Military Medical Records and Hearing Tests: What Veterans Can Request and What the Records Mean
Your service record, your service medical record, your hearing-surveillance records and the MOD's general noise and exposure records are not necessarily the same thing, and are not necessarily held in the same place. A veteran who asks simply for "my Army records" can receive something much less useful than they expected. This guide explains what may exist, what each hearing document means and how to ask for the right thing.
If you are trying to understand whether military service affected your hearing, your old records can be extremely useful.
They may show:
- what your hearing was like when you joined;
- whether your hearing thresholds changed during service;
- whether you reported tinnitus or hearing difficulty;
- whether you were referred for further assessment;
- whether your military hearing category changed;
- whether a particular noise incident was recorded;
- what hearing tests were performed before or after relevant exposure.
But military records are not one single document.
A veteran may have:
- a personnel or service record;
- a military medical record;
- individual audiograms;
- hearing-surveillance records;
- PULHHEEMS or other medical-employment gradings;
- ENT or audiology records;
- records relating to acoustic trauma;
- NHS records created after leaving service;
- separate MOD occupational-health, noise-risk or safety records.
Those records can overlap, but they are not interchangeable.
This guide explains what may exist, what the different hearing documents mean, how veterans can request their own information from the Ministry of Defence and what to do if records appear to be missing.
The short version
- Veterans can request their own personal information and service records from the MOD.
- The MOD currently provides an online route for former service personnel.
- There is no fee for an ordinary request for your own records.
- You will normally need proof of identity and proof of address.
- If the records are needed urgently for a legal or medical reason, GOV.UK says you should explain that in the request so it can be considered for prioritisation.
- Be specific about what you want. Asking only for "my service record" may not communicate that you particularly want medical and hearing material.
- Useful hearing evidence can include entry audiograms, periodic hearing tests, repeat tests, hearing-health surveillance, ENT referrals and later diagnostic audiograms.
- MOD policy requires audiometric health surveillance for personnel whose noise exposure creates the relevant risk.
- MOD policy also requires personal health records to be generated for audiometric health surveillance and says those records should follow individuals throughout their careers.
- Historic military audiograms can be important evidence, particularly when several tests show a consistent pattern.
- A modern diagnostic audiogram is generally stronger evidence of current hearing ability than an old screening test.
- Missing records should be treated as missing evidence. Their contents should not simply be guessed.
- Your NHS GP record may contain military medical information transferred when you left service, as well as later hearing complaints and referrals.
- Some evidence about military noise may exist outside your personal medical record altogether.
- A Subject Access Request for your personal data is not the same thing as obtaining every MOD risk assessment, unit noise record or other non-personal document that might become relevant to a legal claim.
What is a military service record?
A service record records information about a person's military career.
Depending on the service, period and records available, it may include information concerning matters such as:
- identity;
- service number;
- rank;
- postings;
- units;
- dates of service;
- promotions;
- training;
- employment or trade;
- discharge.
That information can be important in a military hearing-loss investigation because it helps establish where you served, when you served and what you were doing.
But a general personnel record should not be confused with the complete medical evidence about your hearing.
What is a military medical record?
A military medical record concerns healthcare and medical information recorded during service.
Depending on the person's service history and the records retained, it may contain:
- medical examinations;
- illnesses and injuries;
- treatment;
- referrals;
- medications;
- medical-employment restrictions;
- ear complaints;
- hearing complaints;
- tinnitus complaints;
- audiograms;
- ENT assessments;
- records following acoustic trauma;
- medical-board material.
The exact contents vary.
A veteran should not assume that because one bundle of service records contains no audiograms, no hearing tests were ever carried out.
It may be necessary to identify specifically what medical and hearing information is being requested.
What is a military audiogram?
An audiogram is the record produced by a hearing test known as pure-tone audiometry.
It plots the quietest tones somebody could detect at different sound frequencies.
Military personnel may have undergone audiometry:
- on or around entry;
- during routine hearing surveillance;
- following concerns about hearing;
- after a relevant noise incident;
- as part of a medical assessment;
- before or around discharge.
A military audiogram may therefore provide a snapshot of hearing at a particular point in the person's service.
Several audiograms can be much more informative than one.
