Lost - Missing Kit ( merged )

[Pusser]

In order to get new kit issued, all you have to do is complete the Stores Loss Report (i.e. do it soon).  Once you've submitted the form, Supply can issue new kit.  You should not have to wait for an investigation to be completed.  Nor should you have to pay for it first (as that can take awhile).  The bottom line is that if you need certain kit in order to do your job, the system has to give it to you.  Supply cannot hold it for "ransom" waiting for you to pay for the lost items.

Payment is normally made by administrative deduction from pay, but:

Read Chapter 38 of the QR&O:  http://www.admfincs.forces.gc.ca/qro-orf/vol-01/doc/chapter-chapitre-038.pdf

Chapter 38 is short, but somewhat convoluted in its wording.  In layman's terms though:

1)  You must be given the opportunity (i.e. there should be a spot on the form) to object to any proposed recovery and you are allowed to object to payment on the grounds that it is unwarranted or unreasonable (e.g. payment would be unwarranted if you were not negligent or willful in the loss - unreasonable would be paying full value for an item that was old and at the end of its life)

2)  Your CO can, in effect, only "suggest" you pay up to $200.  He/she has no authority to order a deduction in any amount if you choose to object.

3)  The formation commander can only order up to $50.

4) the Commander of a Command can only order up to $100.

5)  The CDS can only order up to $250.

Having said all this, one needs to think about this.  If you were not negligent or willful, then by all means object.  There are many folks that are of the belief that if you lose something you pay for it and it's as simple as that.  This is not the case and so it's worth fighting if you run into folks who simply expect you to pay.  I've given you the ammunition for that fight. 

However, if you were negligent or willful in the loss, you're better off paying for it and hoping it goes away.  The alternative would be a charge under the Code of Service Discipline for negligence.  If found guilty, it could cost you more than if you'd just paid for it.  The CF can recover amounts greater than $250, but it then becomes a legal vice an administrative process.  In other words, you can't drive a truck off the end of a jetty on purpose and only expect to pay $250.

The regulations can protect you from being railroaded, but they can't protect you from being a negligent or willful idiot.  Clear as mud?

 

[Ducal]

ACK

I appreciate the help and information.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

First off, when you fill out the form, DO NOT agree to accept responsibility and DO NOT agree to pay for it. Otherwise you're just making it a slam dunk for them to recover the cost.

 

[Robert0288]

To avoid starting a new thread.  Does anyone have a working link to a lost kit report form for the NCR?

 

[Occam]

To avoid starting a new thread.  Does anyone have a working link to a lost kit report form for the NCR?

http://cfsuo.mil.ca/sites/page-eng.asp?page=11489  (DWAN only)

Look for "Miscellaneous Loss Report".

 

[Robert0288]

Thanks

 

[CRIT]

Will someone be so kind as to post a list of kit that is required to be returned during the release process.  Also, does anyone know if kit can be purchased from supply rather that returning it?  I have a few non-cadpat items that I would hate to part with. i.e. flight suit and combat boots.

Thanks!

 

[LightFighter]

Base clothing stores should be able to give you a list of what doesn't need to be returned, etc. The base release section may have that sheet as well.

Items classified as next to skin items(eg underwear, t-shirts), boots(some types or all?), DEUs, and maybe a couple other items you can retain on release.

No idea if you can keep a non CADPAT flight suit, I would assume it is operational kit and would be returned.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Go to your QM and ask them for a copy of your clothing docs. Ask them to highlight what you have to bring back. You cannot buy kit, but if you lose it, you'll have to pay for it. Typically, at highly inflated prices. Your unit will likely also have to do a lost\stolen kit investigation for operational kit. You will be quite involved in that process.

 

[MJP]

The list of items that can be retained by a releasing mbr is governed by the Supply Administration Manual (SAM)  Section 5 Deliver 5.5 CLOTHING AND PERSONAL EQUIPMENT Annex A

Note: ALL ITEMS with Disruptive Pattern (CADPAT) in either Temperate Woodland (TW) or Arid Region (AR) MUST BE returned to clothing stores.

