Fraudulent Wg Cdr. Possibly.

[Bob Viking]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13127825/amp/RAF-Wing-Commander-based-Pentagon-defrauded-MoD.html

Oh dear. He’s not going to get a lot of sympathy.

BV

[4mastacker]

A 10-year posting to the US? Really? How does that come about? I bet those who have to move every couple of years are well-chuffed.

[Bob Viking]

I would not say that’s the problem here. Good luck to anyone who can get themselves a good deal such as a ten year posting to the US.

The problem is, allegedly, flagrantly breaking the rules. And getting caught.

BV

[Timelord]

Search and Rescue pilot filling a post at “The Home Of The Fighter Pilot”. Now THAT is flagrantly breaking the rules!

[ShyTorque]

Search and Rescue pilot filling a post at “The Home Of The Fighter Pilot”. Now THAT is flagrantly breaking the rules!

I dunno. He is fighting for his career...

[Lonewolf_50]

A guy I flew with back in the 80's got reassigned to San Diego in the 1990's.
He bought a house (price was high) and of course used his local DHA/housing allowance to defray some of that cost. (Not enough base housing in that area to cover even a tenth of the people assigned there).
He also had three junior officers move in to the empty rooms and each pay him rent.
Each of them applied for and got a full housing allowance (which was against the rules at the time) But they apparently used a street address one or two up or down the street for their claims .. under old salts advice.
It was the fourth JO, (filling in the last room) who seems to have spilled the beans.
Not sure how he did this, but in filling out his paperwork he didn't do as the others had done. This got a pay clerk looking into that street address. All of the street addresses.
NCIS (then NIS) got a phone call.
About Two years of all four of them claiming excess housing allowance came to light.
The ring leader (LCDR/OF-3), aka the guy I knew, took the hardest fall.

Futzing about with housing allowances: great way to out clever one's self.

[chevvron]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13127825/amp/RAF-Wing-Commander-Based-Pentagon-Defrauded-MoD.html

Oh dear. He’s not going to get a lot of sympathy.

BV
Link doesn't seem to work with me.

[ORAC]

Buying a house would seem to indicate he didn’t expect to move back to the UK any time soon - or at all.

[Bob Viking]

Link doesn't seem to work with me.

Copy and paste works fine. Not sure why it won’t form a link.

BV

[Biggus]

The only set of people in this country who can get away with saying, "oh I'm sorry, I'll pay it back", with no subsequent sanction, when caught out in some sort of financial dodgy deal are POLITICIANS, of ANY party....

[ShyTorque]

Buying a house would seem to indicate he didn’t expect to move back to the UK any time soon - or at all.

I'm sure his wife will be rather interested in his future plans, too.

[albatross]

If he was transferred to Washington would he not then have been able to purchase the house in Lost Wages, stop collecting the housing allowance for that, and then legally claim a housing allowance for his rented apartment at his new post in Washington? This would have negated the need for his blundering subterfuge.
Just curious.
Is what he told his wife, while reprehensible, in reality, just between them and a moot point from a legal standpoint except, perhaps, as proof of intent to defraud provided hearsay is allowed. Can a spouse even testify against his/her partner in the UK?

[Bob Viking]

Whilst remembering that nothing has yet been proven I had considered that possibility.

Since he has entered a not guilty plea it as plausible that he is falling on his sword and saving his wife the ignominy of being considered complicit. If he is found innocent, they can both be considered innocent. If he is found guilty it is only him that loses his job and reputation. There is every chance that both knew exactly what they were doing.

We’ll probably never know the full truth regardless of what the courts martial decide.

BV

[ORAC]

Assum8ng it wasn’t his wife who found out about the secret account and reported it….

[Gordon Brown]

If this is proven...

You've got to be some special sort of idiot to do that.

Makes a change from CEA fraud though, I suppose.

[Davef68]

Can a spouse even testify against his/her partner in the UK?

Yes, but they can't be compelled to. (except in certain offences relating to violence or sexual offences against a child, or violence against the spouse)

[MPN11]

If this is proven...
You've got to be some special sort of idiot to do that.
Makes a change from CEA fraud though, I suppose.The OH was on the Allowances desk at Adastral. Life was an endless process of handling dodgy claims in EVERY area, including sadly being the ‘expert’ witness at the CM of a personal friend of us both. People will alway try their luck, and usually get caught.

[ShyTorque]

I know a certain SO who was allegedly obtaining “indulgence travel” air tickets for non entitled children. It may have been an honest mistake but he was perhaps rather lucky to be advised that it might be best all round if he resigned. My understanding is that he took said advice and no further action was taken.

[Radley]

He’s ex Nimrod

[pr00ne]

If he was transferred to Washington would he not then have been able to purchase the house in Lost Wages, stop collecting the housing allowance for that, and then legally claim a housing allowance for his rented apartment at his new post in Washington? This would have negated the need for his blundering subterfuge.
Just curious.
Is what he told his wife, while reprehensible, in reality, just between them and a moot point from a legal standpoint except, perhaps, as proof of intent to defraud provided hearsay is allowed. Can a spouse even testify against his/her partner in the UK?

Yes they can, and have many many times.

[ShyTorque]

He’s ex NimrodWho is?

[RAFEngO74to09]

Buying a house would seem to indicate he didn’t expect to move back to the UK any time soon - or at all.

Once you have been a permanent resident in the USA for 5 years you can find an immigration attorney who could probably navigate a path to US Citizenship.