Our guide to how to read a military audiogram explains frequencies, decibels, right- and left-ear symbols, 4 kHz notches, 6 kHz, 8 kHz and hearing categories in detail.
Why were military hearing tests carried out?
Military audiometry is not carried out primarily for compensation litigation.
Its important purposes include:
- monitoring hearing;
- identifying potentially harmful changes;
- assessing medical or occupational fitness;
- determining whether further clinical assessment is required;
- protecting personnel from further harmful noise exposure.
Current MOD noise policy describes an audiometric health-surveillance programme as a system for monitoring personnel's hearing sensitivity through periodic hearing tests.
That distinction matters when old records are later considered in a legal claim.
A screening audiogram may still be valuable evidence even though nobody created it with a future court case in mind.
Who should receive military hearing surveillance?
Current MOD policy requires health surveillance where personnel are exposed to noise at a level that creates the relevant identifiable health risk.
The purpose is to identify adverse effects at an early stage and allow protective action to be taken.
Where identifiable hearing damage is found, JSP 375 provides for examination by a doctor and, if the damage is likely to be the result of noise exposure, further action which may include:
- reviewing the noise risk assessment;
- reviewing exposure controls;
- considering different work;
- continuing health surveillance;
- reviewing similarly exposed personnel.
So a hearing-surveillance record is not merely an administrative score.
It forms part of a system intended to monitor and protect hearing.
What hearing records might exist?
Depending on when and where somebody served, useful records may include the following.
Entry or enlistment audiograms. These can be especially important because they may show hearing near the beginning of service. If hearing was relatively good on entry and changed during later service, that chronology may be relevant. But an entry test still needs proper interpretation.
Periodic or routine audiograms. These may show how hearing changed while somebody remained in service. A sequence of routine audiograms can sometimes be particularly informative.
Repeat audiograms. A hearing test may be repeated because the first result was unexpected, a threshold change was identified, the testing conditions were questionable, or further confirmation was required. The existence of a repeat test can itself be important when interpreting an apparently abnormal result.
Special or clinical hearing assessments. Some personnel may have undergone testing because of hearing complaints, tinnitus, suspected acoustic trauma, an abnormal screening result or another ear condition.
ENT records. An Ear, Nose and Throat referral can contain more detailed assessment than routine screening.
Audiology records. These may include more detailed diagnostic hearing tests, recommendations or hearing-aid assessment.
Medical-employment or hearing gradings. Records may contain PULHHEEMS hearing categories, medical employment standards, restrictions or medical-board findings. These provide useful context but are not substitutes for the actual threshold values on the audiogram.
Records following a noise incident. Where somebody reported blast, an explosion, weapons-related acoustic trauma, sudden hearing change or tinnitus after noise, there may be clinical or safety records associated with that event. Not every incident will necessarily have produced one.
What is PULHHEEMS?
PULHHEEMS is a military medical assessment system historically used to describe different aspects of medical fitness.
The H component relates to hearing.
A record might therefore contain an H category such as H1, H2, H3 or H4, rather than, or in addition to, a full audiogram.
The category is based on grouped hearing thresholds and has an occupational purpose.
It should not be interpreted as a complete medical diagnosis.
H1 does not automatically prove that no noise damage existed. And H3 does not prove that military noise caused the hearing impairment.
Where the underlying audiogram exists, the actual thresholds provide much more information than the H grade alone.
What frequencies might appear on a military audiogram?
Military hearing assessment can include frequencies such as:
- 250 Hz;
- 500 Hz;
- 1 kHz;
- 2 kHz;
- 3 kHz;
- 4 kHz;
- 6 kHz;
- 8 kHz.
Not every historic test contains every frequency.
This is particularly important at 8 kHz.
Some historic military screening tests did not record an 8 kHz threshold.
That matters because modern military NIHL analysis, including rM-NIHL, can make significant use of the 8 kHz result.
If an old audiogram does not contain that frequency, the result is missing. It should not simply be invented from a later test.
Why are old audiograms potentially so valuable?
Memory changes.
A contemporaneous hearing test does not rely on somebody trying to remember exactly what their hearing was like 20 or 30 years ago.
It can therefore provide objective historical evidence about measured thresholds.
For example, a sequence might show entry → normal or relatively good hearing, then later service → high-frequency deterioration, then still later → further change or a persistent pattern.
