AIP mispayment

[unruly1986]

Has anyone got any solid proof yet that we have to pay this money back? Or has anyone been approached yet and been told the money will be taken from them?

No, likely to be confirmed tomorrow though. Briefings at 0900 - if it was good news we probably would've seen it on MOSS and they wouldn't have roped a Gp Capt into delivering the news.

 

[Barch]

Anybody heard owt yet?

 

[Downsizer]

Indeed, anyone got any gen? Especially for those of us in the diaspora....

 

[Martin Blank]

I've heard today letters are going out and those affected are getting called in by SO4 or 3 to get told.
Appeal is allowed x2 plus service complaint.
Din is being released at 17:00 or something.

rumours of costs vary among those affected to be £100's to £20,000

sad sad day recouping from the workforce, what is in effect a pittance when they don't recoup contractural cock ups and spend millions on practicing blowing stuff up

 

[Dicky_morris]

I'm on leave, got called into work, 3.5K, £356 pcm for 9 months.. Letter from Stn Cdr with copy of Annex 4.11 of Managing Public Money. LINK

I don't know what I am going to do, I think I need to put in a hardship claim because I have tenants in my gaff atm but if they leave things will start getting tight. I was pointed to this.. LINK which I believe we have a case but I don't know what I'm going to do atm.

 

[justintime129]

I'm on leave, got called into work, 3.5K, £356 pcm for 9 months.. Letter from Stn Cdr with copy of Annex 4.11 of Managing Public Money. LINK

I don't know what I am going to do, I think I need to put in a hardship claim because I have tenants in my gaff atm but if they leave things will start getting tight. I was pointed to this.. LINK which I believe we have a case but I don't know what I'm going to do atm.

An employee can also use the defence of common law promissory estoppel to prevent their employer from reclaiming overpaid wages. To qualify for protection under promissory estoppel the employee must satisfy 3 conditions:

That their employer made representations of fact that entitled them to believe that the sum if money overpaid was theirs;
and
That the employee has “changed their position” (by spending some or all of the money) and in doing so acted in good faith and without notice that their employer wished to recoup the overpayment; and

That the employee was not primarily at fault for the mistake

*that says it all.

 

[vim_fuego]

I think all of you need to individually or as groups seek legal advice...it sounds unfeasible that somethinbng that was sanctioned originally by a higher authority can now bw claimed back.

 

[Dicky_morris]

Good faith
A4.11.6 The decision on how far recovery of an overpayment should be pursued in a particular
case will be influenced by whether the recipient has acted in good or bad faith:
• where recipients of overpayments have acted in good faith, eg genuinely believing
that the payment was right, they may be able to use this as a defence (though
good faith alone is not a sufficient defence);
• where recipients of overpayments have acted in bad faith, recovery of the full
amount overpaid should always be sought.
A4.11.7 Recipients may be inferred to have acted in bad faith if they have wilfully suppressed
material facts or otherwise failed to give timely, accurate and complete information affecting the
amount payable. Other cases, eg those involving recipients’ carelessness, may require
judgement. And some cases may involve such obvious error, eg where an amount stated is very
different from that paid, that no recipient could reasonably claim to have acted in good faith.
A4.11.8 In forming a judgement about whether payments have been received in good faith, due
allowance should be made for:
• the complexity of some entitlements, eg to pay or benefits;
• how far the payment depended on changes in the recipient’s circumstances of
which he or she was obliged to tell the payer;
• the extent to which generic information was readily available to help recipients
understand what was likely to be due.

Thats from the document they referred to during the briefing.. My heads cooked right now.

 

[Fu Fu Valve]

I had this 10 years ago. Nothing i could do would stop them taking back the £3,000 thay said i wasn't entitled to even though it had been reviewd by a SNCO in PSF and signed off, the chief Clk then signed it off and finally PMA signed it off. 3 Years later i was told i should never have gotten the AIP as 'my trade' didn't qualify for it and they wanted their £3,000 back.
I tried to fight it and the answer was it's the tax payers money and we want it back.​

 

[4everAD]

Gutted for all those concerned this is an absolute cluster, Treasury obviously believe they can fight this in court, all i'll say is they have tried this sort of thing before (pregnent,gay etc) and don't always get away with it, good luck.

 

[Barch]

I think all of you need to individually or as groups seek legal advice...it sounds unfeasible that somethinbng that was sanctioned originally by a higher authority can now bw claimed back.

Totally agree.

As far as I can determine (I'm not an expert on these things) it shouldn't be classed as an overpayment because it was authorised ie Not a mistake but a change of rules / criteria.

It is like a civilian company contracting overtime at two times normal rates then changing it to 1.5 normal rate and claiming back the difference for previous payments, they would get laughed out of court.

 

[Trampoline]

I've just been handed a bill for around £500. They take 4 days off you each month. £320 for me , taken in April.
I used by NVQ Level 3 that i got during trade training, apparently this was wrong...

 

[justintime129]

Couple of questions.

How have they determined how much you should pay back each month.

Is it purely a raf fiasco.

 

[gray]

4 Days pay, per month.

 

[techie_tubby]

So have just been told I owe £5500. Oh wonderful, what great news to hear when you are saving for a wedding!! At 4 days pay a month works at £324 plus change a month being deducted from my wages so should be squared away in about 18 months!

5 mons after leaving my WO office I rang my Gilbert Blades to request a phone appt, all I said was I am in the RAF and AIP mis-payment and I have been added to a list! 4 hours after the brief went to people there is already a list! I hope this blows up massively in the Govts faces!

I just want to make clear that I bear no grudge to the RAF in anyway. The briefing we got from the Chf Clk, OC PMS, OC BSW and the chat we had with the NEM team earlier in the year I fully believe that the RAF have tried their hardest to get common sense to prevail. It appears that the treasury lawyers have made a case to claw back the money and it was stronger then the RAFs. The next couple of months will be interesting!

 

[Downsizer]

I have yet to hear anything. Who's passing out the info??

 

[Dicky_morris]

I got called in from leave by the Sqn Ldr to have a meeting.

 

[Dicky_morris]

God help us all

 

[SORRY CJ]

So what is the majority of education qualifications put fwd for the AIP's that has caused this problem?......Is it pronominally educational courses gained within the RAF training regime ie...Btech, City and Guild, the sort of stuff you get on your fitters course and the like or non trade related?

OR

Would a course such as NC/HNC Mechanical Engineering (in the case of a rigger and trade related) that was done on a day release and paid out of your own pocket fall into the same pile of poo?

Mr SCJ

 

[bowleg]

Interview with WO PSF giving me the bad news

Interview with WO PSF giving me the bad news

Just had my interview with WO PSF recovery action starting 30 Apr. Looking to contest got to prepare my defense. A few of us at my location are thinking of Joint Legal action but don't know if its worth it. Just need to drag it out till November then I'm out.