Normally that would have required obtaining a Permanent Resident Card ("Green Card" that isn't actually green) that allows you to enter and work in the USA and then after 5 years residency apply for Naturalization. One way of doing that would be to apply for an Employment Based Visa where the employer would need to sponsor someone as having special skills for a vacancy they can't fill with a US citizen. As an Exchange Officer he wouldn't have needed the Green Card to get in the US, work and be there for the requisite time. There are certainly former UK officers who have worked at NATO Allied Command Transformation (ACT) as NATO civilians who have managed to go that route.

[RAFEngO74to09]

Comments on ARRSE - page 1159 onwards

https://www.arrse.co.uk/community/threads/interesting-court-martial-on-the-horizon-general-in-the-dock.300837/page-1159

[RAFEngO74to09]

Best so far on ARRSE!

"I can't believe some of the comments regarding this.

Close the thread for this absolute legend.

He secures a 10 year posting to the states (who wouldn't fancy a bit of that as opposed to Bulford, Northolt, the Shot etc), squares away a 'special spending allowance' from the missus (must admit mine used to be around £50 for the odd night out on Adv Trg, so he is up there with the finest on this account) and he also buys a house in Las Vegas.

HE BUYS A HOUSE IN LAS VEGAS.

In the words of Winston Churchill - "Makes you bloody proud to be British" "

[RAFEngO74to09]

The Sun quotes the charge directly and has the amount allegedly defrauded as much higher

Commodore James Farrant, prosecuting, told the court: "The final quantum figures involved relate to overseas rent allowance totalling $28,127 and fuel and lighting allowance of $3,708."

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25615177/raf-officer-alex-drysdale-pentagon-trial-fraud/

[RAFEngO74to09]

A contemporary article shows that he was on 39 Sqn at Creech in 2013 - so it was not a matter of managing to hang on to the same post for 8 years before moving to the Pentagon.

[ORAC]

Once you have been a permanent resident in the USA for 5 years you can find an immigration attorney who could probably navigate a path to US Citizenship.
I worked for Raytheon for many years, including a 2 year secondment to the USA. An acquaintance was on the staff of the local congressman and often offered that he could get me a Green Card if I wanted one.

Couldn’t understand that I was quite happy to go home and didn’t see having to start again in my 40s in a job with less holiday entitlement, having to pay for health insurance and a pension plan as an appealing prospect.

​​​​​​​As it was my next position was on a 3 year secondment in Madrid.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

Ten years in the US seemed to become quite a thing. There were probably about half a dozen, maybe more, of this guy's contemporaries who started with a tour on 39 at Creech and then never left. If picked up, they would start lobbying desk officers various about the convenience of keeping them in the US considering they were already there, so they'd get bounced around staff jobs, roles with General Atomics, tours in Washington or Nellis, and so on. There's at least a couple of people I remember who went out to the US even earlier than this (2008-2009 maybe), and have never come back to the UK.

[teeteringhead]

squares away a 'special spending allowance' from the missus Reminds me of a guy in Germany who (allegedly) had this exchange with wifey.

She: "What's this LOA I've been hearing about?"

He: "Don't worry dear - I'll pay that!"

[212man]

Who is?
Drysdale - he is ex-120 SQN

[adminblunty]

From the JSP:

'09.0101. Aim. The aim of Overseas Rent Allowance (ORA) is to reimburse Service personnel with the necessary cost of rent and utilities for rented accommodation when they are assigned overseas and no suitable Service Families Accommodation (SFA), Single Living Accommodation (SLA), Substitute Service Families Accommodation (SSFA) or Substitute Service Single Accommodation (SSSA) is available.'

So if it's true he received ORA when he wasn't renting a property It seems like a very quick court martial and a career/marriage ending move. Re not telling spouses about allowances, I saw that many time whilst in, the shift from receiving expenses in cash to bank payments 20 years ago caught a few people out and it's easy for a service person to syphon off an element of salary to a UK bank account and unless his spouse saw his pay slip she'd never know, unless he was stupid.

[ShyTorque]

An ex officer colleague of mine in RAFG left his wife for another woman. Although they had been married for quite some years, she told my wife that she'd never had any idea about how much he was being paid because all his salary went into his own bank account and from that he gave her an allowance. When he left her living alone in the MQ to live "elsewhere", he insisted that she attended any squadron or station function with him, so as to hide the fact. He stopped her allowance so in effect she was instantly penniless. She eventually had to return to UK because in legal terms she lost her right to live in the MQ and the country. She was homeless on arrival in UK.

It's true to say that said officer caused quite a lot of angst amongst other wives because they could instantly see in what a precarious situation they could potentially be placed by their own husband and apparently without any sanction. He didn't make himself very popular amongst his fellow squadron members when the truth eventually came out.

[tdracer]

and he also buys a house in Las Vegas.

HE BUYS A HOUSE IN LAS VEGAS.

Depends on when he bought. It's since recovered, but there was a period around years 2008-2015 when you could buy a nice house in Lost Wages for a song - they'd seriously overbuilt when the mortgage/banking mess hit and it took a long time to recover.
It was so cheap I briefly considered buying a second 'vacation' home there.

