Injured war veterans' care costs prompt new funding call

A War Disablement Pension is treated like an income and counts towards care costs

Ministers must provide more funding to protect injured war veterans from spending compensation on social care costs, local authority leaders say.

The Local Government Association (LGA) says an "unfair anomaly" means veterans are treated differently depending on when they were injured.

Compensation paid to those injured on or before 5 April 2005 is usually taken into account when councils do means tests to decide social care payments.

But those injured later are protected.

Social care in the UK is means tested, meaning people with money may have to pay some or all of the costs of their care.

Military personnel injured in service on or before 5 April 2005 receive the War Disablement Pension.

Money from this is taken into account in means tests - meaning veterans can be forced to use it to pay for care.

Those injured after this date receive money from the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme. This cannot be taken into account in the means tests.

Keith Clarke

Keith Clarke injured his spine falling through a hatch while fighting a fire on a Royal Navy submarine 15 years ago.

As his injury happened before the 2005 rule change, Norfolk County Council was allowed to take his compensation into account when assessing his means.

And last year it said he should pay £100 a week towards his care.

But Mr Clarke, who needs carers twice a day, successfully appealed and no longer has to use "most of his military compensation" to cover care costs.

The Royal British Legion estimates that about 4,000 people injured before the rule change could be paying extra due to the situation.

'Rightly deserve'

The LGA, which represents more than 370 councils in England and Wales, said the government should provide extra funding to "ensure all of our brave veterans are treated fairly".

LGA chairman Gary Porter said: "Some councils have looked at ways to subsidise the cost for veterans faced with having to hand over their weekly pension to fund care costs.

"However, pressures on council budgets and a social care funding gap growing at around £700m a year means this is something many are finding increasingly impossible to keep up."

"Additional funding is now needed so councils can provide the full, fair support and care that any of our service men and women who were injured whilst selflessly serving their country rightly deserve."

Matthew Seward, of the Royal British Legion, said the current situation was a "clear breach of the Armed Forces Covenant" - the agreement that sets out the UK's duty of care to military personnel.

The Legion's Insult to Injury campaign aims to ensure veterans' compensation is not "treated as normal income".

The government said it was "committed to working with local authorities to explain the needs of the armed forces and to help them tailor their support accordingly".

A spokesman added: "We encourage all local authorities to honour their Covenant commitments to ensure the armed forces community get the support they rightly deserve."