Please help.... Squaddies On the Streets after Serving Country!!!

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Gavin

You better not be suggest that people in the armed forces are retards that can't cope with any other job They aren't quibbling over more money,

To be fair if they're able bodied they're treated the same as you and I are by the local authority. They don't get negative points because they come from the forces.

If you've been in the army (without children*) for several years where's the money gone? Why weren't they saving for their live out of the army?

*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?

---------- Post added at 23:19 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------

Originally Posted by Taf

13 years RAF myself... our local Council gave me points towards a council house... but still had to wait a year for a pokey little hi-rise flat... and a further 14 years to get a house....

How is that different to any other able bodied person on the list?

I'm not being funny but why should being in the forces bump you up the list?

The system is out of line but not just for service men (AND WOMEN).

Originally Posted by Shaun

To be fair if they're able bodied they're treated the same as you and I are by the local authority. They don't get negative points because they come from the forces.

If you've been in the army (without children*) for several years where's the money gone? Why weren't they saving for their live out of the army?

*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?

How is that different to any other able bodied person on the list?

I'm not being funny but why should being in the forces bump you up the list?

The system is out of line but not just for service men (AND WOMEN).

Shaun, as posted previously, it's not about bumping up the list, it's about being resident in the area not counting if you are in the Forces - it is trying to make it equal.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I believe the point of the petition is for equity, not to introduce inequity - as the ARRSE link states
"Under legislation at present it states: 15.10 Under s.199(2) and (3), serving members of the armed forces, and other persons who normally live with them as part of their household, do not establish a local connection with a district by virtue of serving, or having served, there while in the forces.

I would like to say this about local connection points, if you do not have a local connection to the area that you are asking to live in, then you have no chance at all. However a civilian only has to live in an area for six months to get a local connection??."

[spike7451]

Originally Posted by Shaun

To be fair if they're able bodied they're treated the same as you and I are by the local authority. They don't get negative points because they come from the forces.

If you've been in the army (without children*) for several years where's the money gone? Why weren't they saving for their live out of the army?

*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?

---------- Post added at 23:19 ---------- Previous post was at 23:16 ----------



How is that different to any other able bodied person on the list?

I'm not being funny but why should being in the forces bump you up the list?

The system is out of line but not just for service men (AND WOMEN).

Firstly,when I joined the RAF,It was a career.I was intending to do 22 years & retire.If I was still serving,I'd be retiring next year.But it all changed when the Berlin wall fell.The military were top heavy & redundencies started.
But how many teenagers & men in their early twenties saved like mad for a house do you know.Maybe now they do but back then,being a singly,I saved for a car.
Anyway,Why should I buy a house in,say Stafford when I decide to get married & settle in Scotland or somewhere.If I did buy a house hat would I do with it?Rent it out?Thats ok if you live in the area & can keep a eye on things but what if you're down in Iraq ?
Secondly,I thought your comment;
*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?
Was a bit crass.Saying that only single men should go to war is wrong.
Thirdly,When you leave the forces,you're not treated the same by the lcal authorities when you leave the forces. I had to wait for seven years before I was even considered for a house yet one of the neighbours near me was released from prison for assault & was given a home straight away! What makes him special?And all the dole scroungers?The single mothers who get pregnant for a house? (I cite my nieghbours daughter for example.)
I come from this area,have family in this area yet get no help when I was made redundent.
The are injured servicemen invalided out of the services who have it worse than I or any other servicemen ever got.All we want is to be treated the same as our civilian counterparts.
Have a look at the links Hitback posted,you'll see what I mean.
Thanks again to all those who helped.Every signature helps.

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by spike7451

Firstly,when I joined the RAF,It was a career.I was intending to do 22 years & retire.If I was still serving,I'd be retiring next year.But it all changed when the Berlin wall fell.The military were top heavy & redundancies started.
But how many teenagers & men in their early twenties saved like mad for a house do you know.Maybe now they do but back then,being a singly,I saved for a car.

But that was your choice - don't get me wrong, I see your point about the system being unequal (to many groups of people) and it needs changing but I can't see how only campaigning for one group rather than a whole overhaul will get a system that works?

Anyway,Why should I buy a house in,say Stafford when I decide to get married & settle in Scotland or somewhere.If I did buy a house hat would I do with it?Rent it out? That's ok if you live in the area & can keep a eye on things but what if you're down in Iraq ?

Then you'd need a letting agent to take care of things. Even if you don't buy a house you can still save. I don't mean to comment on your specific circumstances as that's not really right. I'm not after picking your life choices apart. Even so, you must have known that when you left the army you'd need a house to live in.

Secondly,I thought your comment;
*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?
Was a bit crass.Saying that only single men should go to war is wrong.

This is my opinion - I think that if you have kids it's unfair on them and your partner to go to war (where you go to fight and die) and run the risk of coming back home in a coffin. It's just my opinion, nothing more.