[RAFEngO74to09]

Found on ARRSE - from Telegraph:

"A top RAF officer based at the Pentagon has been convicted of fraud over £20,000 payments he hid from the defence department and his wife.
Wing Commander Alex Drysdale defrauded the Ministry of Defence (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/26/raf-officer-hid-housing-fraud-court-hears/) to claim £19,500 in allowances he was not entitled to.
The fraud arose when the father-of-two bought a home in Las Vegas (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/las-vegas/)– a sprawling four-bedroom house with access to a communal pool and spa – which his family had previously been renting for £2,408 a month.
However, he failed to tell the MoD (https://www.telegraph.co.uk/ministry-of-defence/) of the purchase and carried on banking so-called Overseas Rent Allowance – a full rent reimbursement he was no longer eligible for. The money was deposited in a personal account he hid from Mrs Drysdale.
The Scottish officer, who has served in the US since 2011 was promoted to Wing Commander in 2021 and assigned to serve with the Air Force Warfighting Integration Capability (AFWIC) at the Pentagon.
His fraud was uncovered by Stuart Phillips, a fellow wing commander, with whom he had served in Nevada for some nine years.
He believed Drysdale may have lied to him when he claimed not to have bought the home in a conversation in April 2022.
The wing commander searched court records to discover that Drysdale had bought the house in February 2022 and raised his concerns with Air Cdre Jez Attridge, UK Air and Space Attache to the United States.
In a statement, Wing Commander Phillips said he had been friends with Drysdale for nine years, that their families would socialise together and they had taken skiing trips together.
He said: “He had told me of his intention to purchase the Las Vegas property so that when he was posted to Washington DC his wife and children could stay there when he moved.
“We spoke via Facebook messenger and he said he was yet to purchase the property as his landlord was making it difficult.”
Cdre James Farrant, prosecuting, told the military court at Catterick: “The prosecution case is that Wing Commander Drysdale deliberately and dishonestly concealed the fact he purchased his home from British Defence Services in order to continue claiming the allowance.”
Drysdale told the military court at Catterick he had no idea he had infringed MoD rules and was open and honest about purchasing his home, which he bought for $645,000 (£508,131).
However, he was convicted after a four-day trial of fraud by misrepresentation and will be sentenced at a later date.
Adjourning the case until April, Judge Advocate Smith told Drysdale: “This one blemish detracts from, but does not take away completely, from your 20-plus years of service.”'






[Mogwi]

Guilty as charged - to be sentenced at a later date.

Mog

[trim it out]

Found on ARRSE - from Telegraph:

"Drysdale told the military court at Catterick he had no idea he had infringed MoD rules"
It literally says on line 5 of the eligibility paragraph in JSP 752, that you can't claim if your family are occupying a property you own.

Disappointing that people like him serve among us, although reassuring there are people/near peers willing to call it out.

[WhoNeedsANav]

It literally says on line 5 of the eligibility paragraph in JSP 752, that you can't claim if your family are occupying a property you own.

Disappointing that people like him serve among us, although reassuring there are people/near peers willing to call it out.

I see it the other way but then maybe I'm too old fashioned. Personally I would hate to still be serving in a force where other officers were quietly running their own 'investigations' and making anonymous accusations.

In the Air Force I served in, had something like this happened then it could have been dealt with internally without having to resort to a CM. And I'm not condoning fraud at all, but let he who is without blame cast the first stone. I certainly bent the regulations from time to time and even broke them on more probably more then one occasion without even knowing because I have better things to do than read JSP whatever, which is something blunties should know all about but sharp pointy operators should be ignorant of, IMHO, and give me a 1771 all day long rather than the total abortion that was (maybe still is!?) JPA.

Can't think of someone I'd want less on my wing than a person who is 'calling out' (as you put it) regulatory transgressions by making anonymous accusations rather than taking me to one side in the bar and giving me an ear full.

But like I said, maybe I'm too old fashioned.

[Bob Viking]

I can see where you’re coming from but no, I think the time for ‘a quiet word in the ear’ has long since gone. For better or worse I think times have changed and we can’t afford to turn a blind eye to blatant fraudsters.

BV

[WhoNeedsANav]

I can see where you’re coming from but no, I think the time for ‘a quiet word in the ear’ has long since gone. For better or worse I think times have changed and we can’t afford to turn a blind eye to blatant fraudsters.

BV

​​​​​​It has definitely long since gone, they've had a CM!! Like you say, times have changed 'for better or worse'. I think for worse, and it would seem from the number of people leaving I'm not the only one.

We could never afford to turn a blind eye to people making bad decisions, it's just that back in my day I believe we had a more grown up and pragmatic way of dealing with it.

But it's not my day anymore so I guess I should return to my hole. There is just something about officers who should be looking out for each other but are actually launching their own criminal investigations, searching court documents and collecting evidence on their fellow officers behind their back that doesn't sit well with me.

Good luck to all still serving.
​​​​​

[barotraumatized]

Is it just me or does the 'outing' of the Whistleblower in the Press not sit very well? I'm all for Military courts being conducted in a way that broadly matches proceedings in a standard ('civilian') court, but would we expect such details to make it to the public arena if this were a 'civvi' case?? I know it's not, so the point is maybe moot, but.....surely 'witnesses' are afforded some protection?

[trim it out]

​​​​​​It has definitely long since gone, they've had a CM!! Like you say, times have changed 'for better or worse'. I think for worse, and it would seem from the number of people leaving I'm not the only one.

We could never afford to turn a blind eye to people making bad decisions, it's just that back in my day I believe we had a more grown up and pragmatic way of dealing with it.

But it's not my day anymore so I guess I should return to my hole. There is just something about officers who should be looking out for each other but are actually launching their own criminal investigations, searching court documents and collecting evidence on their fellow officers behind their back that doesn't sit well with me.

Good luck to all still serving.
​​​​​
I see where you're coming from, but as you acknowledge times have changed. Sometimes it's for the better (anonymous reports have had tangible changes made which have improved morale/safety etc) or for worse (the amount of hoops and hurdles just to get out the door and into a cab has gone too far IMO).

[Friedlander]

Is it just me or does the 'outing' of the Whistleblower in the Press not sit very well? I'm all for Military courts being conducted in a way that broadly matches proceedings in a standard ('civilian') court, but would we expect such details to make it to the public arena if this were a 'civvi' case?? I know it's not, so the point is maybe moot, but.....surely 'witnesses' are afforded some protection?