That does not by itself prove why the change occurred.
But it may provide important evidence for a clinician investigating causation.
What did Abbott say about military audiograms?
The High Court examined military audiometry in considerable detail in Abbott v Ministry of Defence [2026] EWHC 941 (KB).
The Court did not accept either extreme — neither "military audiograms are unreliable and should be ignored" nor "every recorded military audiogram must be completely accurate".
Its approach was more careful.
The Court concluded that properly conducted diagnostic pure-tone audiometry remains the gold standard where available.
“Pure Tone Audiometry (PTA) conducted in compliance with the protocol and standards set by the British Society of Audiology (BSA) is the gold standard of audiometric testing and should be used in medico-legal cases as the best evidence whenever it is available.”
But historic military screening audiograms can still assist diagnosis and quantification, particularly where they form part of a consistent pattern.
“However, screening audiograms, including military screening audiograms, are ordinarily suitable for screening and triage. Furthermore, especially when they are part of a consistent pattern, they may also be used, as part of the exercise of clinical judgment by clinicians advising in medico-legal cases, for diagnostic and quantification purposes.”
That is important.
One old result should not necessarily be considered in isolation from all the tests around it — a point the Court made expressly.
“Audiometry evidence (including BSA-compliant PTA) should, wherever possible, be considered in context and as a whole, rather than in isolation.”
Our guide to what Abbott decided covers the judgment as a whole.
What if one test is very different from all the others?
An isolated result may require investigation.
For example:
| Test | 4 kHz threshold |
|---|---|
| Test 1 | 10 dB |
| Test 2 | 15 dB |
| Test 3 | 60 dB |
| Test 4 | 15 dB |
Illustrative figures only — one result out of step with the tests around it.
The 60 dB result may represent a genuine event.
Or there may have been another explanation affecting that particular test.
The surrounding evidence matters. Abbott recognised that reading trends from a series may not be possible where the audiograms show significant and unexplained variation.
A clinician should not automatically select either the worst result or the best result simply because it supports a preferred conclusion.
What if my audiograms show steady deterioration?
A consistent change across several tests can be medically important.
For example:
| Test | 4 kHz threshold |
|---|---|
| Entry | 5 dB |
| Later | 15 dB |
| Later | 30 dB |
| Later | 40 dB |
Illustrative figures only — a consistent change across a series.
That may provide evidence of a change during a particular period.
But the table still does not answer: what caused the change?
The clinician needs the history.
That can include:
- military noise;
- civilian noise;
- ear disease;
- age;
- medication;
- other medical factors;
- timing.
Does an abnormal military audiogram prove I have NIHL?
No.
An audiogram measures hearing.
It does not identify legal responsibility.
An abnormal result can have several possible causes.
Military NIHL may be one.
Others can include:
- age-associated hearing loss;
- non-military occupational noise;
- recreational noise;
- ear disease;
- other sensorineural hearing conditions;
- conductive hearing problems;
- medication;
- trauma.
That is why diagnosis and causation are separate from simply finding an abnormal test. Our guide to noise-induced hearing loss explains the condition itself.
What if all my military hearing tests were recorded as normal?
Those results matter.
They should not simply be discarded.
But their significance depends on:
- when they were carried out;
- which frequencies were tested;
- what happened after the tests;
- whether harmful exposure continued;
- whether later tests show deterioration;
- whether the results form a consistent series;
- the person's complete clinical history.
A normal test from early service does not tell you what somebody's hearing was ten years later.
Equally, a later abnormal test does not automatically prove earlier military noise caused the deterioration.
What if I had hearing problems before joining?
An entry audiogram can be particularly valuable in this situation.
If a hearing abnormality existed before the relevant military exposure, that may affect diagnosis, causation, quantification and how later deterioration is interpreted.
Pre-existing hearing impairment does not mean later military noise could never have caused additional injury.
But the starting position matters.
Are tinnitus complaints recorded on an audiogram?
Usually not as a measurable threshold.
An audiogram measures hearing sensitivity.
Tinnitus is a subjective symptom and cannot be "seen" on the graph.
However, tinnitus may appear elsewhere in the medical record, for example:
- an audiometry questionnaire;
- GP-style service medical notes;
- ENT records;
- audiology records;
- an acoustic-trauma assessment;
- medical-board documentation.
