Pension card and Chelsea Hospital

[Stevejm]

I found the pension card and a soldier who served with the MGC in Mesopotamia and noticed a stamp with Chelsea hospital mentioned. I know that he suffered massive facial wounds and wondered if he may have been undergoing facial reconstruction surgery  at Chelsea. He is listed as wounded on the War Office list dated 17/1/17 and discharged Para 392 (XVI) Para B.1 on 15/1/19. Any ideas pleae 

[Stevejm]

The below record card for a soldier who received severe facial wounds has a stamp that mentions Chelsea with an admission date immediately following his discharge from the army. Is it possible that he was admitted to Chelsea hospital or were they the record keeper? I understand that the specialist plastic surgery unit was located at Sidcup not Chelsea

[PRC]

Ok, will pop my head above the parapet and take a stab at this as no-one seems to be coming back on your queries on this.

 

As far as I'm aware the Royal Hospital Chelsea had an administrative reponsibility for all service people who received a military pension because they were discharged on medical grounds, either wounds or sickness, or through long service and so as part of the discharge process they would gain a Chelsea Hospital number. This had nothing to do with where they were treated.

 

Cheers,

Peter

Edited 25 March , 2021 by PRC
Typo

[ss002d6252]

Peter is correct, the Chelsea Commissioners who ran Chelsea Hospital had the duty of running the army pensions for disabled soldiers.

 

When the Ministry of Pensions formed Chelsea was taken over in to the new setup and continued on pretty much the same grounds, just as a branch of the new Ministry, Treatment would have been undertaken by the treatment branch of the Ministry.

 

In this case he was admitted to pension with a 100% disability under the 1918 Royal Warrant.

 

Craig

[Stevejm]

2 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

Peter is correct, the Chelsea Commissioners who ran Chelsea Hospital had the duty of running the army pensions for disabled soldiers.

 

When the Ministry of Pensions formed Chelsea was taken over in to the new setup and continued on pretty much the same grounds, just as a branch of the new Ministry, Treatment would have been undertaken by the treatment branch of the Ministry.

 

In this case he was admitted to pension with a 100% disability under the 1918 Royal Warrant.

 

Craig

Thanks but doesn't it say 80% Disability?

3 hours ago, PRC said:

Ok, will pop my head above the parapet and take a stab at this as no-one seems to be coming back on your queries on this.

 

As far as I'm aware the Royal Hospital Chelsea had an administrative reponsibility for all service people who received a military pension because they were discharged on medical grounds, either wounds or sickness, or through long service and so as part of the discharge process they would gain a Chelsea Hospital number. This had nothing to do with where they were treated.

 

Cheers,

Peter

Thanks. That makes sense

[ss002d6252]

29 minutes ago, Stevejm said:

Thanks but doesn't it say 80% Disability?

 

Keep in mind that the cards and the ledgers are not always created at the same time - the card was created before the ledger came in to use.

In Jan 1919 27s 6d was a 100% disability under the (then) active 1918 Royal Warrant. 80% at that time would be 22s.

I think it is actually 'Due to 802' rather than 'Due to 80%'.

Craig

[Matlock1418]

5 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

In this case he was admitted to pension with a 100% disability under the 1918 Royal Warrant.

 

3 hours ago, Stevejm said:

Thanks but doesn't it say 80% Disability?

 

2 hours ago, ss002d6252 said:

Keep in mind that the cards and the ledgers are not always created at the same time - the card was created before the ledger came in to use.

In Jan 1919 27s 6d was a 100% disability under the (then) active 1918 Royal Warrant. 80% at that time would be 22s.

I think it is actually 'Due to 802' rather than 'Due to 80%'.

I agree with Craig's first assessment of 27/6 = 100%

and also his second suggestion that the ledger came later - when Steele had perhaps recovered a bit and thus was only granted 80% [which would have been 22/-] - perhaps after the original 100% award had run out.

However, I don't particularly agree with his lasts sentence - I think it is actually 'Due to, 80%' [or that was the intention] rather than 'Due to 802'

[Unless Craig can perhaps explain what 802 was/might be ???]