Although it's been a while since I sat on a court martial, I do recall it being fairly normal for a 'member of the press' or two to be present. It doesn't take much for it to be picked up by the local press and from then on to the nationals, especially if it's a quiet news day. ISTR that if there was a good reason, the same sorts of protection were available for witnesses as in a civilian court, but that has presumably not been an issue in this instance.

As for a quiet word in the shell-like alluded to earlier, he's a wg cdr and should know better - I doubt anyone would have the same sympathy if he were a sgt or, for that matter, an air officer! It's thanks to people like this that I have to spend so much time every year doing computer-based training about fraud, bribery and corruption (or whatever this year's course is called).

[trim it out]

It's thanks to people like this that I have to spend so much time every year doing computer-based training about fraud, bribery and corruption (or whatever this year's course is called).
Great point. The answer is a pilots to see and more DLE for everyone :ugh:

[Akrotiri bad boy]

People usually get caught out when they start bragging at the bar. He probably p155sed someone off who was within earshot. The guy was a Wing Commander in a plum posting and it still wasn't enough for him. He stole public money and should pay the price, no favours, no RHIP.

[5 Forward 6 Back]

I can see where you’re coming from but no, I think the time for ‘a quiet word in the ear’ has long since gone. For better or worse I think times have changed and we can’t afford to turn a blind eye to blatant fraudsters.

You're spot on, but there's a funny tinge to this story in terms of dates etc. It's the sort of thing where the 'whistleblower' could have pulled him up on it earlier, and Drysdale would have had the option to pull the plug after a month or 2, claim an oversight, and carry on. Knowing the people in question it wouldn't surprise me that the whistleblower sat on it for a bit longer to make it more of an issue before speaking to the DA. Don't discount the role of pathetic backstabbing office politics in this sort of thing.

It's disgraceful that he did it, of course, and he deserves the upcoming punishment. The thing that gets me is that having been the beneficiary of a couple of overseas tours, including one to the US, it's already a bloody good deal; fuel and lighting instead of paying your bills, ORA in return for paying for a quarter, LOA, etc etc. Why risk it for more?

[Asturias56]

Greed - have youever seen a banker for instance, turn down a raise ??

[Avionker]

I see it the other way but then maybe I'm too old fashioned. Personally I would hate to still be serving in a force where other officers were quietly running their own 'investigations' and making anonymous accusations.

In the Air Force I served in, had something like this happened then it could have been dealt with internally without having to resort to a CM. And I'm not condoning fraud at all, but let he who is without blame cast the first stone. I certainly bent the regulations from time to time and even broke them on more probably more then one occasion without even knowing because I have better things to do than read JSP whatever, which is something blunties should know all about but sharp pointy operators should be ignorant of, IMHO, and give me a 1771 all day long rather than the total abortion that was (maybe still is!?) JPA.

Can't think of someone I'd want less on my wing than a person who is 'calling out' (as you put it) regulatory transgressions by making anonymous accusations rather than taking me to one side in the bar and giving me an ear full.

But like I said, maybe I'm too old fashioned.

And would you have extended that courtesy to Other Ranks also? Or would you have it as “one rule for us and one rule for them”?

Fraud is fraud, regardless of the rank held.

If anything, then the higher the rank the greater the responsibility to set a good example wouldn’t you say?

Ex-Cpl Avionker

[WhoNeedsANav]

And would you have extended that courtesy to Other Ranks also? Or would you have it as “one rule for us and one rule for them”?

Fraud is fraud, regardless of the rank held.

If anything, then the higher the rank the greater the responsibility to set a good example wouldn’t you say?

Ex-Cpl Avionker

​​​​​​I don't disagree with what you say.

Honestly, when I was serving, as aircrew I had minimal responsibility for other ranks so never encountered the situation you described.

As I said before, I am not condoning what this individual has done. I don't know either of the people mentioned in the news articles and am aware that there could be a lot more to this that I don't know.

I just would hate to work in an organisation where individuals were running their own investigations on each other. This is not the RAF I left and I don't believe encouraging this 'whistleblowing' mentality is conducive to creating an effective fighting force. A force where you will be asking individuals to put their lives in the hands of their fellow Squadron members.

This individual has committed fraud and is going to be punished. That is deserving and right, make no mistake of what I am saying. But whilst others focus on the individual and salivate at the idea of justice being done, I choose to ponder the state of the force I proudly served and left many years ago. To me this is a failure of more than just a single individual.
​​​

[snapper41]

I see it the other way but then maybe I'm too old fashioned. Personally I would hate to still be serving in a force where other officers were quietly running their own 'investigations' and making anonymous accusations.

In the Air Force I served in, had something like this happened then it could have been dealt with internally without having to resort to a CM. And I'm not condoning fraud at all, but let he who is without blame cast the first stone. I certainly bent the regulations from time to time and even broke them on more probably more then one occasion without even knowing because I have better things to do than read JSP whatever, which is something blunties should know all about but sharp pointy operators should be ignorant of, IMHO, and give me a 1771 all day long rather than the total abortion that was (maybe still is!?) JPA.

Can't think of someone I'd want less on my wing than a person who is 'calling out' (as you put it) regulatory transgressions by making anonymous accusations rather than taking me to one side in the bar and giving me an ear full.

But like I said, maybe I'm too old fashioned.

The air force you were in must have been on a completely different planet to the rest of us, then. Seriously - you think a £20k fraud should have been dealt with by a quiet word in the ear at the bar?

Can’t think of anyone I’d want less on my wing than someone who is a liar and a fraudster. Give me the person who is calling it out any day.