That is why asking only for "audiograms" may be too narrow.
Our guide to tinnitus and military service explains the distinction between tinnitus and measurable hearing loss.
What is a hearing-health-surveillance record?
Current MOD policy requires a personal health record for personnel undergoing audiometric health surveillance, generated using MOD Form 5051.
“The commander, manager or accountable person must make sure that a personal health record in respect of personnel who undergo audiometric health surveillance is generated using MOD Form 5051 … the record must be maintained, a copy kept and made available in a suitable form.”
The record is intended to document the surveillance rather than merely leaving an unexplained hearing graph. JSP 375 notes that MOD Form 5051 is itself under review as part of a wider review of health-surveillance policy and process.
Current policy also says health records should follow personnel throughout their careers, and that personnel must be allowed access to their own personal health record when reasonable notice has been given.
“Health records should follow an individual through-out their careers.”
This can be relevant where somebody served in several units, at several bases, in different roles, or for many years.
The fact that a hearing test was carried out at one unit does not necessarily mean the veteran should search only through that unit's historic paperwork.
Are noise-risk assessments part of my medical record?
Not necessarily.
This is an important distinction.
A medical record is about the individual.
A noise-risk assessment may concern a workplace, a weapon, equipment, a process, a vehicle or a group of personnel.
Current MOD noise policy requires retention of several categories of relevant material, and lists them expressly.
“The types of records (non-exhaustive) that must be retained for the periods set out in Chapter 39 Annex A are; Noise risk assessments, audiometric health surveillance, training, and maintenance records and so on.”
Those documents may therefore exist separately from the veteran's personal clinical file.
What about records of hearing protection?
Possible evidence can extend beyond a medical record.
Depending on the issue, relevant evidence might concern:
- hearing-protection equipment;
- training;
- risk assessments;
- maintenance;
- safety instructions;
- noise measurements;
- particular equipment or weapons systems.
A personal Subject Access Request does not automatically mean the MOD must send every generic document relating to a unit, weapon or workplace.
Those are different information requests.
What is a Subject Access Request?
A Subject Access Request, usually shortened to SAR, is a request to an organisation for personal data it holds about you.
Under UK data-protection law, a living individual can request access to personal information held by the MOD.
For veterans, GOV.UK currently provides an online service for requesting their own records.
Current service personnel can use the MOD Subject Access Request process.
Does it cost money to request my own military records?
The MOD currently says there is no fee for the normal process of requesting your own service records.
You will normally need evidence confirming your identity and address.
This is different from paying a private company to obtain records for you.
A veteran can make the request directly.
How do I request my military records?
For a former member of the Royal Navy (including the Royal Marines), the British Army or the Royal Air Force, GOV.UK provides the service Get a copy of military records of service — apply for your own records.
Veterans can use the online service.
If you are still serving, or cannot use the online process, GOV.UK directs you to the MOD process for obtaining information about yourself.
Use the current GOV.UK page rather than relying on an old email address copied from a historic forum post or claims website. MOD contact details and records systems change — the MOD data-rights guidance was itself updated in March 2026.
What identification do I need?
GOV.UK says you will need proof of your identity, such as a passport or driving licence, and proof of address.
Follow the current instructions on the official application when you apply.
Should I just ask for "my military records"?
If hearing is what you are investigating, be more specific.
MOD's own guidance on obtaining your information asks applicants to state clearly what they want.
“Please state clearly the information you require.”
A more useful request could identify the hearing material you particularly want. For example:
A more specific request
"Please provide my service medical records and all personal data relating to my hearing and ear health during service, including any audiograms, audiometric health-surveillance results, hearing questionnaires, hearing gradings, ENT or audiology referrals, records of tinnitus or hearing complaints, records following acoustic trauma or noise incidents, and relevant medical-board or medical-employment documentation."
It is also worth giving whatever identifying detail you have, such as:
- your service number;
- service;
- approximate dates;
- units or postings where relevant.
Do not make the request artificially narrow if you want the complete medical history.
Can I ask specifically for audiograms?
Yes.
If audiograms are particularly important to you, say so. For example:
"Please include copies of all available audiograms and numerical hearing-threshold results from entry to discharge."
