. Drive on to Calais and night stop. Day 5, drive to Carefor Hypermarche, in Calais load them big estate with copious quantities of duty free, get on ferry, then drive back to the office. Day 6 (following Monday) submit genuine ‘rate’ claims for two.

I have no idea what the total cost was, but it didn’t come out of the air travel budget so NMS was appeased.

lovely grub!

[vascodegama]

I remember a VSO coming to FY many years ago and telling us that the whole idea of NMS (called at first ERB) was to avoid this different budget idea. He was then embarrassed by being given several examples of how it didn't.

[Whenurhappy]

But the kicker comes at the end of the article, he may have still been eligible for it.
I doubt it very, very much. Normally, the custody of the children has to be assigned to the Serving person by the Courts before CEA is granted. Staying with dad during the holidays doesn't count.

[Whenurhappy]

True. Did you know CEA rules were changed to ensure just Officers and the odd anomaly we’re able to claim? One day the press will find us out!! Lol.
Rubbish.

[downsizer]

Rubbish.

Actually whilst they haven't de jure, they have de facto.

With non commissioned nowadays having 3-5 year FADs it's very difficult to get a mobilty certificate signed off these days. There are only a handful of non-comm posts that requires moves in the frequency required for CEA these days.

[Countdown begins]

Rubbish.
Another outstanding post, gotta love the old boys!

[Diff Tail Shim]

You were far from alone here. HM Gulag St Athan...applied, and accepted for, 22 years, which meant you had to be fit and qualified for, further promotion.

Once this was confirmed, in goes the escape route application for a posting....however, such was the malice directed at anybody who didn't serve their sentence...the minimum term was about 3 years, some being very happy to convert this to life, and after being "advised" to retract my posting request, they produced something called an "X" annotation, never heard of this before, and, oh look, as you are "M.U. trained," off you go to 71 MU....who were genuinely annoyed, because, the Gulag had also dropped my assessments ...in the space of about two months. .

They did the same to at least three other people who wanted to get back into the RAF...rather than clock on / have monthly haircut parades in the hangar / along with pickaxe guard....which, came round " on a more than regular basis" for those of us who had made it clear we didn't join for any of the above reasons . You might have thought representing the RAF in the Inter Services gliding would have been looked on favourably....not a cat in hells chance as three of us discovered ...quite the reverse in fact !

As for CS claims, an individual I took over from kindly told me what I could claim for when I attended conferences etc as he, it seemed, felt it essential he attended as many as possible. Given these conferences / meetings were of no use, or value, to me, or the recipients thereafter, I smiled... nicely (ish)....and ignored his advice. I understand, after he left, an audit of his travels and claims was "revealing ". ...

Abingdon would have been better than St Athan. The dreaded X413 annotation of primary structures. Saw a posting to Abingdon from 431 MU get changed at short notice from F shed to RSS and a posting to St Athan avoided by a lucky exchange posting to Colt. One loves what the bosses and drafters do in the background. My promotion board pick up in 2004 was witheld by Colt management to fill a dead end post in 2005. 25 years was long enough. I laugh when I see Plane Reclaimers and the leading hand whom was posted onto RSS with his previous Flight Sargent when it was closing at Abo, the latter giving me a ****e appraisal as I was never at Abo and both disappeared to Llantwit Major. They were welcome to it.

[Diff Tail Shim]

Another outstanding post, gotta love the old boys!
39 years since I joined as of today and over 14 years since I left. Why I don't comment on stuff I haven't got a clue is now pukka gen or not.

[Whenurhappy]

Another outstanding post, gotta love the old boys!
I last claimed CEA April last year...

[Atlasisrubbish]

I last claimed CEA April last year...
is that a boast?

[ShyTorque]

We never claimed boarding school allowance for my son simply because we didn’t send him. The consequence was that by the time he reached the age of fourteen he’d attended seven different schools, all but one of those due to RAF postings. Having left the service, I then found myself in very different circumstances and in a position of having to fund his boarding school education out of my own pocket for three years. Consequently, we don’t have much of a retirement fund…but I’m very pleased that he didn’t let us down; he’s done very well for himself since and earning more than I ever did.

[NutLoose]

And another one! A full Colonel this time!

A senior British Army officer who was the deputy director of the Government’s Covid-19 taskforce has denied fraudulently claiming tens of thousands of pounds in allowances to pay his children’s private school fees.

Retired colonel Marcus Reedman, 51, was a lieutenant colonel at the Ministry of Defence (MoD) building in Whitehall at the time of the allegations, between October 1 2016 and August 17 2017.