[WhoNeedsANav]

The air force you were in must have been on a completely different planet to the rest of us, then. Seriously - you think a £20k fraud should have been dealt with by a quiet word in the ear at the bar?

Can’t think of anyone I’d want less on my wing than someone who is a liar and a fraudster. Give me the person who is calling it out any day.

The more I hear about the state of the RAF now, the more I'm inclined to agree that it was a different planet.

​​​​​​Certainly when I was serving much worse things happened than 20k of fraud and it was usually dealt with without court marshals and the embarrassment to the service that entails.

Someone who was keeping tallies, making records of other officer conduct and then reporting them to higher authorities would not have been welcome on any Squadron I served on. This kind of activity is utterly corrosive to the esprit de corps that is essential to ensuring people climb into their jets and complete their missions when there is a reasonable chance they might not make it back. If that sounds dramatic then I would encourage people to focus on current events because we may find ourselves in that situation again soon.

I still remain convinced there was a better way to handle this but then maybe there are facts I am not aware of, or may the RAF has fundamentally changed beyond anything I would recognise.

[Moi/]

The daily mail comments want blood and are an interesting read ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13142031/raf-wing-commander-pentagon-rent-allowance-vegas.html#comments-13142031

As they say, "the dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed" and I suspect the outcome will be once again making the news.

We all make mistakes, the majority of the time we get away with it, lessons are learned and I hope his transition to civilian life is smooth and painless.

[4everAD]

The more I hear about the state of the RAF now, the more I'm inclined to agree that it was a different planet.

​​​​​​Certainly when I was serving much worse things happened than 20k of fraud and it was usually dealt with without court marshals and the embarrassment to the service that entails.

Someone who was keeping tallies, making records of other officer conduct and then reporting them to higher authorities would not have been welcome on any Squadron I served on. This kind of activity is utterly corrosive to the esprit de corps that is essential to ensuring people climb into their jets and complete their missions when there is a reasonable chance they might not make it back. If that sounds dramatic then I would encourage people to focus on current events because we may find ourselves in that situation again soon.

I still remain convinced there was a better way to handle this but then maybe there are facts I am not aware of, or may the RAF has fundamentally changed beyond anything I would recognise.

And that is exactly how sexual predators and the like got away with things for so long in "the good old days".

[212man]

The daily mail comments want blood and are an interesting read ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13142031/raf-wing-commander-pentagon-rent-allowance-vegas.html#comments-13142031

As they say, "the dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed" and I suspect the outcome will be once again making the news.

We all make mistakes, the majority of the time we get away with it, lessons are learned and I hope his transition to civilian life is smooth and painless.

The article says he earns £130,000 pa - I assume that includes his rent allowance?

[tucumseh]

While not making light of an extremely serious allegation, I am utterly shocked that some parts of MoD still get expenses, while others have to fund (e.g. travel and subsistence) from their salaries. Can I put in a retrospective claim?

[ORAC]

Opinion here seems to be that he will get hung out to dry and dismissed.

But I note the Judge’s closing remarks and will wait to see the sentence.

‘Adjourning the case until April, Judge Advocate Smith told Drysdale: “This one blemish detracts from, but does not take away completely, from your 20-plus years of service.”'

[WhoNeedsANav]

And that is exactly how sexual predators and the like got away with things for so long in "the good old days".

Yes the modern air force has nipped that one in the bud. Just look at the Red Arrows. Oh hold on....

[Yellow Sun]

Opinion here seems to be that he will get hung out to dry and dismissed.

But I note the Judge’s closing remarks and will wait to see the sentence.

‘Adjourning the case until April, Judge Advocate Smith told Drysdale: “This one blemish detracts from, but does not take away completely, from your 20-plus years of service.”'

A reasonable comment I suppose, which could be interpreted to mean that previous satisfactory service is a factor included in determining the severity of the sentence, which will be decided in accordance with the Sentencing Guidlines (https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Master-Combined-Sentencing-Guides.pdf). However any decision will be made in the light of the following statement from the reference:

5.2.1 Service personnel may have access to valuable stores (including those attractive to terrorist
organisations), IT equipment and a wide range of other materiel. They have access to the Joint
Personnel Administration System (JPA) and can claim expenses and allowances with limited checks
or controls. They are trusted to deal with such equipment or claims honestly, and theft or fraud is a
clear breach of that trust. Offences can be hard to detect and sentences with an element of
deterrence are generally required, particularly when offences are committed by commissioned
officers.

My emphasis
YS

[air pig]

And that is exactly how sexual predators and the like got away with things for so long in "the good old days".

As has been recently shown with two UK based units..

[anson harris]

Sorry, you were an Officer in the Armed Forces? Presumably QRs was one of the manuals that you were too good to read? It certainly sounds that way.

I see it the other way but then maybe I'm too old fashioned. Personally I would hate to still be serving in a force where other officers were quietly running their own 'investigations' and making anonymous accusations.

In the Air Force I served in, had something like this happened then it could have been dealt with internally without having to resort to a CM. And I'm not condoning fraud at all, but let he who is without blame cast the first stone. I certainly bent the regulations from time to time and even broke them on more probably more then one occasion without even knowing because I have better things to do than read JSP whatever, which is something blunties should know all about but sharp pointy operators should be ignorant of, IMHO, and give me a 1771 all day long rather than the total abortion that was (maybe still is!?) JPA.

Can't think of someone I'd want less on my wing than a person who is 'calling out' (as you put it) regulatory transgressions by making anonymous accusations rather than taking me to one side in the bar and giving me an ear full.

But like I said, maybe I'm too old fashioned.

[WhoNeedsANav]

Sorry, you were an Officer in the Armed Forces? Presumably QRs was one of the manuals that you were too good to read? It certainly sounds that way.

