The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme
| Author | Andrew Bano |
| Pages | 99-107 |
PART II
ARMED FORCES COMPENSATION
Chapter 12
The Armed Forces Compensation Scheme
12.1 In March 2001, the government published a consultation paper
proposing new schemes to replace both the War Pensions Scheme and the Armed Forces Pensions Scheme.
12.2 The March 2001 Joint Compensation Review recommended that the War Pensions Scheme and the attributable benefits of the Armed Forces Pensions Scheme should be merged into a single scheme providing lump sum payments for pain and suffering based on a tariff of awards, with further payments for loss of earnings, calculated as a lump sum but paid in instalments as a guaranteed income stream. The time limit for submitting claims would be cut to 3 years, and claimants would have to prove on the ‘balance of probabilities’ that their
Business Plan 1999–2000, Sixth Report of Session 1998–99, HC 377 (23 June 1999), paras 25–
27.
Compensation Arrangements, Third Report of Session 2001–02, HC 666 (1 May 2002).
Compensation Arrangements: Government Response, Fifth Special Report of Session 2001–02, HC 1115 (17 July 2002).
102 War Pensions and Armed Forces Compensation – Law and Practice
condition was due to service. The Review described the core principles which the government considered should be central to the new arrangements as follows:
Fairness. The arrangements should guarantee a fair deal for all those who are entitled to compensation, and should in particular give due recognition to the needs of those most seriously disabled.
Simplicity. The arrangements should be simpler to apply and to administer, and easier for claimants to understand, the aim being that decisions on claims should in most cases be taken within a few weeks of their submission.
Modernity. The arrangements should as far as possible meet the best modern standards for compensation schemes.
Security. Compensation should be fixed at realistic levels, and for those most seriously injured who may be unable to work again should provide lifetime financial support. Employability. Awards should not act as a disincentive to those who are able to work, but should support those who could not do so.
Human Rights and Fairness at Work. The arrangements should be consistent with the Government's commitment to human rights and to being a modern and fair employer. Affordability. The arrangements should be cost effective, affordable, and fair also to the taxpayer.
12.3 Following a further period of consultation with service charities, the government announced its final proposals on 15 September 2003. The Ministry of Defence summarised the key features of the new Scheme as follows:
(i) All Service personnel injured on or after introduction would be covered (even if an individual remained in the then...
To continue reading
Request your trial