It is alleged that Reedman, whose last post was deputy director of the Covid-19 taskforce as acting brigadier, claimed continuity of education allowance (CEA) payments to fund his three children’s £75,000-a-year private school fees, which matched his Army salary.

Prosecutors say he failed to declare he was serving unaccompanied at his residence at work address (RWA) in Biggin Hill, south-east London, while his wife Astrid Reedman lived at the family home in Rye, East Sussex.

Reedman was last year charged with fraud relating to three CEA payments totalling £43,470 over the course of a single school year.

The allowance is aimed at enabling children of service personnel to remain at the same schools to allow their serving parent to be accompanied by their spouse as they are posted to different locations.

CEA payments come with conditions and include rules saying the spouse must not be away from the RWA for more than 90 days per year.

Reedman, who has been pictured alongside the King – then the Prince of Wales – and then-prime minister David Cameron during his career, appeared at Southwark Crown Court on Friday to plead not guilty to a single count of fraud.

The indictment alleges that he dishonestly failed to disclose to the MoD that he was serving unaccompanied at his RWA from October 1 2017.

It says the information “had an effect on (his) eligibility to claim CEA which (he) was under a legal duty to disclose”.

Reedman faces a two-week trial from May 9 and was granted unconditional bail by Judge Nicholas Rimmer.


Ex-Army colonel denies fraudulently claiming thousands to pay school fees (msn.com) (https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/ex-army-colonel-denies-fraudulently-claiming-thousands-to-pay-school-fees/ar-AA18swf7?ocid=winp1taskbar&cvid=4fc775d5a01d4d99bdc1edb0c06fecaa&ei=44)

[Asturias56]

"It is alleged that Reedman, whose last post was deputy director of the Covid-19 taskforce as acting brigadier, claimed continuity of education allowance (CEA) payments to fund his three children’s
£75,000-a-year private school fees, which matched his Army salary."

No-one else the country on £75k a year would stick 3 kids into schools charging those numbers

[langleybaston]

No-one else the country on £75k a year would stick 3 kids into schools charging those numbers[/QUOTE]

By the time that is taxed, mortgage paid, car paid, household bills, three teenage-ish children and one decent holiday a year, should be grateful for a country that provides education to age 18. And National Elf, whatever!

[NutLoose]

Retired Colonel found not guilty of school fees fraud.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/british-army-michael-fallon-covid-brighton-college-rye-b2353972.html

A retired colonel, who was the deputy director of the Government’s Covid-19 task force, has been cleared of falsely claiming £43,470 to pay his children’s boarding school fees.

Prosecutors said Marcus Reedman, 51, claimed continuity of education allowance (CEA) payments to help fund his three children’s £75,000-a-year private school fees, which matched his entire British Army (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/british-army) salary.

Reedman’s last job was as the deputy director of the Covid-19 task force with the rank of acting brigadier.

During his Army career, he was pictured alongside the King, who was then the Prince of Wales, and David Cameron, who was prime minister at the time.

Prosecutors said he “cheated the system” to “dishonestly” collect taxpayers’ money while he was posted to a desk job at the Ministry of Defence (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/ministry-of-defence) (MoD) building in Whitehall.

Reedman’s eldest daughter and son attended Brighton College (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/brighton-college), costing about £30,000 each a year, while his youngest daughter was a daygirl at the Marlborough House prep school in Kent, for which no CEA was claimed.

To be eligible for the scheme – aimed at allowing the children of service personnel to stay at the same school while their serving parent is posted around the country or abroad – he had to be accompanied by his wife, Astrid Reedman.

He was alleged to have wrongly claimed the payments while she and his family were living at the family home in Rye (https://www.independent.co.uk/topic/rye), East Sussex, instead of his residence at work address (RWA) in Biggin Hill, south-east London.

The soldier, who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, told jurors he was serving accompanied throughout the period October 1 2016 until August 17 2017.

He was acquitted of fraud by a jury at Southwark Crown Court on Thursday after 15 hours of deliberation.

His supporters in the public gallery cheered and he bowed to Judge Nicholas Rimmer before leaving the court.

Giving evidence, Reedman said he attended a prep school before completing state education and joined the Army aged 23.

He told jurors he decided to send his children to private school because his daughter was being “severely bullied”.

But he said he was not “wedded” to the idea and denied he had dishonestly defrauded the MoD.

When asked if he had moved to Biggin Hill alone, he said: “No, I moved with my family,” and told the jury his wife had not moved back to Rye by October 2016.

[Asturias56]

Well it was a jury trial so he must have made a decent case.

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

[Herod]

Well it was a jury trial so he must have made a decent case.

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

Part of the military contract. Loyalty works both ways. Although subject to abuse.

[Bengo]

Well it was a jury trial so he must have made a decent case.

