# Another case of issued kit on E-Bay?



## YeOldFootman (21 Dec 2006)

I don't know if the policy regarding surplus kit has changed as of late, so correct me if I'm wrong (not that it matters as I doubt this is surplus in the first place).

Canadian Forces FPV:
http://cgi.ebay.ca/cadpat-body-armor-frag-vest-SAPI-plate-carrier_W0QQitemZ190063634976QQihZ009QQcategoryZ36071QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

The vest design in the photos appear to be genuine (My refence is the CTS documents)


----------



## George Wallace (21 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Once more..................  :
> 
> *WARNING*
> 
> ...



How many times must we tell people this?


----------



## Yrys (21 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> How many times must we tell people this?



Ad infinitum would be my uninformed guest...


----------



## George Wallace (21 Dec 2006)

I guess your uninformed guest is right.                                          ;D


----------



## YeOldFootman (22 Dec 2006)

My apologies.


----------



## jbeach95 (22 Dec 2006)

When is there NOT issued kit on ebay? Everytime I look, I see something that appears to have been issued, and isn't likely to be surplus.


----------



## Franko (22 Dec 2006)

JDB said:
			
		

> When is there NOT issued kit on ebay? Everytime I look, I see something that appears to have been issued, and isn't likely to be surplus.



More than likely it was stolen from the suply system and hocked on to Ebay. 

This has happened in the past and the pers who did it have already been charged and sentenced/ punted completely.

More than likely it'll happen to this one as well.

Report it like George said.

Regards


----------



## Bzzliteyr (22 Dec 2006)

Looks like an actual business if you read his feedback.. he has sold at least a couple of others.. but that's not my job to do the sleuthing.. it's for the MPs..


----------



## KevinB (22 Dec 2006)

whatcha think I should bid for it  ;D


----------



## Armymedic (22 Dec 2006)

The reserve bid has to be more then $167...
go for $200.


----------



## career_radio-checker (22 Dec 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> whatcha think I should bid for it  ;D


The guy is selling a bullet proof vest yet he strongly recomends you don't use it for it's intended purpose. Some kind of alarm bells are going off in my head, how about yours?


----------



## KevinB (22 Dec 2006)

Strictly speaking it is a FPV - Fragmentation Protective Vest...

Well I bid it to $200 USD...


----------



## justmyalias (22 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> How many times must we tell people this?



WOW....that cautionary you've quote is pretty scary.  I'm wondering how naive some people would think to ad such items and NOT expect to get busted?


----------



## old man neri (22 Dec 2006)

justmyalias said:
			
		

> WOW....that cautionary you've quote is pretty scary.  I'm wondering how naive some people would think to ad such items and NOT expect to get busted?



Right, cause everyone who sells stolen items or commits fraud on Ebay is always caught..............


----------



## Trinity (22 Dec 2006)

old man neri said:
			
		

> Right, cause everyone who sells stolen items or commits fraud on Ebay is always caught..............



On civilian items...  who knows

On military items... the percentage is higher than what you may think.

Many a store and person have had their door knocked on within Canada
for selling cadpat items that were issue...  to verify its source.  I've heard
good stories from friends in the industry.


----------



## career_radio-checker (22 Dec 2006)

Recce By Death said:
			
		

> More than likely it was stolen from the suply system and hocked on to Ebay.
> 
> This has happened in the past and the pers who did it have already been charged and sentenced/ punted completely.
> 
> ...



I think its just the government hates seeing its kit get a better price than what they paid for it.
I seem to recall a certain Icebreaker... 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2005/07/29/ebay-icbreaker050729.html


----------



## old man neri (22 Dec 2006)

career_radio-checker said:
			
		

> I think its just the government hates seeing its kit get a better price than what they paid for it.
> I seem to recall a certain Icebreaker...
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/story/2005/07/29/ebay-icbreaker050729.html



No, the gov't hates seeing people stealing from them. The ice breaker thing was perfectly legal.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (23 Dec 2006)

The reason for the cautioning is to cover his behind, legally speaking.. if some dork goes out and gets his "pal" to shoot at him/throw nades at him and he dies.. the seller is probably covered.


----------



## Lerch (24 Dec 2006)

So just a tad curious...I was doing some perusing on eBay (as I usually do) and came across a horde of goodies that shouldn't be there. The only thing is that the seller is in Germany.

Advice for further action?


----------



## KevinB (24 Dec 2006)

Lerch said:
			
		

> So just a tad curious...I was doing some perusing on eBay (as I usually do) and came across a horde of goodies that shouldn't be there. The only thing is that the seller is in Germany.
> 
> Advice for further action?


