War hero could lose £25,000 compensation.
Discussion
A pearl of wisdom from the Wail.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263630/Wo...
I think it's
ridiculous that this brave Para is at the mercy of pen-pushing jobsworths.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1263630/Wo...
I think it's
ridiculous that this brave Para is at the mercy of pen-pushing jobsworths.Edited by Langweilig on Monday 5th April 20:25
I personally don't agree with the wars we're in at present, and I don't particularly admire soldiers. I appreciate they may believe they are fighting for my freedom, but I find the idea of killing someone because your superior has ordered you to a little morally reprehensible.
That's not what this is about though, I just wanted to clarify my own personal opinions before launching an attack at the insurance companies.
I mean, what the fk. The guy's been shot at by a helicopter, he can't fking walk, I didn't see it, but I don't suspect he skipped out onto the field with the cup in his hands now did he.
As he says, he paid the premiums, we can only hope that perhaps this little media outburst will convince the insurance companies that it's easier, and the right thing to just pay up.
I would also be critical of the Mail's style of Journalism though - whip up public outrage, play on the emotions with phrases like "His beloved Manchester United", even the caption under the picture of him ... "Brave: Paratrooper Dave Tatlock was waiting for the compensation money when he was picked to parade the trophy before the final" ... what does that Brave mean? Why is it there? Is he brave because he was picked to parade the trophy? Is he brave because he was unwittingly shot at? Truth be told, he's brave for going out there, but being shot by a friendly helicopter makes him no more brave than anyone else out there - he didn't chose to be shot at, and bravery implies the person has actively done something to be brave.
As well as all this, the insurance company did say that they were "looking at his case and were just waiting for medical notes.", so presumably this means that once they've looked over again, seen he is actually a qualifying claim, they will pay the claim.
I don't think it's terribly unreasonable that an insurance company should be looking out for their business interests, and I don't think the fact that an injured soldier is involved should play on our emotions any more than if it were anyone or anything else - be it a car insurance claim or otherwise.
I dunno, it just seems silly that the Mail are whipping up such a fuss over an insurance review. By all means kick off and whip up public outrage if they review his case and decide against paying him, but no-one has said he won't be paid yet.
More sensationalized nonsense from the Mail.
That's not what this is about though, I just wanted to clarify my own personal opinions before launching an attack at the insurance companies.
I mean, what the f
k. The guy's been shot at by a helicopter, he can't fking walk, I didn't see it, but I don't suspect he skipped out onto the field with the cup in his hands now did he.As he says, he paid the premiums, we can only hope that perhaps this little media outburst will convince the insurance companies that it's easier, and the right thing to just pay up.
I would also be critical of the Mail's style of Journalism though - whip up public outrage, play on the emotions with phrases like "His beloved Manchester United", even the caption under the picture of him ... "Brave: Paratrooper Dave Tatlock was waiting for the compensation money when he was picked to parade the trophy before the final" ... what does that Brave mean? Why is it there? Is he brave because he was picked to parade the trophy? Is he brave because he was unwittingly shot at? Truth be told, he's brave for going out there, but being shot by a friendly helicopter makes him no more brave than anyone else out there - he didn't chose to be shot at, and bravery implies the person has actively done something to be brave.
As well as all this, the insurance company did say that they were "looking at his case and were just waiting for medical notes.", so presumably this means that once they've looked over again, seen he is actually a qualifying claim, they will pay the claim.
I don't think it's terribly unreasonable that an insurance company should be looking out for their business interests, and I don't think the fact that an injured soldier is involved should play on our emotions any more than if it were anyone or anything else - be it a car insurance claim or otherwise.
I dunno, it just seems silly that the Mail are whipping up such a fuss over an insurance review. By all means kick off and whip up public outrage if they review his case and decide against paying him, but no-one has said he won't be paid yet.
More sensationalized nonsense from the Mail.
Dragoncaviar said:
I personally don't agree with the wars we're in at present, and I don't particularly admire soldiers. I appreciate they may believe they are fighting for my freedom, but I find the idea of killing someone because your superior has ordered you to a little morally reprehensible.