I'm sure I read parts of it when I was at Cranwell. QR's often felt like the bible to me. Lots of people quoted from it but very few had read it cover to cover. I count myself in that group.

I know the RAF wanted people to be 'Officer first' but I'll be honest and say I joined for the flying and I think most of the aircrew of my era would have been the same.

So anything I did read in QR's I quickly forgot about because I didn't feel it was relevant to my job. I left it to the blunties to remind everyone that they were entitled to ride a horse into work, etc.

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.

[bugged on the right]

And that is exactly how sexual predators and the like got away with things for so long in "the good old days".


To be fair, in those days there was not very much to predate.

[downsizer]

I'm sure I read parts of it when I was at Cranwell. QR's often felt like the bible to me. Lots of people quoted from it but very few had read it cover to cover. I count myself in that group.

I know the RAF wanted people to be 'Officer first' but I'll be honest and say I joined for the flying and I think most of the aircrew of my era would have been the same.

So anything I did read in QR's I quickly forgot about because I didn't feel it was relevant to my job. I left it to the blunties to remind everyone that they were entitled to ride a horse into work, etc.

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.

Mate, just to be clear, you think a 30k fraud should be dealt with "a word in the ear"?

Also the guy was a wing commander, surely the higher up you progress the higher standard one should be held to?

[cheekychimp]

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.
Everyone in the RAF is involved in delivering air power. Most of the pilots I know are normal down to earth people, without a superiority complex, but it's elitist attitudes that are causing headlines now "I'm Red 6, the rules don't apply to me"

[vascodegama]

I'm sure I read parts of it when I was at Cranwell. QR's often felt like the bible to me. Lots of people quoted from it but very few had read it cover to cover. I count myself in that group.

I know the RAF wanted people to be 'Officer first' but I'll be honest and say I joined for the flying and I think most of the aircrew of my era would have been the same.

So anything I did read in QR's I quickly forgot about because I didn't feel it was relevant to my job. I left it to the blunties to remind everyone that they were entitled to ride a horse into work, etc.

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.
I always tried to keep up to date -that way when blunties lied you could put them right. The difficulty in the early days was getting hold of the rules-the one thing JPA did do was make it all transparent.

[snapper41]

I'm sure I read parts of it when I was at Cranwell. QR's often felt like the bible to me. Lots of people quoted from it but very few had read it cover to cover. I count myself in that group.

I know the RAF wanted people to be 'Officer first' but I'll be honest and say I joined for the flying and I think most of the aircrew of my era would have been the same.

So anything I did read in QR's I quickly forgot about because I didn't feel it was relevant to my job. I left it to the blunties to remind everyone that they were entitled to ride a horse into work, etc.

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.

You sound an absolute pleasure to have served with 🙄

[NutLoose]

The daily mail comments want blood and are an interesting read ~ https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13142031/raf-wing-commander-pentagon-rent-allowance-vegas.html#comments-13142031

As they say, "the dildo of consequences rarely arrives lubed" and I suspect the outcome will be once again making the news.

We all make mistakes, the majority of the time we get away with it, lessons are learned and I hope his transition to civilian life is smooth and painless.

I somehow doubt it, I cannot see any Airline touching him having been convicted of Fraud.

[beardy]

I somehow doubt it, I cannot see any Airline touching him having been convicted of Fraud.
Having worked in a UK airline with someone who left after a CM for fraud I can see it. Unless someone has dismantled the old boy's network.

[anson harris]

I honestly can't figure out if you're joking or not.

I'm sure I read parts of it when I was at Cranwell. QR's often felt like the bible to me. Lots of people quoted from it but very few had read it cover to cover. I count myself in that group.

I know the RAF wanted people to be 'Officer first' but I'll be honest and say I joined for the flying and I think most of the aircrew of my era would have been the same.

So anything I did read in QR's I quickly forgot about because I didn't feel it was relevant to my job. I left it to the blunties to remind everyone that they were entitled to ride a horse into work, etc.

in fact, in most of my experience the people that care about that stuff only have time to care about it because the were not actually involves in delivering air power. Maybe that is you, I don't know.

[Red Line Entry]

My regular Service spans from the 80s to the 20s and the attitude displayed by WhoNeedsANav is one that I remember all too clearly from the early days of my time. The attitude of hiding things under the carpet, breaking the rules and sorting things out ‘unofficially’ with a chat (or a percussive interview behind the hangar) was prevalent across the Service. Bullying, often disguised as banter, was rife and I could name several VSOs whose behaviour was little more than abuse (in at least one case, sexual).

The RAF today is a million light years from the RAF I joined and while I sometimes get nostalgic for long-closed bases or aircraft types, for Friday happy-hours, sports afternoons or flaming pianos, there is no doubt that the Service of today is a fairer, more open, tolerant and frankly, nicer place to live and work than it was 30+ years ago. And, without doubt, it is also populated with people who are every bit as dedicated, professional and brave as have ever worn our monarch’s uniform.

[vascodegama]

RLE
+1
Our times overlapped a fair bit yr analysis of the "good old days " is spot on. What really does get to me is the lack of consistency in application of the rules -I have been out a while so cant comment with authority but recent events suggest to me that there is still work to be done.

[mahogany bob]

Accounting/admin regs were sometimes difficult to understand and could lead to trouble/misunderstanding!

eg1 handing in my impress to accounts following a round the world trip tried to hand in a load of loose change in a variety of currencies ( quite a lot of money ) to be told by the clerk - we don’t take coins you keep it !
tempting but I just left it on the desk.

eg 2 playing w/e sport in London was told that because overnight accommodation allce was not allowed you could claim for mileage for 2 journeys - the second ( not actually made ) being ‘hypothetical’
never felt comfortable submitting these claims so checked and was told that it was ok.

