Can we have your husband's salary back please?

[SET 18]

Well, I cannot actually believe this is entirely true, but if the MOD really did ask a recently bereaved Marine's wife to return his salary pro rata, shouldn't the instigator of this disgraceful act be summarily sacked?

Blair and Buffhoon said in the Commons today that the matter would be investigated and that, if it were true, that it would be quickly resolved.

Are we really run by incompetent people who actually thought that this decision was reasonable??

[Navy_Adversary]

NTL World news are reporting that the widow has to move out of her MOD owned house pretty quickly as well.
Geoff Hoon has said that he was disappointed with the MODs stance and the PM is also to receive a letter from the widow outlining the facts,

[Grey Area]

Mr Blair replied: "In relation to Mrs Seymour, I understand from the Secretary of State for Defence these facts are not correct.

"However I can assure him that if they were they would be wholly contrary to normal practices."

Of course those of us who have had the misfortune to have mates killed in service will know that Blair is either
a) lying
b) being lied to by the MOD
As that is exactly what happens and has occurred to military widows often in the past, despicable as it is.

[round&round]

I gather that this ladies husband tragically died sometime around the 20th of the month. Naturally he was piad for a full month, so someone with all the personable skills of Saddam himself, asked for the money back.

Personally, I feel deeply ashamed that I work for an organization that can treat people simply as entries on a balance sheet. It is a sad, sad day and what's saddest of all, is that I'm not even surprised!!

Please do remember, that the letter demanding the money back would have a little inscription at the bottom right saying "Investor in People".

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Bet the poor soul was taxed on it as well.

[FJJP]

It might help if we got the facts right - I have been involved in a number of cases over the past 30+ years where men were killed for one reason or another. First of all, the widow continues to receive the deceased's salary for 6 months after his death. Then, with regard to continuing to live in married quarters, the widow is given a set period (not sure of the exact time) before being given notice to quit. This notice to quit is important, because if the widow moves out on her own accord, she is deemed by the social services to have made herself voluntarily homeless and therefore not eligible for council housing and a raft of other benefits. So the notice to quit for many widows is a step in the chain to attain an advantage on housing lists. Furthermore, after the period of notice has expired, the widow is never pressed to vacate - indeed, she continues to live rent free for some time in the quarter until a council house becomes available (after the notice period expires, the MOD cannot collect rent for a variety of legal reasons, such as giving security of tenure to live in the property).

I have not read the news articles about this case, but it sounds as thought a) a newspaper reporter does not have his facts right and is shooting from the hip, or b) the widow has been badly advised by barrack-room lawyers, or c) some admin clerk without knowledge of the rules has opened his mouth and unecessarily stirred a hornets' nest.

I believe the situation is as above, but it would be good if a knowledgable Blunty out there would confirm.

[John (Gary) Cooper]

I felt sick watching this on the lunchtime news, what a bunch of insensitive BANKERS!

[fobotcso]

FJJP has this more or less right and the rest of you should be ashamed of yourselves for finding someting to rant about where there is none. A War Widow is very well cared for as far as is possible having lost her man.

C'mon Moderator PPRuNe, let us see you state the facts.

[SphereSpredda]

fobotsco - not sure how you think that a PPRuNe moderator could be in a position to "know the facts" that you demand he state? However, I am sure that they would be delighted to see a RAF bluntie "in the know" state these facts on their behalf. I did hear today on Radio 5 that this was a "major error" by "somebody on the base" who visited the wife in question shortly after "the event" and stated the things that she was - quite rightly - totally upset and distressed by. This same news item also stated that she would be allowed to stay in her married quarter for a "minimum of 6 months, and longer if necessary" and that no such letters of demand for repayment of salary would have been sent by the MOD.

I suspect that this whole shambles has been caused by an insensitive **** of a scribbly, probably civil servant, (sorry if that shows my prejudice) wrongly reading the "rules" and misinterpreting them and dashing off round to her house to show how "on top of the rules" he was.

Agreed - sack him - but don't dish the dirt to the system, which in my nearly 40 years of experience has always dealt really well with those in need under such circumstances.