That communicates much more clearly what you are looking for than simply asking for "hearing records".
Can I ask for a particular period?
Yes.
Providing approximate dates can help the MOD locate information.
That can be particularly useful where you are trying to find:
- an entry medical;
- a particular deployment;
- an acoustic-trauma incident;
- a change in hearing grade;
- a referral;
- a final medical.
But where the purpose is understanding hearing changes across an entire military career, requesting the complete hearing series may be more informative than limiting the request to one incident.
What if I need the records urgently?
“If your application is urgent, explain why in your form or a letter, so it can be prioritised. For example, you need the records for legal or medical reasons.”
That does not guarantee immediate disclosure.
The MOD also currently warns that service-record requests are affected by a significant backlog.
If there is a legal deadline, do not assume requesting records stops that deadline from running. Similarly, do not delay medical treatment while waiting for old records.
How long will my request take?
There is no reliable single turnaround time that this page should promise.
“Due to a significant backlog, you may experience a delay in receiving a response from the department.”
The time needed may depend on:
- what information is requested;
- where it is held;
- age of the records;
- whether records have been archived or transferred;
- whether the request needs clarification.
If the request is genuinely urgent, explain why.
Are old military records being transferred to The National Archives?
Yes.
“The Ministry of Defence (MOD) is transferring around 9.3 million service records to The National Archives. The transfer is expected to complete in 2027.”
This means responsibility for some older records can depend on the service, the age of the record, the dates of service and what type of record is being requested.
For your own records, start with the current GOV.UK guidance rather than guessing whether MOD or The National Archives has the file.
The official service will direct requests according to current record holdings.
Are my military medical records transferred to my NHS GP?
Service leavers are encouraged to register with an NHS GP and make sure relevant military medical information reaches the practice.
Current government guidance specifically advises veterans to tell their GP that they served, and to hand over their military medical paperwork.
“Ask for the term 'military veteran' to be recorded in your patient record. … Give your GP any paperwork and medical records from your military medical centre. This helps to ensure your military health record transfers to your NHS record.”
The Service Leavers' Guide also warns that military health records can sometimes take time to arrive at the NHS practice.
If you were given medical paperwork when leaving, keep it.
Should I check my NHS record as well?
Yes, if you are investigating your hearing history.
Your NHS record may contain useful evidence created after service, including:
- the first GP complaint about hearing;
- tinnitus complaints;
- ear examinations;
- audiology referrals;
- ENT referrals;
- hearing-aid records;
- later audiograms;
- occupational history recorded by clinicians.
These records can help show when symptoms were first reported after service.
They may also identify other potential causes of hearing difficulty.
Can my NHS records replace missing military records?
Not exactly.
Later records cannot recreate a hearing test that was never found.
But they can provide different evidence.
For example, an NHS record from 2004 saying that a veteran reported long-standing tinnitus since weapons training is not the same thing as a military audiogram from 1989.
Both may be relevant, but they prove different things.
What should I do if records are missing?
First, do not assume that because a particular bundle does not contain the document, it never existed.
Check what you actually requested.
If you asked only for "service records" and expected every medical and audiological document, it may be worth clarifying or making a more specific personal-data request.
You can identify:
- the missing period;
- unit;
- medical centre;
- approximate date;
- type of document;
- reason you believe it may exist.
What if the MOD says the record cannot be found?
A missing record is not a licence to invent its contents. If an audiogram is absent, nobody should simply assume "it must have been normal" or "it must have shown NIHL".
It is missing evidence.
Other material may still help build the history, including:
- earlier audiograms;
- later audiograms;
- medical notes;
- NHS records;
- ENT records;
- tinnitus complaints;
- medical gradings;
- employment records;
- witness evidence.
The evidential significance of a gap depends on the circumstances.
Can a later audiogram be used to recreate a missing old one?
Not safely as though the reconstruction were an actual historical measurement.
This issue arose directly in Abbott.
In Mr Craggs' case the claimant proposed filling in the missing 8 kHz readings on the military audiograms using the value from a much later 2017 audiogram, on the basis that hearing at 8 kHz does not improve over time. The Court rejected that.
“I reject that highly artificial argument.”
“I see no sound basis for reconstructing those results or making assumptions about what the missing records at 8 kHz would be.”