Fly to Germany and kick their ass


----------



## armyvern (24 Dec 2006)

Lerch said:
			
		

> So just a tad curious...I was doing some perusing on eBay (as I usually do) and came across a horde of goodies that shouldn't be there. The only thing is that the seller is in Germany.
> 
> Advice for further action?


Hmmm, very interestingly, located closly to Geilenkirchen, report to MPs.


----------



## cadettrooper (24 Dec 2006)

Lerch said:
			
		

> The only thing is that the seller is in Germany.
> 
> Advice for further action?



ya i know the seller, i asked him how he got his hands on a prototype AR Cadpat sniper suit .......in germany. he never replied.


----------



## cadettrooper (24 Dec 2006)

and wow! heres a perfect example, check out his store:
http://search.ebay.ca/_W0QQsassZtheQ5frealQ5fmcQ5fkraut

can you say "stolen"


----------



## TN2IC (24 Dec 2006)

Trakalo said:
			
		

> and wow! heres a perfect example, check out his store:
> http://search.ebay.ca/_W0QQsassZtheQ5frealQ5fmcQ5fkraut
> 
> can you say "stolen"




Who wishes to blow the whistle on this guy?  ;D


----------



## Dissident (25 Dec 2006)

$72 for a cadpat boonie hat? I'd check the buyers for possession too...


----------



## Nfld Sapper (25 Dec 2006)

I contacted E-Bay waiting for a reply let see what they do.  ;D

So has anyone contacted the MP's about this yet?


----------



## Shamrock (25 Dec 2006)

Given that he's in Germany he may not fall under their jurisdiction...


----------



## Nfld Sapper (25 Dec 2006)

Still how can a current Issue TAC VEST be declared surplus when they have just been issued  ???


----------



## cadettrooper (25 Dec 2006)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Still how can a current Issue TAC VEST be declared surplus when they have just been issued  ???



and even when it comes with its own user's manual............ :


----------



## Trinity (25 Dec 2006)

Nfld Sapper said:
			
		

> Still how can a current Issue TAC VEST be declared surplus when they have just been issued  ???



If it's found to have a defect thus making it NS??  (just a thought)

Of course.. it's most likely stolen.  Not the first time.. not the last time.
Sticky fingers in some QM I suspect.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (25 Dec 2006)

http://cgi.ebay.ca/cadpat-body-armor-frag-vest-SAPI-plate-carrier_W0QQitemZ190063634976QQihZ009QQcategoryZ36071QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

This listing (190063634976) has been removed or is no longer available. Please make sure you entered the right item number. 
If the listing was removed by eBay, consider it cancelled. Note: Listings that have ended more than 90 days ago will no longer appear on eBay.

So much for that investigation.  Hope someone got some info on it before it went bye bye.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (25 Dec 2006)

You can still find the items in his on-line store.


----------



## George Wallace (25 Dec 2006)

Trakalo said:
			
		

> ya i know the seller, i asked him how he got his hands on a prototype AR Cadpat sniper suit .......in germany. he never replied.



So Trakalo

Against all the warnings we have given you on this site, you have "Warned Off the Seller" and possibly interfered with a Criminal Investigation.   Well Done You.   :


----------



## old fart (25 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So Trakalo
> 
> Against all the warnings we have given you on this site, you have "Warned Off the Seller" and possibly interfered with a Criminal Investigation.   Well Done You.   :




George any "Ebayer" /potential buyer can ask whetever question he/she likes of a seller.  Although the seller of course may not respond.

Hopefully though the powers that be are already on top of the situation (s) with regard to potentially ill gotten goods offered for sale/auction by persons of ill repute.  

With the hope that the guilty B_stards are caught, hung, drawn and quartered.

Time for tea...Merry Xmas to one and all.


----------



## cadettrooper (25 Dec 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> So Trakalo
> 
> Against all the warnings we have given you on this site, you have "Warned Off the Seller" and possibly interfered with a Criminal Investigation.   Well Done You.   :



no that was almost six months ago that i tried to ask him, not to threaten him but a simple question how he got it. 
he ended up selling it anyways...... 


                                                                                                                           Merry Christmas ;D


----------



## Lerch (26 Dec 2006)

So it looks like the seller ripped off an airman...pretty nifty.
But the higher ups should already be on top of this (or as 'on top' as they could be for someone outside Canada) since the kit wasn't hard to find.