Retention Items
3. The items listed below are to be retained by all Regular Force and Reserve Force members who have completed 12 months service prior to being released.
a. All DEU clothing
b. All non-operational maternity clothing
c. All accoutrements
d. All socks (except gortex)
e. Sewing kit
f. Belt trousers green cloth webbing material
g. All Boots (excluding special purpose boots that can be re-issued i.e., firemen boots climbing boots, chainsaw boots, hazmat boots, lineman boots and mukluks)
h. Cap knit, green, black, blue, midnight blue, Canadian average green
i. Cap knit, Cadets, black, blue, green
j. Cap knit, Quebec Medical Tech - burgundy
k. Cap knit, Junior Canadian Rangers - dark green
l. Drawers including Army Light Weight Thermal Drawers (LWTD)
m. Undershirts including Army Light Weight Thermal Underwear (LWTU)
n. Shirts black, Military Police
o. Trousers and slacks black, Military Police
p. Shirts, Dental and Medical
q. Trousers, Dental and Medical
r. Sandals
s. Towels
t. Berets
u. Handkerchiefs
v. Swim wear (trunks/suits)
w. T-Shirt athletic
x. Shorts athletic
y. Med Tech “On Car” Uniforms

4. The following items, listed on 431(AD) Sqn local Scale of Issue, may be retained by members of the Snowbird Demonstration Team:
a. Flight Suit Red
b. Flight Suit Blue
c. Flight Jacket Dark Blue
d. Garment Bag
e. Sausage Bag

 

[Brasidas]

Go to your QM and ask them for a copy of your clothing docs. Ask them to highlight what you have to bring back. You cannot buy kit, but if you lose it, you'll have to pay for it. Typically, at highly inflated prices. Your unit will likely also have to do a lost\stolen kit investigation for operational kit. You will be quite involved in that process.

Iirc from when I released several years ago, there are limitations on how much can be charged to the member for missing kit, in terms of a proportion of the full cost and an absolute cap.  I was charged between $50-$60 for windpants. RQ had me wait out a week, re-confirm that I couldn't find them, and wrote it off with minimal hassle.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Go to your QM and ask them for a copy of your clothing docs. Ask them to highlight what you have to bring back. You cannot buy kit, but if you lose it, you'll have to pay for it. Typically, at highly inflated prices. Your unit will likely also have to do a lost\stolen kit investigation for operational kit. You will be quite involved in that process.

Its not inflated prices its the price as listed in Canadian Government Catalogue System (CGCS) the same value the items are written off as when lost or stolen during a MLR process.

As stated previously go to your supporting clothing stores, request a copy of your clothing docs with the items required for return highlighted.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Its not inflated prices its the price as listed in Canadian Government Catalogue System (CGCS) the same value the items are written off as when lost or stolen during a MLR process. 

The binos we were issued about 15-20 years ago were listed for around $500-$600, IIRC.

We found the exact same binos, same model #, etc, in a camera shop around the corner from the armouries for $100 new. If I was buying 20,000 pair, I'll bet they could be had for 50 cents on the dollar.

I would suggest that DND, TB or the GoC is not doing their due diligence when they go shopping. But that's just me. I don't know how that system really works.

 

[Halifax Tar]

The binos we were issued about 15-20 years ago were listed for around $500-$600, IIRC.

We found the exact same binos, same model #, etc, in a camera shop around the corner from the armouries for $100 new. If I was buying 20,000 pair, I'll bet they could be had for 50 cents on the dollar.

I would suggest that DND, TB or the GoC is not doing their due diligence when they go shopping. But that's just me. I don't know how that system really works.

The issue is we don't take into account the degraded value of a piece of kit while being used.  Unfortunately the point behind the whole thing is to procure a replacement for the lost piece we need to pay full price for a new piece.  I'm not willing to get into how broken our procurement system is though.  I run a procurement cell right.

 

[George Wallace]

I would suggest that DND, TB or the GoC is not doing their due diligence when they go shopping. But that's just me. I don't know how that system really works.

They have their 'contracted' and 'approved' suppliers.  I do not think that DND, TB or the GoC bother to investigate and ensure that those suppliers are indeed fulfilling their contractual obligations to apply discounted rates.  The  3K USD hammers purchased by the USAF years ago is but one example how government does not verify that a supplier is not inflating the price of their products.  That case was an example, if I remember correctly, of the media conducting an access to information investigation and exposing government inefficiencies. 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The issue is we don't take into account the degraded value of a piece of kit while being used.  Unfortunately the point behind the whole thing is to procure a replacement for the lost piece we need to pay full price for a new piece.  I'm not willing to get into how broken our procurement system is though.  I run a procurement cell right.