Think along the lines that, if this were not the case, you wouldn't be here, or you would be here, living on a diet of sauerkraut and sausage.mybrainhurts said:
Dragoncaviar said:
I personally don't agree with the wars we're in at present, and I don't particularly admire soldiers. I appreciate they may believe they are fighting for my freedom, but I find the idea of killing someone because your superior has ordered you to a little morally reprehensible.
Think along the lines that, if this were not the case, you wouldn't be here, or you would be here, living on a diet of sauerkraut and sausage.Don't get me wrong, I'm not looking to get into an argument/discussion over whether we should have armed forces, because quite frankly, that's an argument I'd lose in a second. I just don't think it's for me, and don't particularly admire people who commit state-sanctioned murder. That is ALL fighting in a war is.
Fittster said:
Dragoncaviar said:
As he says, he paid the premiums, we can only hope that perhaps this little media outburst will convince the insurance companies that it's easier, and the right thing to just pay up.
You don't think it's likely for insurers to withdraw from the market?I'm very much talking out of my comfort zone here. $0.02.
I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, 'We serve no erd-coats 'ere.'
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed and giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again, an' to myself sez I:
Oh, it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, go away':
But it's 'Thank you, Mister Atkins,' when the band begins to play -
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
Oh, it's 'Thank you, Mister Atkins,' when the band begins to play.
I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, wait outside';
But it's 'Special train for Atkins' when the trooper's on the tide -
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
Oh, it's 'Special train for Atkins' when the trooper's on the tide.
Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?'
But it's 'Thin red line of 'eroes' when the drums begin to roll -
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
Oh, it's 'Thin red line of 'eroes when the drums begin to roll.
We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that , an' 'Tommy, fall be'ind,'
But it's 'Please to walk in front, sir,' when there's trouble in the wind -
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
Oh, it's 'Please to walk in front, sir,' when there's trouble in the wind.
You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Chuck him out, the brute!'
But it's 'Saviour of 'is country' when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!
The publican 'e up an' sez, 'We serve no erd-coats 'ere.'
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed and giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again, an' to myself sez I:
Oh, it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, go away':
But it's 'Thank you, Mister Atkins,' when the band begins to play -
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
Oh, it's 'Thank you, Mister Atkins,' when the band begins to play.
I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, wait outside';
But it's 'Special train for Atkins' when the trooper's on the tide -
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
Oh, it's 'Special train for Atkins' when the trooper's on the tide.
Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?'
But it's 'Thin red line of 'eroes' when the drums begin to roll -
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
Oh, it's 'Thin red line of 'eroes when the drums begin to roll.
We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that , an' 'Tommy, fall be'ind,'
But it's 'Please to walk in front, sir,' when there's trouble in the wind -
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
Oh, it's 'Please to walk in front, sir,' when there's trouble in the wind.
You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' 'Chuck him out, the brute!'
But it's 'Saviour of 'is country' when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool - you bet that Tommy sees!
If he was going to get the money on the grounds that he couldn't walk, or that he couldn't walk without a stick, then it's hard to justify the payout.http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0...
NTDWM Taken from Abacus' website
PRESS RELEASE 5th April 2010
Private David Tatlock
Following several stories in the media relating to the position of Abacus Limited in an on
going Personal Accident Insurance claim by Private David Tatlock, Abacus would like to
set the record straight.
The stories emanate from an article published in the News Of The World on Sunday 4th
April 2010 written by Paul McNamara, which states that Abacus has stopped a payment of
£25,000 and that someone from Abacus called Headley Court, the Defence Medical
Rehabilitation Centre, to tell them that this was the case. Both assertions are untrue and
are a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
Private Tatlock has already received a payment in excess of £100,000 through his
Personal Accident Policy for the injuries he sustained and, because there appears to be a
worsening of the effects, the case remains open. Far from his claim being declined, a
request has been made by AXA (the underwriters of the policy) for an independent medical
assessment to establish whether a further payment is due.
This request was indeed made through Private Tatlock’s Social Worker based at Headley
Court, but by AXA, not Abacus.
Mr McNamara has placed overt emphasis on a misunderstanding of the situation by his
‘source’ within Headley Court, which could have been rectified and clarified if there had
been a willingness to be more thorough when checking the facts.
