Fraudulent Wg Cdr. Possibly.
Thread Starter
Fraudulent Wg Cdr.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...auded-MoD.html
Oh dear. He’s not going to get a lot of sympathy.
BV
Oh dear. He’s not going to get a lot of sympathy.
BV
Last edited by Bob Viking; 3rd Mar 2024 at 08:05.
Top Answer
3rd Mar 2024, 15:23
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.
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.
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
Thread Starter
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
The problem is, allegedly, flagrantly breaking the rules. And getting caught.
BV
The following users liked this post:
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,581
Received 439 Likes
on
232 Posts
Search and Rescue pilot filling a post at “The Home Of The Fighter Pilot”. Now THAT is flagrantly breaking the rules!
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.
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.
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 27th Feb 2024 at 15:00.
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....
The following users liked this post:
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,581
Received 439 Likes
on
232 Posts
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?
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?
Thread Starter
Shytorque
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
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
Last edited by Bob Viking; 27th Feb 2024 at 15:01.
The following 2 users liked this post by Bob Viking:
The following 2 users liked this post by ORAC:
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)
Last edited by Davef68; 27th Feb 2024 at 16:36. Reason: Added additional info
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,817
Received 142 Likes
on
65 Posts
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.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,581
Received 439 Likes
on
232 Posts
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.
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?
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?