----------



## MikeL (26 Dec 2006)

Lerch don't you have a bunch of issue kit aswell... 

like the tac vest, boonie hat an helmet..
http://ct.pbase.com/g6/44/727944/2/70541397.9CPv2zlU.jpg


----------



## cadettrooper (27 Dec 2006)

lerch's tacvest isn't issued, it's gucci ;D


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (27 Dec 2006)

http://cgi.ebay.ca/very-rare-CADPAT-AR-tactical-vest-first-pattern-XL_W0QQitemZ140067321029QQihZ004QQcategoryZ36071QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=140067321029&indexURL=2&photoDisplayType=2#ebayphotohosting

*****--****  Hummm.... one doesn't even need to buy it to trace the number.... nice.... 
(blotted out the number because I think it is protected)

I know this is likely just a quick way for some dishonest person to make money and the buyer is likely just some "odd-person" with an interesting sex life,  but seeing issued stuff for sale actually freaks me out.  If "they" (we are at war remember) got ahold of our uniforms it wouldn't take much to make copies,  good copies or even use the ones purchased in combat.  Imagine the tactical advantage to approaching a group of Canadians in a CF uniform. And that is just what I, with my limited imagination, could think of.  How about if Timmy started running around doing horrible things in the CF uniform ... wouldn't take much to get really bad really fast.

It isn't just theft,  it could cost lives - it is/could be treason. I don't care if the seller is in Germany. I'm surprised, I always thought the Germans were better at this.  Although they might just want to see who buys it.  

The only kit I bought was my beret,  and that was because I wanted to take the lining out.


----------



## Trinity (27 Dec 2006)

1.  That's why we have passwords.  Just because you are dressed like a soldier
doesn't mean you can just walk up to other soldiers in a war zone.

2. US kit is everywhere and easy to buy.  Why try getting Canadian stuff (green) 
when you can buy an entire set of American kit and attempt what you are suggesting..


Situational Awareness.  If a soldier comes out of no where and you are the only friendly
units in the area.... your spider senses should be going off.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (27 Dec 2006)

That topic of discussion comes up anytime kit is spotted on EBay.. there are collectors out there who are very willing to pay big bucks to get that "sweet" piece of kit that no one else has.  That could very well be the type of person this is.  

Kit becomes available through many different avenues in the world, from contractors who do trial and evaluations for kit then sell the "extras", to people who join the military and then sell the kit to buy drugs ( I have seen it happen).  Trinity makes a good point and that's why we have to be on our toes.  Even though we have however many people on base.. we can hopefully recognize a "Canuck" when we see one.. (the Timmies cup should give them away.. or lack thereof)


----------



## Zell_Dietrich (27 Dec 2006)

Trinity said:
			
		

> 1.  That's why we have passwords.  Just because you are dressed like a soldier
> doesn't mean you can just walk up to other soldiers in a war zone.
> 
> 2. US kit is everywhere and easy to buy.  Why try getting Canadian stuff (green)
> ...



100% true.  But even if one is alert,  dressing in the CF uniform does offer tactical advantages in many other situations. I am only 80% sure on this but the CADPAT isn't ever owned by a person,  it is still Property of the CF. (correct me if I'm wrong)  Even if you buy it,  you simply paid money to hold onto stolen goods. The items themselves,  the pattern on the clothings and I believe even the look are all protected.  You'll notice the knockoffs you see in surplus stores are noticeably different than the issued stuff.

  I'm not a fan of torture,  or public flogging,  but I think we should find people who do this and force them to endure harassment training every day for no less than 6 weeks oh and the instructor should be unreasonably good looking.  I am shocked that e-bay hasn't pulled the item.  But it is Boxing week,  so I guess they're busy.


----------



## mysteriousmind (27 Dec 2006)

Zell_Dietrich said:
			
		

> I am only 80% sure on this but the CADPAT isn't ever owned by a person,  it is still Property of the CF. (correct me if I'm wrong)  Even if you buy it,  you simply paid money to hold onto stolen goods. The items themselves,  the pattern on the clothings and I believe even the look are all protected.  You'll notice the knockoffs you see in surplus stores are noticeably different than the issued stuff.



You are correct...every part that is issue is property of the CF, you technically have to return everything. but...like socks, boots, Beret, towel, underwear....things that are more "personal" you will show them and technically keep them after they have put on the mark that they are no longer in service...(the tamp, the hole in the boot. ) etc. etc. etc.

