Living In Accom Charges - single

ICATQ

I currently live in the Mess during the week and go home to my own property at weekends. I am single and pay for the accommodation, whereas married unaccompanied dont.... why the difference?

Its PAYD so thats not an issue.

Cheers

Alias_Omega

Hi,

Married unaccompanied have to pay for the upkeep of a house/mortgage/wife/kids/everything else.

ICATQ

You may have missed the bit about having my own property and mortgage, council tax, utility bills and other charges for being a home owner.

as a single person i am contributing to the upkeep of their kids too
as they get allowance from the state for them which i contribute to

my point remains - why the discrimination between married and single?

Andy_L

Because the military live in the 1950s as far as property ownership and family life are concerned

ICATQ

Andy, that applies to most things... still not helping !

Alias_Omega

The answer to the question is

JSP 754, Chapter 9, Section 1, Para 09.0107 (o).

If you think this is unfair, you could email the Sponsor on the first sheet of JSP 754. I am sure they would be happy to remove the allowance, in the next round of defence cuts.

tinkerbell28

I would imagine the answer is pretty obvious. As a serving employee, you go where work takes you, if you want to buy your own house knowing you'll be moved away, so be it. You sign up for that.

The families don't make that choice, they are forced by proxy, disturbing education, work, etc.

Plus it's MUCH cheaper for the MOD to encourage married unaccompanied or not into their own home.

They don't have to pay out the likes of CEA and heavily subsidise MQ's.

It's cheaper for them to give them a crappy block room as a "favour".

Alias_Omega

Tinkerbell,

Upon reading of the JSP quoted above, you will find that it is unfair against unmarried personnel who own a property and commute on the weekend. This topic has been discussed in many a crew-room over the years, but the rules have never changed.

It is probably understood that a married person has more outgoings than a single person, as they usually have to support a spouse/children.

Its not a lot each month, but it adds up..

ICATQ

The exception to pay for SLA enjoyed by certain PStats - not just married unaccompanied - is at odds with other allowances such as GYH and LSA etc which are basically the same. When I moved the disturbance allowance is the same whether you are married or not.

Married unaccompanied personnel can opt to move as can I - we both choose not to for different reasons. As for going where the work is it matters not whether we elected to be posted here or were posted.

As for maintaining a spouse, married people receive tax benefits and choose to be married and have children - which should be at their expense and not mine.

Its is due for review in Aug 2014. I am writing to the sponsor and i would urge others in the same position to do so too.

*pinkpanther*

Sorry could u explain this for me. Do you mean married unaccompanied pay nothing for accommodation? I only ask As we have been unaccompanied for a year now and hubby has always paid for accommodation and cilcot, Granted its next to nothing but would be interesting to know!

Thank you.

Andy_L

*pinkpanther* wrote: »

Sorry could u explain this for me. Do you mean married unaccompanied pay nothing for accommodation? I only ask As we have been unaccompanied for a year now and hubby has always paid for accommodation and cilcot, Granted its next to nothing but would be interesting to know!

Thank you.

It depends on personal circumstances & terms of the posting, he needs to dig out his posting letter & speak to his admin people