Thirdly,When you leave the forces,you're not treated the same by the lcal authorities when you leave the forces. I had to wait for seven years before I was even considered for a house yet one of the neighbours near me was released from prison for assault & was given a home straight away! What makes him special?And all the dole scroungers?The single mothers who get pregnant for a house? (I cite my neighbours daughter for example.)

I have agreed with you - the system needs changing and equalizing but campaigning for just one section won't fix it.

I come from this area,have family in this area yet get no help when I was made redundant.

...and your right to be angry - we were when our house burnt down and the council took 6 months to find me my brother and my mum a house but that's life. Margaret Thatcher sold them all off and no ones built any more. Perhaps the campaign should be for more council houses full stop.

The are injured servicemen invalided out of the services who have it worse than I or any other servicemen ever got.All we want is to be treated the same as our civilian counterparts.
Have a look at the links Hitback posted,you'll see what I mean.
Thanks again to all those who helped.Every signature helps.

I did agree with you mate, the system need an overhaul.

[Hitback]

Shaun, the system of social housing is in disarray and there is a need for a shake-up by Ministers. This campaign is to address the issue of the Homelessness Legislation (local connection) as stated below for service personnel. My personal plight, which is still ongoing, has all come down to the wording of the homelessness legislation. In fact, the amendment made to the legislation on April 2006 by Yvette Cooper MP, was long over due. This amendment was to prevent Housing Associations from refusing to help service personnel who ended their contracts, and were deemed to be making themselves homeless.

I'm also working with another person, who is looking into the bigger picture of social housing for all groups. The ratio of property being built and handed over to social housing / RSLs is not covering the required needs of the public.

The Discrimination is that "A civilian only has to live in an area for 6 months in 1 year or 3 years in 5 to get a local connection". This is not given as an option to serving members of the armed forces. 15.10 Under 199(2) and (3) of the Homelessness Legislation. The Act 2002 Special Bulletin Appendix 4, Page 135 Para 8.20 to 8.24. Vulnerable Peoples Act will never work for service personnel, due to the above Act 15.10.

I know for a fact that 10% of social housing was handed over to the Imigration Office, FACT not FICTION.
If this wasn't fact, then those in government would have ripped it to pieces.

I had to give a synopsis on Travellers and Gypsies. They're given greater rights to Housing due to them being from a minority group, as stated by Brussels in the European Parliament. The point is, that itinerant people don't want housing, they want pitches for their lifestyle and mode of transport / living.

Prisoners who have been incarcerated for a long period of time and become cacooned in the prison system, will be given priority housing through the prison release system.

Why have 199(2) and (3) in the homelssness Legislation? What is it for, Why only for serving military personnel?

Would we allow any other group to be prevented the same rights?

In conclusion. Ministers understand there is a case for discrimination and that is why they have placed an EDM in the House of Commons. In the House of Lords, Lord Garden and others have asked why, Act 199(2) and (3) is in the Homelessness Legislation. This part of the act is disadvantageous to military personnel and their families. Her Majesty the Queen, who is of a greater position than most to be objective about issues. Has directed her Ministers to address the issue. The DCLG and the MoD also acknowledge this is an area that requires to be addressed.


Thank you for your support.

Regards
Hitback

[Vlad_Dracul]

Originally Posted by orangebird

I was living with my parents when they went to move abroad. The house we were in was tied to the job my dad was leaving, therefore I would be homeless. I applied to three different Housing Associations, and got nothing back from any of them apart from an acknowledgement from one. I'm not flaming, but why should servicemen get ahead of anyone else? I haven't signed your petition, but good luck to you all the same.

Phew,,i had to page forward quite a bit before i read a dissenting voice in the form of Orange Bird.

I would say that on the face of it,members or ex members of the armed forces are not discriminated againt. Nor should they be treated with positive discrimination. They join the waiting list just like anyone else. Sorry but its a tough old world.

[Hitback]

Why do some people feel threatend by service personnel asking to be treated the same as others. If this legislation said any other group in our country was not permitted to a local connection due to their employment. People would be asking why.

dooper786, this is not about service personnel getting better treatment, its about getting the same treatment as everyone else. We are asking for the removal of 15.10, Act 199(2) and (3) from the legislation.

[punky]

Originally Posted by Shaun

To be fair if they're able bodied they're treated the same as you and I are by the local authority. They don't get negative points because they come from the forces.

If you've been in the army (without children*) for several years where's the money gone? Why weren't they saving for their live out of the army?

*obviously if they have kids the the money will have gone to them, but in my eyes if you have a family you shouldn't be out there risking their lives surely?

As pointed out by Foreverwar, they do negative points for coming from the forces.