Where a particular historic frequency had not been tested, the Court rejected an attempt to reconstruct the missing 8 kHz results from a much later audiogram. Later evidence can inform the medical analysis, but it does not turn missing historic data into measured historic data.
What if my records contain handwritten audiograms?
Older records may be handwritten, photocopied, scanned, numerical, graph-based or difficult to read.
Do not alter the original.
Keep the best copy available.
If you are using the record for medical or legal purposes, a clinician or solicitor may be able to interpret abbreviations or request a clearer copy.
Should I throw away duplicate audiograms?
No.
Two copies that initially look identical may contain:
- a different date;
- annotations;
- medical signatures;
- referral comments;
- grading information.
Where hearing history matters, preserve the complete record.
What if there are errors in my military record?
A record can contain an error.
A mistake should not simply be silently changed on your own copy.
If personal information held by the MOD is factually inaccurate, data-protection law provides a right in appropriate circumstances to request rectification. The MOD has a separate data-rights process for this.
There is also an important distinction between incorrect factual personal data and a professional opinion you disagree with.
“Someone else's opinion or feedback about you is not considered incorrect data, if it represents a genuine account of their views.”
Can I request records for somebody else?
For a living person, you normally need authority to act for them.
GOV.UK gives examples such as a lasting power of attorney, or written permission from the individual.
A solicitor acting for a veteran can obtain appropriate authority.
The rules are different for records of somebody who has died.
Can I request the medical records of a deceased veteran?
There is a separate MOD process.
The legal basis and information that may be disclosed depend partly on:
- when the medical record was created;
- who is making the request;
- whether the requester is the deceased person's personal representative;
- whether there is a claim arising from the death.
Do not use the ordinary living-person Subject Access Request route for somebody who has died — data-protection access rights apply to living individuals. GOV.UK has specific guidance titled Medical records for deceased service personnel.
Is a Freedom of Information request the right way to obtain my own medical records?
Normally, no.
Your own medical and personnel information is personal data.
For a living person, the appropriate route is generally the MOD's personal-data/Subject Access Request process.
Freedom of Information is more relevant to non-personal government information.
Do not confuse the two.
What other MOD records might matter in a hearing-loss investigation?
Medical evidence is only one side of the question.
A civil military NIHL investigation may also need evidence about noise exposure.
Depending on the circumstances, that might include:
- noise-risk assessments;
- weapon or equipment noise data;
- unit or workplace records;
- training documentation;
- hearing-protection arrangements;
- maintenance records;
- safety occurrences;
- role and posting history;
- exposure evidence from other personnel.
Some of these are not part of the veteran's personal medical file.
Does a SAR give me every MOD noise-risk assessment?
No.
A Subject Access Request gives you rights concerning your personal data.
A generic noise-risk assessment for a weapon, vehicle or workplace may not be personal data about you.
A solicitor investigating a civil disease or hearing-loss claim may therefore pursue relevant occupational and exposure material separately.
The Civil Procedure Rules' Pre-Action Protocol for Disease and Illness Claims specifically includes procedures for requesting occupational records, including health records.
That legal disclosure process is different from a veteran obtaining their own personal records for information.
Do I need to collect all the records myself before speaking to a solicitor?
No.
You can request your own records if you want them.
But somebody should not assume they must first assemble a perfect archive before asking for legal advice.
In a civil claim, a solicitor may obtain relevant records and other evidence as part of the investigation.
Likewise, do not wait for legal involvement before seeking healthcare if your hearing concerns you.
Do I need my records before getting a hearing test?
No.
If you think your hearing has deteriorated, your health does not need to wait for the MOD archive.
A current hearing assessment can establish your present hearing thresholds.
Historic records answer a different question: what did earlier tests show?
Both can be useful.
What records are most useful for military NIHL?
There is no universal ranking, but potentially important evidence includes:
- Entry audiogram — provides evidence of hearing near the start of service.
- Serial service audiograms — may show changes over time.
- Audiograms around significant noise exposure — can help establish chronology.
- Discharge or late-service hearing test — may show hearing near the end of service.
- Modern diagnostic audiogram — provides strong evidence of present hearing ability.
- ENT or audiology records — may contain diagnostic opinion.