[timzsta]

I am afraid the bean counting w&*$ers in the MoD do this kind of thing all to often. It does not compare in any way but I had a vaguely similar experience when I left the Royal Navy.

I had to give 12 months notice to leave, yes a year to sort my pay out, and went to my UPO six weeks before going on terminal to check up they had no lose ends. "No its all in hand Sir".

So imagine my surprise six weeks after becoming a civilian again when I get a letter from MoD Accounts saying I owe the £19 due to "receipt of belated information". I was livid - seven years service and they have the cheek to chase me up for £19, but being sensible I wrote the cheque. Well I had also just received the standard letter the 2nd Sea Lord sends to all Officers on leaving. So I sent a reply to him which went on the lines off "when I was an Officer of the Watch there were no excuses for having the ship late at an RV, regardless of what belated information I may be in receipt off". He agreed, and investigated the matter personally on my behalf. I will not post his words but lets suffice it didnt take a degree in astro-physics to work out he had given a number of people in MoD Accounts and the Supply Branch of the RN a big kick up the behind.

So my advice to the poor lady concerned is refuse to give the money back, take it to very top and get it properly sorted. And make sure that those responsible are held to account.

[Future Pundit]

I am not surprised.

My pay was not correct during any month when I was serving. Why do we expect anything different when we die?

[swinging monkey]

FJJP,

Whilst I agree with you in the main, I regret that you are not completely correct old boy.
Wives of those killed DO NOT receive their loved ones' salary for 6 months - FACT. Nor do they live in the quarter rent free. Take a good look at QRs and the relevant APs and you will see what I mean.
Indeed, just as an aside, a very good friend of mine who was shot down in GW1, was taken POW. His wife lost 'his income' immediately he was posted MIA, and had to fight 'tooth & nail' to get any money whatsoever out of the service. That was because 'the book' says so!

FOBOTSCO,
I'm not too sure what your point is - FJJP got it more or less wrong The fact is, there is an issue here that needs to be highlighted and 'ranted' about, and it is a very big one. What on earth makes you think that War Widows are treated well? They are not treated well at all, indeed, I would go so far as to say they are treated disgracefully, as this poor lady has found to her cost.

Nobody at the MOD made a mistake, nor did they misinterpret what is written in the books. These are the rules regretably, and until they are changed more and more instances like this will keep occuring, causing further unneccesary suffering to those who are already suffering badly.

John (Gary)
You have hit the nail on the head, they are utter 'Barclays'

Lets hope and pray that the powers that be in the MOD take a long look at this problem, and take steps to ensure that cases such as Mrs Seymour, never happen again. As round&round clearly states, the bit of paper will have had 'Investors in People' clearly emblazoned on it. IIP.... I'm surprised these people can even spell it, let alone understand it - they are beyond belief.

RIP all you brave warriors. You are not with us to share in the glory, peace and freedom that your sacrifice has given to the world and the people of Iraq. We that are left will ensure that your loved ones, as well as yourselves, are NOT forgotten.

The Swinging Monkey
'Caruthers, raise a glass with me to those who are not coming home'

[pulse1]

there is an issue here that needs to be highlighted and 'ranted' about, and it is a very big one

Over the last few years there has been a growing number of issues involving the MoD which need ranting about. All of them involve the arrogant an unworthy attitude of the MoD to serving personnel and their families.

I have a growing anger about this which has led me to campaign on some of them, at least by pestering MP's. Now, I have a son in the Navy I have even more interest in trying to sort them out.

If Swinging Monkey is correct, this is absolutely disgraceful and is an anchronism which must be put right. Surely a serving soldier is serving even as a POW, and possibly even MIA, and their dependants should be paid and housed.

I feel a MP letter coming on so if some facts on QR could be quoted I would find that helpful.

[John (Gary) Cooper]

I am sure some of you will recall that when a merchant ship in WW2 was torpedoed etc, the merchantman's pay ceased immediately he hit the water, not a lot changes does it..................

[Arkroyal]

timzsta,

I'm amazed that you paid the idiots. When I left, I was sent a bill a couple of months later for £176.42 for a C126 I had signed for the loss of my cold weather flying jacket and a couple of T shirts. Christmas Leave had meant it had not been processed in time for my final pay.

They got a damned good ignoring.........and the letter is framed in my downstairs bog alongside my commission.

If the facts of this case are as stated in the press, then it is a disgrace, and needs sorting out by president Tone himself.

I find it a little suspicious that there is only one instance from the number so unfortunately killed in this conflict.

[ORAC]

PA - "Hoon apologises to widow over blunder"

Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon has delivered a personal apology to a Gulf war widow after his department told her that she would lose her forces house and have to repay part of her dead husband's salary. Mr Hoon had a private meeting with Lianne Seymour at the Ministry of Defence in London. Afterwards officials would say little about their discussions, but did confirm that Mr Hoon offered Mrs Seymour a personal apology for the blunder.

[Pontius Navigator]

Nice one everyone.

First, yes it was the rules. Yes, the Welfare Officer blew it.

No, it wasn't the Civil Service. Pay has been contracted out to the British Subsidiary of a US Company, something like EDI I think.

No, she does not get the pay. Yes, she does have to pay it back.

Instead she gets exactly the same money back but as PENSION. Different department and not necessarily as quick. What should have happened, and I am not talking fact logic and reason, is that the pay people should have spoken to the pensions people. Good example of joined up government.

Regarding loss of pay when going MIA, this is a real throw back to WWII when we would have been in deep sh*t if we had continued to issue full pay to the 55,000 members of Bomber Command until the Germans confirmed they were KIA. Also quaint is the requirement that the detaining power takes responsibility for pay and allowances.

In the days of chivalry it might have worked as both sides would have similar numbers of prisoners.

In a modern conflict we are talking hand fulls. If we throw in all the FI KIA and all since we are still less than 500. We could afford to be really generous and pay a higher than standard widows pension for the KIA and KIAccidents in theatre.

Lets talk to the media and get the rules changed as we want them.

[Georgeablelovehowindia]

The 'Officious Nit' syndrome strikes again. On a totally prosaic note, my recently late father suffered a stroke and missed paying his 'sub' to the golf club of which he'd been a member for 25+ years. In spite of having full knowledge of dad's problem, they posted his name on the club noticeboard as in default: 'Rules are rules, old boy.' (Do you begin to wonder to see where these people are coming from?)

Still, this 'attention to detail' made 'The Empire' wonderful, I suppose ... 'Stiff upper lip' and all that.

[Pilgrim101]

Great to see the instinctive protection from so many contributors for one family who suffered loss and, when the emotions are still raw, are ****** over by an impersonal system.

Someone mentioned the "Investor In People" tag and I bet the department concerned has passed every ISO standard required in shuffling out the paperwork. However, It is so easy to forget there are real people at the end of such insensitive letters, at both ends unfortunately.

I also like the idea about lobbying the media for improved protection for families. Who does that and where do we start ?

[swinging monkey]

Pontius,

I'm with you old boy. I fully agree that we need to take this bull by its horns, and bring it out into public view, via any means possible, and show the British people how 'the system' treats its service families.
What do the rest of you think?
Having just left the service, I find I have loads of 'Spare' time on my hands, that I used to spend on secondary duties blah, so I'd be happy to take up the challenge and lobby my MP. Anyone else fancy joining me in campaining for a better deal for war widows/victims etc?
If so, send me a message and lets see if we can make some progress in ensuring that this sort of thing never, ever, happens again.

Georgeable.....how utterly dreadful, my heart goes out to you and your family. I only hope that you made a point of it in the local press or somewhere else public. (I myself may have been more inclined to have planted one on his chin! sorry)

Pilgrim
I am absolutely sure that the ar$eholes who are responsible for this, have been accredited with every lousy credit know to man!
It simply shows to the rest of us that the IIP logo, together with the wonderful ISO symbol are worth three eighths of $od all!

Let me know your thoughts chaps,
Kind regards
The Swinging Monkey
'Caruthers, get a pen & paper old boy, its time to write to our MP'

sorry about all the edits - a bit too much Grouse last night me thinks!