The desire to sensationalise this story has meant that Private Tatlock has been subjected
to additional and unnecessary stress. An obligation clearly rests with AXA and Abacus to
ensure that their customer receives what is due under the terms of a policy. It is
unfortunate that the act of trying to establish whether a further payment is due should lead
to such a wild misrepresentation.
A representative of Abacus made contact with Paul McNamara on Saturday 3rd April 2010
to explain the facts but Mr McNamara chose to submit his story with no further
independent checking of the facts offered. If he had done so the headlines would have
been markedly different.
In view of the negative effect on the reputation of a company held in high regard within the
military, Abacus Limited will be referring the case to the Press Complaints Commission.
Abacus Limited
Queen Isabelle House
Kingsclere Park
Kingsclere
Newbury
Berkshire
NTDWM Taken from Abacus' website
PRESS RELEASE 5th April 2010
Private David Tatlock
Following several stories in the media relating to the position of Abacus Limited in an on
going Personal Accident Insurance claim by Private David Tatlock, Abacus would like to
set the record straight.
The stories emanate from an article published in the News Of The World on Sunday 4th
April 2010 written by Paul McNamara, which states that Abacus has stopped a payment of
£25,000 and that someone from Abacus called Headley Court, the Defence Medical
Rehabilitation Centre, to tell them that this was the case. Both assertions are untrue and
are a gross misrepresentation of the facts.
Private Tatlock has already received a payment in excess of £100,000 through his
Personal Accident Policy for the injuries he sustained and, because there appears to be a
worsening of the effects, the case remains open. Far from his claim being declined, a
request has been made by AXA (the underwriters of the policy) for an independent medical
assessment to establish whether a further payment is due.
This request was indeed made through Private Tatlock’s Social Worker based at Headley
Court, but by AXA, not Abacus.
Mr McNamara has placed overt emphasis on a misunderstanding of the situation by his
‘source’ within Headley Court, which could have been rectified and clarified if there had
been a willingness to be more thorough when checking the facts.
The desire to sensationalise this story has meant that Private Tatlock has been subjected
to additional and unnecessary stress. An obligation clearly rests with AXA and Abacus to
ensure that their customer receives what is due under the terms of a policy. It is
unfortunate that the act of trying to establish whether a further payment is due should lead
to such a wild misrepresentation.
A representative of Abacus made contact with Paul McNamara on Saturday 3rd April 2010
to explain the facts but Mr McNamara chose to submit his story with no further
independent checking of the facts offered. If he had done so the headlines would have
been markedly different.
In view of the negative effect on the reputation of a company held in high regard within the
military, Abacus Limited will be referring the case to the Press Complaints Commission.
Abacus Limited
Queen Isabelle House
Kingsclere Park
Kingsclere
Newbury
Berkshire
mybrainhurts said:
Dragoncaviar said:
I personally don't agree with the wars we're in at present, and I don't particularly admire soldiers. I appreciate they may believe they are fighting for my freedom, but I find the idea of killing someone because your superior has ordered you to a little morally reprehensible.
Think along the lines that, if this were not the case, you wouldn't be here, or you would be here, living on a diet of sauerkraut and sausage.randlemarcus said:
SmoothRB said:
What is with all the mawkish sentimentalism to servicemen these days?
Hardly these days - do you not read your Kipling?Its called gratitude for the poor bloody infantry put in a terrible situation through no fault of their own.
I doubt many people feel genuine gratitude for the wars in Afghanistan or Iraq, they probably support the people serving there and think they are doing a 'good job' but don't think there's any link between their safety in the U.K. and what our forces are being employed to do.
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/gassing/topic.asp?h=0...
Dragoncaviar said:
mybrainhurts said:
Dragoncaviar said:
I personally don't agree with the wars we're in at present, and I don't particularly admire soldiers. I appreciate they may believe they are fighting for my freedom, but I find the idea of killing someone because your superior has ordered you to a little morally reprehensible.
Think along the lines that, if this were not the case, you wouldn't be here, or you would be here, living on a diet of sauerkraut and sausage.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff