Here is a summary of the questions and answers raised at the Town Hall on Tuesday, 12 May 2026.
Questions and Answers
1. What should people do if they’ve been rejected for a DD payment, or haven’t yet applied because they resigned / feel they were constructively dismissed?
Answer:
Andrew advised them to submit something anyway, even in simple terms, and mention that they are aware of the judicial review. His view was: if in doubt, put it in, because missing deadlines could cause problems later. If the judicial review succeeds, those already in the process may be able to go back and have their case reconsidered.
2. If someone believes they left because of the ban, should they still apply even if they expect rejection?
Answer:
Yes. Andrew strongly agreed with the earlier advice that if someone believes they left because of the ban, they should make the application. He said that if they do not apply now, it will be much harder to unpick the case later if the judicial review changes the rules.
3. Is the route through Fighting With Pride / VCW / legal support still open?
Answer:
Yes. Veterans can still come through Fighting With Pride and be routed to support. Andrew said Irwin Mitchell is close to capacity, but they will continue to signpost veterans to other firms, pro bono help, or charities such as the Royal British Legion where needed.
4. What should people do if they do not have records or evidence?
Answer:
Andrew said they may have to tell their story in their own words and rely on a signed statement. He acknowledged that military records are often incomplete or delayed, which makes this difficult. He also said the lack of a hearing process is a weakness in the scheme, because everything depends on paperwork rather than being able to explain the case in person.
5. Should someone seek legal representation, or is it fine to submit their own appeal?
Answer:
Andrew said there is no right or wrong answer. Some people are comfortable representing themselves with support from Fighting With Pride or other organisations, while others prefer legal help. He explained that Irwin Mitchell’s funding arrangement means there would be a deduction from compensation if the case succeeds, but nothing is charged if the case fails. His advice was essentially: use legal representation if it adds value, but it is not always necessary.
6. If an appeal fails, at what point does the judicial review create another route?
Answer:
Andrew said that would only happen once the judicial review is concluded. If the judicial review succeeds, the MoD would likely have to revise the rules, and that could create an opportunity for rejected cases to be looked at again.
7. If someone has been rejected for DD and not yet appealed, do they need to go through the appeal in order to benefit later if the judicial review succeeds?
Answer:
Yes — that was Andrew’s advice. He said people should assume the current rules remain in force and follow the process to the end, including appealing if they can. The idea is to show they have exhausted every avenue under the current scheme.
8. If someone already knows their appeal probably won’t succeed under the present criteria, should they still submit it?
Answer:
Yes. Andrew said this was exactly the difficult position many people are in, but his advice was still to exhaust the process. That way, if the judicial review succeeds, they can say they tried every avenue under the current scheme and now want reconsideration under revised rules.
9. What role does “Vets UK” actually play in this process?
Answer:
Peter clarified that this was mainly a terminology issue. Andrew had referred loosely to “Vets UK”, but the scheme is actually administered by the FRSA scheme team inside the MoD, not by the part of the department commonly known as Vets UK.
10. Is there a fixed timeframe for the court deciding whether to take the judicial review forward?
Answer:
No fixed timeframe was given. Andrew said it is currently a wait and see situation. His colleague Angela is trying to push the case forward urgently, but he could not offer a definitive deadline.
11. If someone left because they were gay but has little evidence on file, should they try to find former colleagues or officers to corroborate their account?
Answer:
Yes. Andrew said that if there are “friendly forces” who can corroborate the story, then obtaining statements from them would be extremely helpful and worthwhile.
12. Is the difference between officers and NCOs still part of the legal challenge?
Answer:
Yes. Andrew said that this was one of the original issues raised with the MoD. The MoD initially appeared to acknowledge the point, but then pulled back from that position in later formal submissions. He said it remains an argument they intend to continue pressing.
13. Why are impact payment decisions not accompanied by proper reasons, and can that be challenged?
Answer:
Andrew agreed completely that this is a problem. He said that basic natural justice requires people to know why they were turned down, especially if they are expected to appeal. He described this as another weakness of the scheme and said it would be raised in the judicial review.
14. If someone bought themselves out / resigned and knows they probably won’t meet the DD criteria, should they still appeal if turned down?
Answer:
Yes. Andrew said they can and should continue to say they do not accept the reasoning, and they should indicate that they understand a judicial review is under way. Again, his overall advice was to remain in the process.
15. If an impact payment application is already in but still hasn’t been decided, could the person lose out when the December deadline comes?
Answer:
No. Ed and Andrew both reassured everyone that once an application is submitted, it is still live. The problem is delay, not expiry. She should not panic about the claim disappearing simply because the panels are slow.
16. If a panel has just met, how long does it usually take to hear the result?
Answer:
Ed said that based on what the community was seeing, it seems to be roughly about a week, perhaps around 7–10 days, though this was based on informal observation rather than an official rule.
17. If someone gets an impact result they dislike, should they try to gather more evidence for an appeal even though the scheme says the burden of proof is not on the veteran?
Answer:
The discussion suggested yes, extra evidence could still help, even though the scheme is supposed to use a reverse burden of proof. Ed’s answer was that if someone is unhappy with the outcome, they should come back to Fighting With Pride for support with the appeal and, if necessary, legal referral.
18. If people who left voluntarily or were persuaded to leave are paid from the scheme, does that disadvantage DD claimants?
Answer:
Ed and Peter both said that all valid claims should be paid and that the £75 million is a budget, not a cap. Peter added that there is some unresolved ambiguity over whether any “unused balance” from the original £50 million would have been redistributed among DD claimants under earlier wording, but that question is still with the minister. Andrew added that while the scheme may broaden the eligible cohort, he does not think it is likely to increase the size of individual payments.
19. Do payments previously made to Rank Outsiders / ECHR applicants affect what people get under this scheme?
Answer:
No. Ed and Andrew were clear that those earlier payments came from different legal routes and are not taken into account under the present scheme. The current scheme is not treated as legal compensation in the strict sense, so there is no offsetting of previous awards against present payments.
20. Will the FRSA payments be exempt from inheritance tax?
Answer:
No. Peter confirmed that although the payments are exempt from income tax in the long term, they are not exempt from inheritance tax, and the MoD has confirmed there are no current plans to change that.
21. Are the payments disregarded for benefits purposes?
Answer:
Yes, for routine benefits. Peter said the payments are disregarded for a range of ordinary benefits, and Fighting With Pride has already intervened in a few cases where benefits were incorrectly stopped and got that corrected quickly. However, he said they still do not yet have final clarification on treatment for social care charging.
22. What support is available for veterans seeking counselling or mental health help?
Answer:
Ellie Howell (VCW Southwest) explained that Fighting With Pride signposts people mainly to:
• Op Courage (NHS veterans mental health service)
• PTSD Resolution
• Combat Stress (especially for more urgent support)
She said VCWs can also help tailor support regionally and walk veterans through the process gently, recognising that many people affected by the ban have felt disconnected from the veterans community for years and may find it especially hard to ask for help.
As always, if any of these questions or answers worry you or have been triggering please reach out to your VCW for guidance and support. If you are not already registered with a VCW, you can do so by completing this form
You can also email info@fightingwithpride.org.uk