But full price, on civvie street was only $100, so at most, that's all a replacement should cost, right? Where does the other $4-$500 go, for a single set of binos?

I'm getting confused. :facepalm:

 

[Halifax Tar]

But full price, on civvie street was only $100, so at most, that's all a replacement should cost, right? Where does the other $4-$500 go, for a single set of binos?

I'm getting confused. :facepalm:

In this specific example I would NSNs to investigate it further. 

 

[MJP]

The binos we were issued about 15-20 years ago were listed for around $500-$600, IIRC.

We found the exact same binos, same model #, etc, in a camera shop around the corner from the armouries for $100 new. If I was buying 20,000 pair, I'll bet they could be had for 50 cents on the dollar.

I would suggest that DND, TB or the GoC is not doing their due diligence when they go shopping. But that's just me. I don't know how that system really works.

Because they were probably that price 15-20 years ago when they were originally purchased or entered into CGCS.  No one has updated the entry probably in years.  They also could have been misidentified and associated with a higher cost item. 

They have their 'contracted' and 'approved' suppliers.  I do not think that DND, TB or the GoC bother to investigate and ensure that those suppliers are indeed fulfilling their contractual obligations to apply discounted rates.  The  3K USD hammers purchased by the USAF years ago is but one example how government does not verify that a supplier is not inflating the price of their products.  That case was an example, if I remember correctly, of the media conducting an access to information investigation and exposing government inefficiencies. 

Standing Offer Arrangement SOA and Supply Arrangement SA.  They a quick and expediant way to get goods from an "approved" contractors.  In the following commodities it is mandatory to use SOA. 
N84: Clothing, Individual Equipment and Insignia
N58: Communication, Detection, and Coherent Radiation Equipment
N91: Fuels, Lubricants, Oils and Waxes
N71: Furniture
N70: General Purpose Automatic Data Processing Equipment (Including Firmware), Software, Supplies and Support Equipment
N23: Ground Effect Vehicles, Motor Vehicles, Trailers and Cycles
D3: Information Processing and Related Telecommunication Services
N74: Office Machines, Text Processing Systems and Visible Record Equipment
N75: Office Supplies and Devices
R: Professional, Administrative and Management Support Services
Sub-categories:
RO: Professional Services
R1: Administrative and Management Support Services
R2 : Personnel Recruitment

I have seen a few highball prices from them mostly in the electronic area because the tech changes so fast that the contracted price is often outdated and priced lower but generally the majority of the stuff I see ordered is at some discount compared to the general public.

The beauty of an SOA is that we don't have to screw around getting quotes if the items are on SOA.  Case in point my unit just got approved for a Vote 5 purchase in excess of $30k in mid Jan.  Anyone with procurement experience know that is to late to engage PWGCS.  Luckily the major item we are after is on an SOA, the vendor is bending over backwards to get it to us before End Mar.  My compatriot down the road had to turn down their approved Vote 5 because no SOA exists for what they want.  It isn't perfect, it might not always be cheaper, but it is faster (or can be).  I just wish Mukluks were on one.....

 

[Fishbone Jones]

In this specific example I would NSNs to investigate it further.

Can't give you that. I'm retired and I think they've changed binos at least once, maybe twice since then. Don't worry about it. It's not important, but thanks for offering to look into it.

 

[Pusser]

Just because items look the same, doesn't mean they are the same.  Items sold to the military may have been altered to meet additional specifications that the civilian model doesn't.  Whether that results in a different model number, is up to the manufacturer.  They may choose to keep it under the same model number (and track the military items by lot or batch instead) as their regular item because the spare parts list is identical.  The model number could also simply have a modifier.

Having said this, whenever an administrative deduction is proposed, the member always has the right to object on the grounds that the proposed charge is excessive or unwarranted.  For example paying the replacement cost of well-used item may be considered excessive, so a the depreciated value may be more appropriate.  That often flies.

QR&O Chapt 38 is worth reading.