Land 'unfit for heroes' row as desperate ex-servicemen are refused allowances

Desperate ex-servicemen are being refused living allowances and war pensions because doctors assessing them do not have the training or expertise to properly diagnose their injuries.

Charities and organisations have complained that the benefits system is too confusing and many soldiers give up trying to fight the system.

Last year nearly two thirds of all appeals made by veterans against the amount they are paid in war pensions were successful.

One ex-serviceman who was badly injured in Iraq said a doctor told him he was the first soldier with war injuries that she had ever assessed, before she rejected the application for his wife's carer's allowance.

The doctor also classed former L/Cpl Adam Douglas at only 30 per cent disabled, which was changed to 70 per cent after an independent doctor re-assessed him when he appealed.

Mr Douglas said: "I had two spinal injuries, a badly damaged bladder and bowel, could only walk with the help of two sticks, and cannot walk up stairs. I had to wear incontinence products and had scars over my body, but I was told I did not qualify for benefits because I wasn't disabled enough.

"It makes you sick to think that I had fought for this country and when I turn to the Government to support me this is the best they can do."

Mr Douglas, 42, set up the Forgotten Heroes charity last year to help support injured soldiers and their families who are being failed by the system.

He added: "Since I set up the charity I have had 47 former armed services personnel from across the country come forward saying they are having similar problems."

The Tory MP for Newark and Retford, Patrick Mercer, a former Army commanding officer, said changes in the system were essential.

He said: "I am well aware of ex-soldiers complaining about the doctors who assess them.

"What use is a former gynaecologist assessing an injured soldier for benefits who has shrapnel wounds and splinters?

"Nothing can be too good for our boys. We need to have specialists giving assessments and a root-and-branch examination of how our armed forces are dealt with, with specialist units and assessors."

He added: "Despite the current cuts in all areas of government we simply must make resources available."

Soldiers are currently assessed alongside civilians by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to see if they qualify for benefits.

The doctors who make the assessments are employed by Atos, an IT specialist company that holds the current 80m-a- year contract with the Government.

A form must be filled out by the claimant, or "customer", but no medical notes from GPs or other doctors are permitted.

For war pensions a separate department, the Service Personnel and Veterans Agency (SPVA), operated by the Ministry of Defence, is responsible and bases its payouts on the level of disability assessed by the same doctors used by the DWP.

Mr Douglas said: "How are laymen, like myself, expected to accurately fill out a medical assessment form when we're not doctors?"

Across the UK there were 4,900 appeals against benefits assessments last year, with 30 per cent of appeals successful for the claimant. The DWP does not have a breakdown of the figures for servicemen or women.

The SPVA has seen 1,145 appeals since last April, 64 per cent being successful.

Campaigner Diane Dernie, whose son Ben Parkinson was one of the most severely injured servicemen to survive in Afghanistan, wants greater levels of compensation for injured servicemen. She said: "They can't

possibly have any experience in how to deal with the physical or psychological injuries experienced by soldiers?" she said.

"Some of these injuries are classed as minor but to these soldiers they are life-changing. The trauma and effect on the bodies can't be measured in a two-hour consultation.

"The service they get is grudging to say the very least."

The regional welfare officer for charity Combat Stress, Chris Ryan, said more was needed to give ex-soldiers proper advice on how to claim for benefits.

The former officer, who served with the Royal Logistic Corps for 36 years, added: "Critically there is some ignorance among ex-servicemen about what they are entitled to, and because they are ill some will just give up on the system.

"There needs to be more compassion, listening and empathy from the Government and those who make the assessments, for ex servicemen because claiming benefits is sometimes the last resort for these men and women and if they had a choice they wouldn't do it at all."

Tory Shadow Defence Secretary Dr Liam Fox, a former GP, said: "We need to ensure that doctors who will be involved in this process have the appropriate expertise and training. These men and women are in a unique situation and government Departments must show sensitivity to that."

A DWP spokesman admitted cases were regularly granted on appeal but said this was because extra medical evidence was usually presented.

He added: "We're working hard to support former Servicemen and women. If former service personnel have criticisms about their medical examinations, we encourage them to use the appeals and complaints processes which are in place and help us to improve the service we provide."