Got a few towels home...mine now not in system anymore. The Cadpat uniform will be taken back even if wore..because it is something considered as reusable...

I cannot tell for every equipment part.

there is a form that you sign that tells that you "promise" to return every equipment part issued and you are willing to pay for the lost items. 

(form is sign in the Pres not sure for the Reg force...but it must be the same thing).


----------



## navymich (28 Dec 2006)

mysteriousmind said:
			
		

> You are correct...every part that is issue is property of the CF, you technically have to return everything. but...like socks, boots, Beret, towel, underwear....things that are more "personal" you will show them and technically keep them after they have put on the mark that they are no longer in service...(the tamp, the hole in the boot. ) etc. etc. etc.



"personal" as you call it, is also known as "next to skin".

Whether they put the hole in the tongue of the boot or not, I have *never* been given the option of keeping them.  Anyone else?


----------



## Big Foot (28 Dec 2006)

I've never been allowed to keep my boots, either. Kinda sucks when you gotta start from scratch. Oh well.


----------



## GO!!! (28 Dec 2006)

Big Foot said:
			
		

> I've never been allowed to keep my boots, either. Kinda sucks when you gotta start from scratch. Oh well.



I have - they said they were worn enough that they'd just be tossed anyways - they are now my "mowing the lawn" boots.

Some of this seems like a moot point anyway - what self respecting infanteer wears the issued TV or boots? 

I would personally be more worried about the guy who shows up with a shiny new TV, cbts and Mk IIIs! Nobody actually wears that stuff!


----------



## Big Foot (28 Dec 2006)

I was refering more to my ankle boots, lol. But, I still have a pair of the old style ankle boots so I'm happy.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Dec 2006)

Zell_Dietrich said:
			
		

> I know this is likely just a quick way for some dishonest person to make money and the buyer is likely just some "odd-person" with an interesting sex life,  but seeing issued stuff for sale actually freaks me out.  If "they" (we are at war remember) got ahold of our uniforms it wouldn't take much to make copies,  good copies or even use the ones purchased in combat.  Imagine the tactical advantage to approaching a group of Canadians in a CF uniform. And that is just what I, with my limited imagination, could think of.  How about if Timmy started running around doing horrible things in the CF uniform ... wouldn't take much to get really bad really fast.
> 
> It isn't just theft,  it could cost lives - it is/could be treason. I don't care if the seller is in Germany. I'm surprised, I always thought the Germans were better at this.  Although they might just want to see who buys it.
> 
> The only kit I bought was my beret,  and that was because I wanted to take the lining out.



In reality there is enough fake TW CADPAT to go around as it is, places which make name tags, etc. In the MEAO there has been numerous thefts of arid CADPAT uniforms before it even got into A-Stan.

I bet you could walk into any Armoury back in niave and unsuspecting Canada, or open base for that matter, posing as a CAPT for example and get into places, say a BOR with a bomb in your daypack before anyone even suspected you. Wearing a stolen TV is irrevellant.

If a person or persons are hell bent on doing something, they will.

Here impersonators kidnap and murder at random.


Wes


----------



## old man neri (28 Dec 2006)

airmich said:
			
		

> Whether they put the hole in the tongue of the boot or not, I have *never* been given the option of keeping them.  Anyone else?



I am transferring from army res to air force reg, I had to turn in all my kit but they let me keep all foot wear (combats, gortex boots, parade boots, oxfords) and next to skin stuff.  It's not on my charge. The funny thing is when I go to St. Jean they will probably have to issue me new ones. What a wonderful system.




			
				Wesley (Over There) said:
			
		

> I bet you could walk into any Armoury back in niave and unsuspecting Canada, or open base for that matter, posing as a CAPT for example and get into places, say a BOR with a bomb in your daypack before anyone even suspected you. Wearing a stolen TV is irrevellant.



What would be funny is an impersonator showing up at St Jean or Meaford (anywhere where there are naive young recruits) wearing sergeant's hooks, walking up to a few recruits that don't have any supervisors around and ordering them to put their C-7s in the back of his pick up truck. I wonder if it would work?


----------



## 3rd Herd (28 Dec 2006)

Command-Sense-Act 105 said:
			
		

> There are a number of IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians that are dead because their enemies wore IDF uniforms, were carrying Galils and M16s and approached their positions in busy, built up areas without raising the alarm, then opened fire.  This has happened a number of times, not only in the Gaza Strip and West Bank areas like Nablus, Jenin and Ramallah, but has happened (if I remember correctly) in Jerusalem as well.
> 
> I think we should take every effort to minimize our distinctive equipment appearing in non-CF hands.



