It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


British Armed Forces Housing

page: 1

log in


posted on Jul, 12 2016 @ 09:46 PM

Action needed now on service that has failed families for years

. . . the Ministry of Defence and contractor CarillionAmey are "badly letting down service families" by providing them with poor accommodation . . .

Steps must be taken to ensure future contractors are capable of delivering the agreed service at the agreed price . . .

The MoD seriously misjudged CarillionAmey’s capacity to deliver a service which CarillionAmey accepts it was not equipped to deliver. accomodation-report-published-16-17/
Can't get this link to work.

The issue of service housing and its maintenance is of huge importance and we have invested £660 million in service housing over the last six years.

It took the personal intervention of the defence secretary, Michael Fallon, for CarillionAmey to hire more staff and set out a plan to improve the quality of its subcontractors’ work. CarillionAmey told the MPs it was not yet making a profit from the contract, but anticipated it would do so in the future.

At least they won a safety award, presumably through never picking up a tool or climbing a ladder.

CarillionAmeyhas been successful in the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA) Occupational Health and Safety Awards 2016, winning the Silver award in the prestigious annual scheme.

Does anyone know what really happened here? Not enough money or too much fraud? I could easily believe it was mostly wastage and fraud with the experience of my local housing authority to go by.

In the Britain we're building there'll have to be a change in attitude towards housing scams.
edit on 12 7 2016 by Kester because: one link fixed

edit on 12 7 2016 by Kester because: (no reason given)

edit on 12 7 2016 by Kester because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:11 AM
The contractors have their work cut out for them. The homes normally need a lot of care when a tenant leaves. They are often vandalised by disgruntled servicemen when they exit.

I'm not really sure why that is, but they're usually really nice homes.

The ones I've seen are usually butchered before the subbies get in there.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:30 AM
Both Carillon and Amey were a mess when they contracted on the railway.
Far too many cheap pairs of hands hired on an ad hoc basis. The core workforce Was highly skilled but their competence was so watered down by cheap labour that eventually the contracts had to be withdrawn and the staff and facilities were taken back by Network Rail.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:41 AM
a reply to: Kester

S&F for bringing this up.

I suspect this type of fraud is actually big business with grants and corruption between the parties involved because the money is so huge and little checks to work standards goes on.

I dare say some of the people awarded by our 'Honours Lists' each year are representative of this practise this because my son works for one that got awarded in this last lot and his wages are a pittance unless he works all hours and does call-outs along-side his daily work schedule. Added to the low pay for his skilled craftsmen this guy is trying to cut down on what he pays by trimming bits off travelling times etc - obviously to give himself even more money so he can afford to hobnob with the tofs he is now mixing with. I have disagreed with a lot of the people who simply get these so-called honours because too few go to people who actually deserve commendation and those who actually are just doing their grant aided businesses and also have the old boy network behind them or get the right amount of propaganda into their films etc.
edit on 13-7-2016 by Shiloh7 because: forgot to congrat on topic

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 01:46 AM
a reply to: SlowNail

I suspect its like the council contract my son works on. Some are genuine complaints that just need fixing but a lot of his work is repairing damage done by tenants and ultimately boarding up where people have vandalised etc and eventually after many warnings and even attempts at charging them for the damage have been evicted.

Until we make tenants more responsible for the housing they get, its a sad fact that this will continue in most forms of social housing unless its shared ownership where damage isn't the landlords responsibility to repair. Amazing how the figures compare between these two types of tenants.

I do agree with Kestor though because some housing for our forces is damp and dire - not all of course but often it can be lower than the standards private landlords have to supply.

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 07:04 AM
a reply to: Kester

Check out their reviews...

posted on Jul, 13 2016 @ 09:23 AM
a reply to: Kester

The government should be directly employing the people involved with efforts pertaining to the housing of families with members in the armed services. I do not accept the necessity for a contracting firm to be involved. If the government wasted less money on bad contracts with private organisations, it would be able to afford to employ the best people to do this work, and only the best.

Getting sick of the private/public partnership ideal that capitalistic nonsense forces on our population. Let's have some nationalisation drives over the next fifty years, get this place back on track, eh?

top topics


log in