Home

What's New

Pensions & Compensation

Service Records, Medals & Badges

Welfare, Support & Contact

Special Support Programmes

Armed Forces Memorial

Veterans Community

Raising Awareness

Veterans World

Veterans Advisory & Pensions
Committees (VA & PC)

ARMED FORCES COMPENSATION SCHEME REVIEW – Q&A

What was the purpose of the Review?
The terms of reference for the Review required Lord Boyce:

• to examine whether the fundamental principles of the Scheme remain valid;

• to evaluate how successfully the Scheme in its current form gives effect to these principles;

• having regard to fairness, feasibility, sustainability and ease of administration, to make recommendations on any modifications that are required to ensure that the Scheme is fit for purpose.

What did the Review look at?
The Review looked at a range of issues including:

• The fundamental principles underlying the compensation scheme
• The overall level of compensation, including for dependants
• What the compensation is for and its relationship with other state benefits
• Comparisons with other compensation in the UK and internationally
• Issues raised by the Court of Appeal judgment
• The circumstances of injury, illness or death
• The claims and adjudication process
• The burden and onus of proof
• The time limit on claims and the treatment of deterioration
• The compensation paid for mental illness
• The compensation paid to individuals with multiple injuries

Further issues that were raised during the course of the Review were:

• The Scheme, and any improvements from the Review, should be applicable to injuries/illness/death occurring before 6 April 2005.
• Hearing Loss is not properly catered for in the Scheme.
• Anomalies across the Scheme (not achieving the horizontal and vertical equity the Scheme should deliver).
• Payments to Eligible Partners.
• Treatment for Foreign and Commonwealth ex-Service personnel.
• Home to Duty Travel Definitions.
• Relationship with personal accident insurance (PAX).
• Relationship with common law claims.

Who was on the Independent Scrutiny Group?

• Major General Sir Evelyn Webb-Carter KCVO OBE DL (Controller of the Army Benevolent Fund, representing the Confederation of British Service and Ex-Service Organisations)
• Lt Col Jerome Church MBE (General Secretary of the British Limbless Ex-Service Men’s Association, representing the Confederation of British Service and Ex-Service Organisations)
• Chris Simpkins (Director General, the Royal British Legion)
• Colonel David Richmond (a serving member of the Armed Forces who suffered an AK47 bullet wound that shattered his femur in Afghanistan in June 2008 when Commanding Officer of 5SCOTS)
• Kim Richardson OBE (Chair of the Naval Families Federation, representing all Service Family Federations)
• Gill Grigg MBE (Chair of War Widows Association of Great Britain, representing all Widows Associations)
• Professor David Bonner (Professor of Law at the University of Leicester)
• Simon Levene (Barrister at 12 Kings Bench Walk Chambers)
• Professor Sir Anthony Newman Taylor CBE FMedsci (Deputy Principal of the Faculty of Medicine, Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine in Imperial College London, Consultant Physician at Royal Brompton Hospital), Dr David Snashall MSc, FRCP, FFOM, LLM (Senior Lecturer in Occupational Medicine, King's College London; Honorary Consultant & Clinical Director,Occupational Health Department, Guy's & St.Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust)
• Professor David Alexander MA (Hons) C.Psychol PhD FBPS FRSM (Hon) FRCPsych (Director of the Aberdeen Centre for Trauma Research and Professor of Mental Health in the Faculty of Health and Social Care, Robert Gordon University, Aberdeen)

Did you get other views?
A four week public engagement phase was announced when the Review’s TORs and the ISG membership was announced in October 2009. The Review team received more than 200 comments and suggestions from Service personnel and their families, veterans, interest groups and charitable organisations, current and former tribunal presidents, Parliamentarians, and the public. In addition, the Review team sought views from Cpl Duncan and Marine McWilliams who were involved in the Court of Appeal AFCS case last summer, held focus groups with each of the three Services, plus at the Defence Medical Rehabilitation Centre at Headley Court. All views put forward were fully considered by Lord Boyce and the ISG. On looking at mental health, we sought views from mental health experts across the UK to inform Lord Boyce and the ISG’s deliberations.

When will the changes take place?
We will make a start on implementing the changes as quickly as possible. We plan to make some changes in this summer, for example the increase in bereavement grants, the longer time limits, and others. The other changes will take some time to translate the high level recommendations in to detailed legislation and this is likely to take around 12 months.

What happens now?
We will improve communications of the Scheme immediately, as well as introduce some early legislative changes this summer. As well as that, we are putting in place an implementation plan detailing the actions we will undertaken to deliver the Review recommendations in full.

If the legislation will take some time to draw up, how can you guarantee that all the Review’s Recommendations will be delivered, given the forthcoming General Election?
This Government is committed to making all of these changes happen.

Should I claim now or wait until the changes are in place?
Those thinking of claiming should do so and will receive what they are entitled to now; the MOD will ensure that existing claimants will get what they are entitled to from the Review. So if you put in a claim now, it will be revisited next year when you may well be contacted about additional benefits resulting from the Review.

Why will it take so long to get extra money to claimants?
The high level recommendations need to be turned into detailed actions, which will then be taken forward in new legislation. We will enact the changes as quickly as possible, however, the changes will need to be fully considered and implemented properly; this is a complex process which takes time to complete.

What does the Review mean for Reservists?
Reservists will benefit from all the changes proposed, such as increased income streams for the more seriously injured.
Survivors of Reservists who are not members of the Reserve Forces Pension Scheme who die as a result of their service will now receive and enhanced bereavement grant. This change will also benefit existing deaths since the start of the scheme.

What does the Review mean for Widows/Widowers/Civil Partners/Eligible Partners?
This group will benefit from the increases to the GIP, which feed directly in to the calculation of the SGIP and Child Payments.  This change will also benefit existing deaths since the start of the scheme.
For future deaths, the top level of bereavement grant will be increased to £25,000.
For widows of Reservists – see Reservists question.

What if I’ve already claimed under the Scheme?
Your claim will be re-visited and if an additional amount is due to you as a result of the Review, you will be contacted.

If you can make retrospective changes to AFCS why can’t you help War Pensioners in the same way?
Lord Boyce and the IGS considered whether any improvements should be made available to those who were injured before the start of the Scheme on 6 April 2005. They recognised the difficulties of providing AFCS benefits before the start of the Scheme, and noted that other compensation arrangements exist for injuries before that date and did not recommend extending the provisions to before the start of the AFCS.

Why did you take their case to the Court of Appeal in July 2009?
As the Court agreed, this case was about gaining important clarity about how the Scheme should accommodate changes in prognosis while treatment is underway, and how the Scheme deals with illnesses.
The case was not about taking money away from the two individuals.
The Court of Appeal has remitted their cases to the First Tier Tribunal. We await that FTT hearing and decision in their cases.We are not prepared to comment on the detail of individual cases but can say that Cpl Duncan and Mne McWilliams will benefit from the Review as will other claimants (higher lump sums, and if in GIP territory, then higher GIPs will be paid).

What are you doing to improve communications?
Initially, we are communicating the outcome of the Review through the single Services. As part of the Review’s implementation, we will put a full communication plan in place to ensure the level of awareness of the Scheme is improved.

On Foreign & Commonwealth personnel – will  this change be available to personnel who have already been discharged?
As with the other changes in the Review, we will confer additional benefits on this group to give them a chance to request the MOD to exercise its discretion within 12 months of the changes coming in to force.

Who will sit on the new expert medical group? Will the specific injuries it is looking at (hearing loss, injuries to the genitalia etc) be made available to existing claimants?
The precise constitution of the group is being urgently drawn up. Its recommendations on the specific injuries covered in the Review will need to be available in time to make the changes in legislation proposed to implement the Review in around 12 months time. So these existing claimants/injuries will be exceptionally covered in this case.

Why does the Scheme not pay for care or housing costs?
It is the Nation’s commitment to the Armed Forces where wider responsibilities to those injured or made ill as a result of their service to the Nation picked up by the public sector as a whole. The Scheme provides financial compensation for pain and suffering in recognition of the sacrifice made on the Nation’s behalf, and for the most seriously injured, for loss of future earnings. The Scheme fits with other elements of the state’s provision – especially free care through the NHS.

This is just another MOD Review. Two were already done in 2007 and 2008. How can you be confident that no more Reviews are required?

This is not simply another MOD Review. The Review conducted under the independent Chairmanship of the former Chief of Defence Staff, Admiral the Lord Boyce, and supported by an independent scrutiny group (ISG) made up of independent professionals who have thoroughly examined every aspect of the Scheme.

Lord Boyce and the ISG unanimously concluded that the Scheme was fundamentally sound, but required significant improvement in a number of areas.  The Review’s recommendations are being implemented in full.  Lord Boyce and the ISG also judged that while future reviews of particular aspects of the Scheme cannot be ruled out, a more fundamental review would not be required.

What changes will not be backdated to the start of the Scheme? Why?
The principal level of Bereavement Grant will rise to £25,000. This change will be prospective as it takes account of pay and inflation since the rate was first set in 2005, so there is not a rationale for making it a backdated change. The ISG, including War Widows and Families representatives, agreed this approach.

How will MOD pay for the improvements in AFCS?
The costs will be met from within existing provision in the Defence Budget.

What will be cut to pay for this?
We do not intend to ‘cut’ anything to pay for this Review. The costs will be met from within existing provision in the Defence Budget.