One only has to look back to the Second World war and the Battle of the Bulge for a near perfect example of the use of the enemies kit. Germans running amok in US kit. Twenty questions at check points. And as for us north of the parallel there is a very interesting story in South Alberta's in which a Sherman was lost one night and led a German attack on it's previous owners the next night. American's "borrowing" Canadian OD in Somalia is a more up to date event. As to today's kit in trying to equip and somewhat standardize a small cadet corps there is just not the abundance of "used/surplus" kit available as in years past. This I surmise is in part due to the measures taken to prevent kit from falling in hands not meant to be. Yes the odd piece will show up now and again but it is not like five or ten years ago when it was cheaper to pop down to the surplus store to replace a lost/stolen/worn out piece of kit then repurchase through the system. As to the knock offs that keep appearing anyone heard of copyright infringement. If the entertainment industry is finally coming to grips with this problem should not others shortly follow suit. Next time you go into a surplus store just take a look at all the new maroon CAR t shirts up for sale. In closing it is kind of interesting to find those that mock those in uniform are the first in line to buy Parkland's lastest fashion release.


----------



## Franko (28 Dec 2006)

Anyone remember the "RCR soldier" that supposedly had jumped the fence during the OKA Crisis?

The "soldier" was on national TV spouting all kinds of retoric, and was caught. Turned out to be a local teen trying to stir the pot so to speak.

Needless to say, you could tell that this guy was an imposter, even though he had the proper rank, hatbadge, beret etc.

Funniest thing I ever saw during the whole thing.

Regards


----------



## KevinB (28 Dec 2006)

I got to keep my boots and next to the skin items both times I got out of the regs.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Dec 2006)

old man neri said:
			
		

> No, the gov't hates seeing people stealing from them. The ice breaker thing was perfectly legal.



Well there was the case of the weather ships, were they sold them cheap, then had to buy back the weather related equipment for almost as much as the buyer paid for the ships, plus the fuel tanks for these long range ships were apparently full.


----------



## CADPAT SOLDIER (29 Dec 2006)

old man neri said:
			
		

> I am transferring from army res to air force reg, I had to turn in all my kit but they let me keep all foot wear (combats, gortex boots, parade boots, oxfords) and next to skin stuff.  It's not on my charge. The funny thing is when I go to St. Jean they will probably have to issue me new ones. What a wonderful system.
> 
> 
> What would be funny is an impersonator showing up at St Jean or Meaford (anywhere where there are naive young recruits) wearing sergeant's hooks, walking up to a few recruits that don't have any supervisors around and ordering them to put their C-7s in the back of his pick up truck. I wonder if it would work?




Silly you, you don't leave recruits un-attended under any circumstances


----------



## darmil (12 Jun 2007)

http://cgi.ebay.com/Canadian-Military-CF-Tactical-Assault-Combat-Vest_W0QQitemZ160126757804QQihZ006QQcategoryZ102537QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

I know there was a few posted before not sure who to report it to.You gotta read the write up on it haha.


----------



## Big Foot (12 Jun 2007)

> Those who have served know the value of this vest.  This TAC vest is the envy of all NATO armies


I found this quote to be quite amusing. Envy of all NATO armies, eh? If thats the case, then why are so many soldiers using aftermarket rigs? Do other NATO countries really have terrible load bearing equipment? lol. I mean, I've only ever used the tacvest for 7 weeks but still, I know there's a lot left to be desired by the vest. Besides, since it specifies that it doesn't have the tags and that it has green mesh instead of CADPAT, I think that means that it isn't the issued tacvest.


----------



## CADPAT SOLDIER (12 Jun 2007)

the vest hes selling must be some older gen, as it doesn't use cadpat mesh, it uses olive mesh, if you read the fine print the vest hes selling is not the one displayed.


----------



## George Wallace (12 Jun 2007)

Talk about a Bull Shyter!  This guy is trying to sell a CADPAT TAC Vest, and then in his last line states that "it is not Camo" and doesn't have any tags on it like in the second picture.........Makes you wonder what exactly he is trying to sell?



> *NEW!!*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (12 Jun 2007)

If you're dead certain that this is an issue tac vest (and I suspect from the pictures it is) your first step would be to alert ebay of its controlled military goods status and that it is unlawful to sell them, they'll pull the auction, the next step if you really want to push it would be to get ahold of the closest provost section, I notice you're a loyal eddy, there should be a provost handy.