Also being aircrew - claims were always submitted ‘in a rush ‘ so genuine mistakes could be made- tended to take ‘crew room /historical advice ‘ rather than studying the small print.

not the case in this instance but Just making a point!

PS rumour at the time was that the Navy always worked hard to make sure that you received all eligible allowances whereas the RAF bust a gut making sure that you didn’t!

[kghjfg]

Isn’t the point that he denied he’d bought the house, and his colleague remembered that he had.

That was probably the opportunity for the “quiet word”, the quiet word was rebuffed.

I know a bent copper who was kicked out of the Met for fraud. He also rebuffed the invitation for a quiet word with a denial, being a grade one asshat he went a little further with “I didn’t do it, and you can’t prove I did”.

This was about 15 years ago, if it had happened now, he’d he inside I’m pretty sure. He was just kicked out by a tribunal.

It appears the reason the other chap went “private detective” was because the accused rebuffed and denied instead of accepting a quiet word.

[WhoNeedsANav]

My regular Service spans from the 80s to the 20s and the attitude displayed by WhoNeedsANav is one that I remember all too clearly from the early days of my time. The attitude of hiding things under the carpet, breaking the rules and sorting things out ‘unofficially’ with a chat (or a percussive interview behind the hangar) was prevalent across the Service. Bullying, often disguised as banter, was rife and I could name several VSOs whose behaviour was little more than abuse (in at least one case, sexual).

The RAF today is a million light years from the RAF I joined and while I sometimes get nostalgic for long-closed bases or aircraft types, for Friday happy-hours, sports afternoons or flaming pianos, there is no doubt that the Service of today is a fairer, more open, tolerant and frankly, nicer place to live and work than it was 30+ years ago. And, without doubt, it is also populated with people who are every bit as dedicated, professional and brave as have ever worn our monarch’s uniform.

I would say that when I was serving people were queuing out the door to join the RAF and the only kind of manning issues I experienced was rather unpleasant compulsory redundancies.

These days it's seems recruitment and retention is a major cause for concern and I do wonder why.

People say what they think others want to hear, but they will do what is in their best interests. No doubt there are lots of people walking the corridors of the ever dwindling number of bases the RAF still have, repeating this dogma that the air force is a much better place but quietly plotting their exit strategy.

But then who can really blame them, certainly not me. I just don't believe you when you say the RAF is a better place. If it was then people wouldn't be leaving. And if it was more tolerant then they have a funny way of showing it by making it clear they don't want white male applicants. That's is open and blatant racism, so much so that even a VSO resigned over it, showing that there are still some people with integrity (but unfortunately in this case leaving).
​

[charliegolf]

Of all the boring, 'adminy' lectures I had during recruitment training in '79, really only one thing sticks out...

"Steal public money- mind yer fingers!"

We were only enlisted sh1ts, but they guy doing the talking, didn't say it was 'only advice' for officers.

CG

[WhoNeedsANav]

Everyone in the RAF is involved in delivering air power.

This is the kind of nonsense that was being preached when I left. Everyone in the RAF is involved in air power, but not everyone is involved in delivering it. There is a significant difference.

[cheekychimp]

This is the kind of nonsense that was being preached when I left. Everyone in the RAF is involved in air power, but not everyone is involved in delivering it. There is a significant difference.
It's only nonsense to those who see themselves as some sort of sky gods. Of course everyone is involved in delivering air power, if the jet isn't fuelled the bomb isn't delivered, if the pilot isn't fuelled the bomb isn't delivered etc etc. You just don't like people having a different view to yourself. I've be in the RAF 37 years this year, apart from a few TACOS that were quite good, the RAF is a much better place to work in and is just as professional as it ever was. I was a FAC/JTAC for quite a while, heavily involved in the bangy bit of air power delivery, before you accuse me of knowing nothing.

[WhoNeedsANav]

It's only nonsense to those who see themselves as some sort of sky gods. Of course everyone is involved in delivering air power, if the jet isn't fuelled the bomb isn't delivered, if the pilot isn't fuelled the bomb isn't delivered etc etc. You just don't like people having a different view to yourself. I've be in the RAF 37 years this year, apart from a few TACOS that were quite good, the RAF is a much better place to work in and is just as professional as it ever was. I was a FAC/JTAC for quite a while, heavily involved in the bangy bit of air power delivery, before you accuse me of knowing nothing.

If its such a better place to work in then please explain to me why nobody wants to work there anymore.

[cheekychimp]

If its such a better place to work in then please explain to me why nobody wants to work there anymore.
No, I really can't be bothered.

[BANANASBANANAS]

This is the kind of nonsense that was being preached when I left. Everyone in the RAF is involved in air power, but not everyone is involved in delivering it. There is a significant difference.

I did a JP5A refresher course at Linton in the early 80's. In SHQ was a huge, hand painted sign (but done extremely well) which simply stated:

'The role of the RAF is to fly aeroplanes. The role of those of us in the RAF who do not fly is to support those who do!'

[BEagle]

50 years ago when I won my 'Wings', the RAF had some 78 squadrons operating some 35 different aircraft types. Even then the old timers bemoaned the cutbacks they'd seen in 1957....

There were 7 flying training stations including RAFC Cranwell and some 12 OCUs as well... Plus a considerable number of UAS, AEF, test and development units etc.

Sorry, but although today's aircraft are vastly more capable, I can't really accept that such a small RAF is in any way a 'better' place than it was 50 years ago.