- Tinnitus complaints — may help establish onset and history.
- Medical gradings or employment restrictions — can provide context concerning functional effect.
- Service and posting record — helps identify likely exposure periods.
- Noise/exposure evidence — helps answer what noise the individual actually encountered.
The importance of each item depends on the case.
Can records prove how much noise I was exposed to?
Usually not by themselves.
A personnel record might establish that somebody served in artillery, armour, aviation, engineering or another noisy role.
That helps.
But it does not necessarily quantify:
- how often a weapon was fired;
- distance from a noise source;
- sound level at the ear;
- duration;
- hearing protection actually worn;
- specific operational circumstances.
Exposure evidence may therefore need to come from several sources.
What if I cannot remember every weapon, vehicle or exercise?
That is common after long service.
Do not guess.
Start with the facts you can genuinely identify:
- service;
- trade;
- regiment/unit;
- postings;
- deployments;
- approximate years;
- main weapons or equipment used;
- particularly memorable noise incidents.
Your service records may help reconstruct the chronology.
Precision is useful when it is real. Invented precision is not.
Can witness evidence help where records are incomplete?
Potentially.
Former colleagues may be able to describe:
- duties;
- weapons used;
- frequency of training;
- noise environment;
- hearing-protection practices;
- particular incidents.
Family members may be able to describe:
- hearing difficulty;
- tinnitus complaints;
- television volume;
- asking people to repeat themselves;
- sleep disturbance.
Witness evidence and medical records perform different roles.
One does not automatically replace the other.
What if my records show I was issued hearing protection?
That is relevant.
It does not end the enquiry by itself.
Questions can include:
- what protection was issued;
- when;
- suitability;
- fit;
- whether it was available during all exposure;
- whether operational communication affected use;
- whether exposure occurred before it was issued.
Equally, the absence of a personal record proving issue does not automatically establish that no protection existed.
The complete evidence matters.
Can military records tell me whether I have a civil claim?
No single document can normally answer that.
A viable civil military hearing-loss claim can involve:
- service dates;
- noise exposure;
- Crown immunity;
- duty and breach;
- limitation;
- medical causation;
- later noise exposure;
- contributory negligence;
- injury and loss.
Records provide evidence relevant to those questions.
They do not replace the legal analysis.
Why does 15 May 1987 matter when looking at records?
The date of exposure can be legally important.
The Crown Proceedings (Armed Forces) Act 1987 removed the previous Crown-immunity bar for relevant service injury, but not retrospectively for injury resulting from acts or omissions before the Act was passed.
Royal Assent was 15 May 1987.
That means establishing when relevant noise exposure occurred can matter, not merely whether somebody served in the Armed Forces at some point.
Our guide to why 15 May 1987 matters explains this in full.
The separate AFCS and War Pension Scheme routes operate under different rules.
What should I do when my records arrive?
Do not begin by searching only for the worst-looking audiogram.
Build the chronology.
A useful approach is:
1. Record your service dates. Note entry, units, postings, deployments, changes of role and discharge.
2. Put every hearing test in date order. Record the test date, right-ear thresholds, left-ear thresholds, which frequencies were tested, any H grade, and any notes or referrals.
3. Identify relevant medical entries. Look for tinnitus, hearing difficulty, acoustic trauma, ear injury, infections, ENT, audiology and hearing aids.
4. Add major noise-exposure periods. For example weapons training, artillery, armour, aircraft, engineering, deployment and blast.
5. Add post-service evidence. Including civilian noisy employment, NHS complaints, hearing tests, hearing aids and later tinnitus.
The purpose is not to diagnose yourself.
It is to organise the evidence into a timeline that somebody qualified can understand.
Should I rely on an AI tool to interpret my service medical records?
AI can potentially help organise dates, explain abbreviations, extract threshold numbers and place tests in chronological order.
It should not be allowed to silently decide:
- that an unclear handwritten value is definitely a particular number;
- that a missing test was normal;
- that a 4 kHz notch proves NIHL;
- that rM-NIHL proves military causation;
- that a legal claim succeeds.
Medical and legal records contain ambiguity.
Any extracted information that matters should be checked against the underlying document.
Useful official routes
Request your own military records. Use the current GOV.UK service, Get a copy of military records of service — apply for your own records. This is the safest starting point for a former member of the Armed Forces.