----------



## Armymedic (12 Jun 2007)

If that is not bad enough, this *@#$% is selling a used kevlar vest with level 4 plates in it for $13 US.

Now if that does not set off alarm bells, I do not know what will.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Kevlar-Bullet-Proof-Vest-Body-Armour-LEVEL-4-w-ceramic_W0QQitemZ160127077558QQihZ006QQcategoryZ102537QQtcZphotoQQcmdZViewItem


----------



## darmil (13 Jun 2007)

How should I go about reporting this.I'm with 1 VP right now on pre training should I go straight to the MP's?


----------



## Bzzliteyr (13 Jun 2007)

Not a Canadian military item.. it's legal to sell body armour in Canada, no?


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (13 Jun 2007)

he's talking about the tac vest, and yes go to the MP's, you could probably even send the policing operations WO a quick email


----------



## MikeL (13 Jun 2007)

From the tac vest for sale page of his


> Those who have served know the value of this vest.  This TAC vest is the envy of all NATO armies







Also, at the bottem of the page he says the tac vest is not the one on the pictures, an it does not have the CADPAT mesh, it has OD mesh.. kinda sounds like a knock off tac vest.
Like this one
http://www.armyissue.com/Gallery/albums/userpics/ASn_holsters_001.jpg
http://www.armyissue.com/Gallery/albums/userpics/ASn_holsters_002.jpg


----------



## darmil (13 Jun 2007)

> you could probably even send the policing operations WO a quick email


You have this email address?


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (13 Jun 2007)

not at home, but it shouldn't be hard to dig up on the din at work tommorrow


----------



## garb811 (13 Jun 2007)

ArtyNewbie said:
			
		

> If you're dead certain that this is an issue tac vest (and I suspect from the pictures it is) your first step would be to alert ebay of its controlled military goods status and that it is unlawful to sell them, they'll pull the auction, the next step if you really want to push it would be to get ahold of the closest provost section, I notice you're a loyal eddy, there should be a provost handy.


How many times do we have to say this, DO NOT CONTACT EBAY direct!   Once you contact Ebay in relation to the item, they will take it down and any evidence which was in "plain view" to the investigating MP will be gone.  This greatly complicates the issue ie. Ebay could refuse to provide the images, item description and vendor information without a search warrant.  If you find an item, contact the MPs, report it and leave the rest to them!  

MikeH:  The Duty MPs can be reached at Ext 4014 or you can simply drop into the Guardhouse.


----------



## KevinB (13 Jun 2007)

Its not an issued Tac-Vest but a repro that someone had built.

Before rushing off half cocked - check the facts.

Calling the MP's will get sweet dick done in this case -- other than wasting the MP's time


----------



## SupersonicMax (13 Jun 2007)

airmich said:
			
		

> "personal" as you call it, is also known as "next to skin".
> 
> Whether they put the hole in the tongue of the boot or not, I have *never* been given the option of keeping them.  Anyone else?



I have


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (13 Jun 2007)

Me too, a supply tech can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I was that reservists are required to turn in all kit including next to skin and personal items. Reg force types do not turn in personal stuff (this I know having recently changed DEU allocation) and yes I've a few pairs of boots with a hole in the tongue that I was allowed to keep, it makes no sense really to have it returned to stores, they can't re-issue boots that have been formed to a mbrs foot as it may cause damage to the next guys feet.


----------



## Bzzliteyr (14 Jun 2007)

But they can sell them through public auction and make some money on them selling them to surplus stores.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (14 Jun 2007)

This is true, and maybe should be the case for operational clothing but not personal kit, this is going back to the days before logistikcorp but once you had a year in you had to replace your personal kit (DEU) when it wore out, out of pocket, for that reason we used to get clothing upkeep allowance (CUA) so then it makes it a little difficult to recover kit from a reg force soldier who has paid for his kit for years. I'm not sure how the points system works for the reserves not being one (anymore) myself but when I left the MO way back I had to turn in everything complete down to the old green boxers and socks.


----------



## medaid (14 Jun 2007)

mmm no, at my unit and this may only be at my unit. Anything next to skin is kept, including boots. DEUs are no longer returned either.


----------



## Disenchantedsailor (14 Jun 2007)

again my info was pre-logistikcorp


----------



## TN2IC (14 Jun 2007)

MedTech said:
			
		

> mmm no, at my unit and this may only be at my unit. Anything next to skin is kept, including boots. DEUs are no longer returned either.



Same here on the East Coast. PRes and Reg Force.


----------