With regards to "where has the money gone?", amry personnel don't get free lodgings while they are posted. The money is automatically deducted out of their account. As pointed out, they aren't earning fortunes as it is.

With regards to "they have kids, they shouldn't be risking their lives", that comment applies to police and fire brigade as well, surely? Due to the amount of jobs, we don't have enough childless people to cover them, factoring in that no everyone can do a job where you put your life in danger for the sake of a stranger.

[spike7451]

Originally Posted by dooper786

Phew,,i had to page forward quite a bit before i read a dissenting voice in the form of Orange Bird.

I would say that on the face of it,members or ex members of the armed forces are not discriminated againt. Nor should they be treated with positive discrimination. They join the waiting list just like anyone else. Sorry but its a tough old world.

So moving back to my home town where all my family live & being told that I would have to wait minimum of seven years before I qualify for a Housing Executive house is'nt discrimination.Yet a recently released prisoner gets a house at the drop of a hat! (like the one living near me who was done for sexual assault!)
Between when I was given my reundency I had around two months to get things in order.And I had to move back from Germany at my own cost!

[dcclanuk]

Why doesnt some1 put this on digg/slashdot etc... i am sure u will get plenty of publicity and votes U DESERVE!

ps, i just view digg sometimes, i dnt know exactly how everything works


pps, i have ur first post on a big forum...hope it helps...

Originally Posted by dooper786

Phew,,i had to page forward quite a bit before i read a dissenting voice in the form of Orange Bird.

I would say that on the face of it,members or ex members of the armed forces are not discriminated againt. Nor should they be treated with positive discrimination. They join the waiting list just like anyone else. Sorry but its a tough old world.

dooper, whilst you were (phew) paging forward quite a bit, you must have missed my previous post (and the others by other posters) which pointed out it was about equality, not positive discrimination - they would love to join the waiting list on the same terms as everyone else, but they are not allowed to.

Originally Posted by foreverwar

I believe the point of the petition is for equity, not to introduce inequity - as the ARRSE link states
"Under legislation at present it states: 15.10 Under s.199(2) and (3), serving members of the armed forces, and other persons who normally live with them as part of their household, do not establish a local connection with a district by virtue of serving, or having served, there while in the forces.

I would like to say this about local connection points, if you do not have a local connection to the area that you are asking to live in, then you have no chance at all. However a civilian only has to live in an area for six months to get a local connection??."

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by Gavin

As pointed out by Foreverwar, they do negative points for coming from the forces.

With regards to "where has the money gone?", amry personnel don't get free lodgings while they are posted. The money is automatically deducted out of their account. As pointed out, they aren't earning fortunes as it is.

With regards to "they have kids, they shouldn't be risking their lives", that comment applies to police and fire brigade as well, surely? Due to the amount of jobs, we don't have enough childless people to cover them, factoring in that no everyone can do a job where you put your life in danger for the sake of a stranger.[/QUOTE]


Ultimately my point was that I feel the whole system needs an overhaul not just a small section of it.

As for the money - I don't earn a lot (less than one of my brothers mates who comes home from the army some weekends and spends opening till closing getting lathered) but still manage to save a little and put a roof over my head.

I'm not saying it's not something that needs considering I'm just saying it
With regards to "they have kids, they shouldn't be risking their lives", that comment applies to police and fire brigade as well, surely? Due to the amount of jobs, we don't have enough childless people to cover them, factoring in that no everyone can do a job where you put your life in danger for the sake of a stranger.

Punky, I'd guess the risk assessment of PC Plod working a 12 hours shift would be a lot better than Corporal Joe working 24 hours a day in Iraq or Afghanistan. Again it's what I think I'd can't see what the problem is with me thinking a kid growing up without a father is not great.

[Hitback]

Shaun, If we all thought your way, we would all be speaking German and have those nasty camps as well. The fact is we all take risks in life, some more than others. I'm proud to say I served my country and proud to be apart of that band of brothers. The covenant between Her Majestys' Armed Forces and her people has been corroded with time. We all require to build it back up.

Hitback

[Vlad_Dracul]

Originally Posted by Hitback

Why do some people feel threatend by service personnel asking to be treated the same as others. If this legislation said any other group in our country was not permitted to a local connection due to their employment. People would be asking why.

dooper786, this is not about service personnel getting better treatment, its about getting the same treatment as everyone else. We are asking for the removal of 15.10, Act 199(2) and (3) from the legislation.

Yes agreed, i may have been guilty of not reading the whole story before posting. There must be other people in similar situations who are not service personnel eg people who's normal employment takes them out of the country for lengthy periods of time?

Originally Posted by dooper786

Yes agreed, i may have been guilty of not reading the whole story before posting. There must be other people in similar situations who are not service personnel eg people who's normal employment takes them out of the country for lengthy periods of time?

these are people who are based in the area before demob - the time spent in the area doesn't count if you are service personnel.