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

Not just for the military. Applies to quite a few Civil Service folk. Mainly the Foreign Office.

There is a clue as to why in the title of the allowance.


N

[Fortissimo]

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

As a direct result of my father’s time in the RAF I went to 13 schools, the last one for 7 years. Had the allowance not been available I would have had to change schools 3 times during my secondary education, including the year running up to my O-levels (GCSE) and 5 months before A-levels.

I still think it was good use of his taxes.

[Just This Once...]

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

Happens in commercial industry, overseas contractors, government, civil servants & militaries around the world. Families still get a kicking though, whatever part of private or public employment you are employed in. For all public servants the tax-payer has to foot the bill in most circumstances (sometimes the costs are shifted to a foreign government or even companies with some secondments) and, ultimately, it is part of the price when governments use some private contractors too.

I managed to complete just under 30 years without using it but I had to compromise elsewhere for my kids education. I don't begrudge those that use CEA either. Whilst it may sound fantastic for your kids to go to a posh version of Hogwarts, you do get to hear what it is genuinely like for a kid to be the only 'poor' one in the class, that comes from a region that everyone seems blissfully unaware of, who didn't go to any of the 'right sort' of feeder schools or be destined for the next pillar of inbreeding education, just because Mummy and Daddy don't own most of Sussex.

[ASRAAMTOO]

Well it was a jury trial so he must have made a decent case.

I still think its odd that someone is allowed to put their kids in expensive schools at tax-payers expense

Which presumably shows how little you know. Its been a very long time indeed (if ever) that the boarding school allowance has come even close to covering the school fees involved in a modest private school let alone an expensive one. Perhaps it would be worth looking at why the allowance makes sense, and why its actually now failing.
Once upon a time the allowance covered a decent proportion of school fees and as a result it was used by both SNCOs and officers(occassionally more junior ranks too but they rarely had kids, as they were younger) to educate children that would otherwise be moved many times during their education which would of course suffer.

As a result those with kids at boarding school REMAINED in the service and were accepting of the need to change posts, often at short notice.

The labour party has a bit of a downer on private education (unless its their own child of course) and IIRC Gordon Brown essentially froze BSA and as the years progressed the perentage of school fees it covered gradually declined. One consequence of this was that fewer and fewer SNCOs were able to afford to pay the balance and the uptake of BSA moved to senior officer level as they were the only ones who could afford it.

Now I'm sure its only one factor but how IS SNCO retention these days and how often do the posters hear the phrase 'if you post me I'm leaving'

For clarity, I have never used BSA and have no skin in the game apart from wishing to ensure our service people get the best possible terms and conditions!

[charliegolf]

The allowance can't have been that terribly frozen if you can still claim 3 x £25k!

CG

[Bob Viking]

You never fail to disappoint. I bet myself that when this thread was resurrected I’d see a post from you criticising the offer of private education for military children.

Two terms spring to mind:

1. The politics of envy - I never had it so why should anyone else?

2. Chip on the shoulder - you never served and clearly begrudge any kind of good deal for anyone else.

By all means petition the government to remove the allowance. Maybe with less bases and less moves for families it is less necessary than it was but don’t come crying when recruitment and the willingness of personnel to accept remote postings suffer as a result.

BV

[PPRuNeUser0211]

The allowance can't have been that terribly frozen if you can still claim 3 x £25k!

CG
In context (though it quotes some fees in the article) a pretty normal (decent enough, but not top of the league and not beloved of the ra-ra set) private school near me costs 13.5k per term / 40k+ per year for boarding fees in year 9+. So if we have established that being highly mobile is probably detrimental to your kids' senior school education, it seems reasonable they should be afforded stability. Either a) don't post people with kids in senior school (career foul/service need) or b) square them away. Neither is happening at the moment, because unless you're lucky/senior officer material you probably aren't affording 15k per child after CEA if the current allowance is 25k a year as quoted.

[Asturias56]

You never fail to disappoint. I bet myself that when this thread was resurrected I’d see a post from you criticising the offer of private education for military children.

Two terms spring to mind:

1. The politics of envy - I never had it so why should anyone else?

2. Chip on the shoulder - you never served and clearly begrudge any kind of good deal for anyone else.

By all means petition the government to remove the allowance. Maybe with less bases and less moves for families it is less necessary than it was but don’t come crying when recruitment and the willingness of personnel to accept remote postings suffer as a result.

BV
Bob - neither do you disappoint

everything is fine just move along don't ask any hard questions................... you can trust us..... just keep paying your taxes...........

[Bob Viking]

I’ve had a few beers so it may affect my thinking but I have no idea what you’re talking about.

BV