:-) M

[RussT]

We are, literally, going round in circles !!

 

Pension Records form SB 36 interpretation - Soldiers and their units - Great War Forum

 

Russ

[Matlock1418]

1 hour ago, RussT said:

We are, literally, going round in circles !!

Yes, I know!

:-/ M

[Stevejm]

3 hours ago, Matlock1418 said:

 

 

I agree with Craig's first assessment of 27/6 = 100%

and also his second suggestion that the ledger came later - when Steele had perhaps recovered a bit and thus was only granted 80% [which would have been 22/-] - perhaps after the original 100% award had run out.

However, I don't particularly agree with his lasts sentence - I think it is actually 'Due to, 80%' [or that was the intention] rather than 'Due to 802'

[Unless Craig can perhaps explain what 802 was/might be ???]

:-) M

I am also curious about the 802 suggestion. I know from the family of Arnold that he did suffer severe facial disfigurement which ties in with the disability table posted on another topic which awards 80% for such wounds

[Matlock1418]

1 minute ago, Stevejm said:

I am also curious about the 802 suggestion. I know from the family of Arnold that he did suffer severe facial disfigurement which ties in with the disability table posted on another topic which awards 80% for such wounds

We circulate in the same regions of GWF!

My feeling is that it is likely he got 100% to begin with and then it settled at 80% as he made a partial recovery.

Can't say any more really.

:-) M

[Stevejm]

5 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

We circulate in the same regions of GWF!

My feeling is that it is likely he got 100% to begin with and then it settled at 80% as he made a partial recovery.

Can't say any more really.

:-) M

Thanks. 

[Matlock1418]

14 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Can't say any more really.

Actually I can ... but I am afraid it is not much to shout about.

The Pension ledger 80% does not indicate if it was a final award [nothing written on the PL rear], so if only conditional it could perhaps have reduced even further to the point of eventually becoming final at ???

Or even possibly a final gratuity pay-off [hard to say how likely, probably unlikely I suspect if severe facial disfigurement]

We just don't know and the vast majority of the full Pension files have been destroyed leaving us largely none the wiser.

I have checked the PIN 26 retained files at the National Archives but couldn't find him amongst them as Steel or Steele 61301

:-) M

[Stevejm]

12 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

Actually I can ... but I am afraid it is not much to shout about.

The Pension ledger 80% does not indicate if it was a final award [nothing written on the PL rear], so if only conditional it could perhaps have reduced even further to the point of eventually becoming final at ???

Or even possibly a final gratuity pay-off [hard to say how likely, probably unlikely I suspect if severe facial disfigurement]

We just don't know and the vast majority of the full Pension files have been destroyed leaving us largely none the wiser.

I have checked the PIN 26 retained files at the National Archives but couldn't find him amongst them as Steel or Steele 61301

:-) M

I actually found his SB36 form on Fold3 listed under Arnold Stelle so his name had been transcribed incorrectly in their index. A note on the back of the pension card states that his name was changed from Steele to Steel!

[Matlock1418]

2 minutes ago, Stevejm said:

I actually found his SB36 form on Fold3 listed under Arnold Stelle so his name had been transcribed incorrectly in their index.

That has been sorted at WFA/Fold3

6 minutes ago, Stevejm said:

A note on the back of the pension card states that his name was changed from Steele to Steel!

And as per the later altered card you posted above

That's why  looked under both variants.

The more interesting thing to me seems to be the date 27 Sept 1951 - what was going on round then?

:-) M

[Stevejm]

2 minutes ago, Matlock1418 said:

That has been sorted at WFA/Fold3

And as per the later altered card you posted above

That's why  looked under both variants.

The more interesting thing to me seems to be the date 27 Sept 1951 - what was going on round then?

:-) M

Another mystery!! I think that I have reached the end of this line of investigation now so I had better leave it now. His family are convinced that his name was Steele so who knows? Anyway his family are thrilled with the info that I have found so thanks to everyone's help on the GWF