[Red Line Entry]

It isn’t surprising that those who served, and left, years ago have difficulty in accepting comparisons with today’s RAF that they think paints their time (and therefore their contribution) as in some way inferior to that of today. That was absolutely not what I was attempting to say, so I apologise. I was also not trying to start a debate about mass versus technology or play some top trumps game of pitching yesterday’s capability against that of today.

However, what I do know for certain, because I have lived them both, is that the CULTURE of today is one that far more positive, supportive, inclusive and therefore, more effective in supporting output than yesterday’s. I too remember those signs about ‘Those who do not fly exist to support (but here you were meant to read ‘serve’) those who do’. I’m pretty confident that you will find no such sign anywhere in the RAF of today. To many of a certain vintage, this is an anathema. To me, it’s symbolic of a Service that has a far stronger team ethos as a whole, and therefore is far better at generating the full range of air power required to defeat our enemies. And if you look at the RAF’s operational record of the past, say 15 years, you will see a record of performance that is simply outstanding.

Is today’s RAF perfect? Of course not, not by a long way. But if the only thing you see is newspaper reporting of occasional missteps (white male recruiting or the Reds saga - arguably the one sqn that retained some of the 80s mentality) or simply use the data point that retention is harder than it was 30 years ago then you are not making a realistic comparison. There were plenty of public scandals from the 80s and 90s and I know of quite a few others that were never made public due to the prevalent culture of covering up, so please don’t pretend otherwise. And leave it to MAGA Republicans to claim that woke culture is destroying society.

If you don’t or can’t accept what I say, then fine. Societies, organisations and air forces do not change because their members change their minds, they change because the older generation is replaced by younger individuals who have different views, experiences and desires. I saw the RAF change hugely over 35+ years and I know it will continue to change now I’ve left. Whether I think that change will be good or bad is, to the RAF, utterly irrelevant.

[cheekychimp]

50 years ago when I won my 'Wings', the RAF had some 78 squadrons operating some 35 different aircraft types. Even then the old timers bemoaned the cutbacks they'd seen in 1957....

There were 7 flying training stations including RAFC Cranwell and some 12 OCUs as well... Plus a considerable number of UAS, AEF, test and development units etc.

Sorry, but although today's aircraft are vastly more capable, I can't really accept that such a small RAF is in any way a 'better' place than it was 50 years ago.
I didn't say it's in a better place, I said it's a better place to work in, there is a difference. Operationally we obviously can't compete with the RAF of the 80s, but for individuals it's far better than then. But i don't know why I'm bothering to respond as the 'in my day' crowd aren't interested in the modern RAF as it's just full of PC weakness, in their opinion.

[Toadstool]

I didn't say it's in a better place, I said it's a better place to work in, there is a difference. Operationally we obviously can't compete with the RAF of the 80s, but for individuals it's far better than then. But i don't know why I'm bothering to respond as the 'in my day' crowd aren't interested in the modern RAF as it's just full of PC weakness, in their opinion.

As someone who joined in the 80s and is still in, I can confirm that it’s definitely a better place to work in. Since 2001, never been so busy operationally. No need for Opevals or Tacevals although ACE may see a resurrection of these. Back to thread, I was told from day one, don’t steal. Shame that doesn’t permeate through all ranks.

[Jobza Guddun]

As someone who joined in the 80s and is still in, I can confirm that it’s definitely a better place to work in. Since 2001, never been so busy operationally. No need for Opevals or Tacevals although ACE may see a resurrection of these. Back to thread, I was told from day one, don’t steal. Shame that doesn’t permeate through all ranks.

Same here and seconded. No argument with the retirees about the reduction in mass and arguably capability, the state of infra etc but attitudes and culture have shifted positively, it's much more of a meritocracy now.

On topic, a former colleague was CM'd, reduced to the ranks and discharged for "borrowing" from a fund (although they paid it back in) to the tune of several hundreds of pounds. I know what sanction I'm looking for here following the theft of tens of thousands. A quiet word? No way. What else can't they be trusted with?

I'd take integrity over talent any day,- at least I know more about what I'm getting.

[BEagle]

I can accept the view that the RAF of today is probably a better organisation within which to work than it was many years ago when bullying and vicitmisation was prevalent.

If that's actually true, then fine.

But, for example, when I see the change of emphasis at UAS level, with much less emphasis on flying training than hitherto, it doesn't surprise me that recruiting is problematic.

Back to thread, fraudulent appropriation of public funds is deserving of little sympathy. If it was suspected, why didn't colleagues give him a gypsy's before it went as far as it did?

Anyone thinking of trying to pull a fast one with public funds should ask themselves "Is it worth risking my pension?".

[Asturias56]

Plus, of course, it makes ANY future employment problematic..................

[cynicalint]

Secrets and Public Funds. A Screw up on either and you soon find you have no friends! 'Twas ever thus....

[anson harris]

Have you heard of Capita? If not, I suggest a quick look through some back issues of Private Eye. They were brought in in 2012 by... guess which party... but haven't met a single target and despite the whole loony idea being designed to save money, it's cost the taxpayer more, with far worse performance than when we did it ourselves. As a result the armed forces are badly undermanned, which means everyone has to dig out a lot more to get the work done, which means people leave because they've had enough.

I just don't believe you when you say the RAF is a better place. If it was then people wouldn't be leaving.
​

[Jobza Guddun]

Have you heard of Capita?

Known as Crapita in many circles....:ugh:

[alfred_the_great]

There are two exacerbating factors:

there is no wiggle room in the medical standards capita apply, which means there’s lots of clarification from GPs etc about things that happened when entrants were 5

and

the near complete collapse of the GP system means letters regarding random conditions when people were 5 are at the very bottom of the pile (literally) and can take weeks to deal with.