Request other personal information held by MOD. Use Obtain information about yourself held by MOD, which explains the Subject Access Request process and the need to state clearly what information you require.
Your NHS GP. Tell your GP that you have served in the Armed Forces and ask for military veteran to be recorded in your patient record. If you still have paperwork from your military medical centre, give your GP a copy where appropriate. See Managing illness or injury as a veteran.
Frequently asked questions
Can I get my Army medical records?
Yes. Former service personnel can request their personal information from the MOD. Use the current GOV.UK records process and specify that you require the relevant medical and hearing information.
Can Royal Navy and Royal Marine veterans request their records?
Yes. The MOD records process covers former Royal Navy personnel, including Royal Marines.
Can RAF veterans request their records?
Yes.
Is there a fee?
No. GOV.UK states plainly: "There's no fee."
Do I need a solicitor to request them?
No. A veteran can request their own personal data directly.
Should I ask specifically for hearing records?
If hearing is what you are investigating, yes. Specify audiograms, hearing-surveillance material, tinnitus/hearing complaints, ENT/audiology records and relevant medical gradings rather than relying only on the general phrase "service records".
Will my military record contain every audiogram?
It may contain several or all relevant tests, but you should not assume every record set is complete. If expected documents are missing, clarify what you requested and whether other records are held.
What if no audiograms can be found?
That means you do not currently have the historic audiometric evidence. It does not tell you what those hypothetical tests would have shown. Other evidence may still be relevant.
Are old Army hearing tests worth anything?
Potentially, yes. Abbott confirmed that military screening audiograms may be used for diagnostic and quantification purposes, especially when they form part of a consistent pattern.
Is a modern NHS or private audiogram better?
For establishing your current hearing, BSA-compliant pure-tone audiometry is what Abbott called the gold standard of audiometric testing. But it cannot replace the historical information contained in an old contemporaneous military audiogram.
What is PULHHEEMS?
It is a military medical-fitness system. The H component concerns hearing. The grade is useful context but is not the same thing as the underlying audiogram or a diagnosis of NIHL.
Does H1 mean my hearing was perfect?
No. It is a military functional category rather than a statement that every hearing threshold was zero or that no degree of noise damage existed.
Does H3 prove the Army damaged my hearing?
No. It describes impaired hearing within the military grading system. It does not identify the cause.
Can I see my NHS records too?
Yes, through the appropriate NHS access process. Your GP record may contain post-service hearing complaints, referrals and military medical information provided when you left service.
Are military medical records automatically transferred to the NHS?
Government guidance says service leavers should make sure relevant military medical paperwork reaches their GP, and warns that transfer of military health records can take time. Do not assume your current GP file necessarily contains every historic military document.
Can I request records urgently for a claim?
GOV.UK says you should explain if the request is urgent and why, giving legal or medical reasons as the example.
Does requesting records stop a legal deadline?
Do not assume so. If you are concerned about a civil limitation deadline or the Matrix registration deadline, obtain legal advice rather than waiting for the records to arrive.
Can I use FOI to request my own medical record?
The normal route for your own personal information is a Subject Access Request, not an FOI request.
Can my solicitor obtain other MOD records?
Potentially. A civil claim may require occupational and exposure evidence in addition to the veteran's personal medical records.
Should I wait for my records before seeing an audiologist?
No. If you are concerned about your hearing, seek appropriate healthcare regardless of the records process.
For solicitor firms: DMD Costs has analysed the post-Abbott costs consequences for military NIHL litigation, including the additional medical, audiological and evidential work that may arise when historic hearing files require reconsideration. That is practitioner costs material rather than guidance to veterans on obtaining their own records.
Related
- Witness Evidence in Military Hearing-Loss Claims: Family, Colleagues and Former Service Personnel
- Military Noise Exposure: Weapons, Aircraft, Vehicles and Machinery
- Military Hearing Loss Time Limits: Civil Claims, Matrix, AFCS and War Pension
- Why 15 May 1987 Matters in Military Hearing-Loss Claims
- Civil Claim vs AFCS vs War Pension: Military Hearing Loss Routes Explained
- How to Read a Military Audiogram
- Noise-Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL): A Guide for Serving Personnel and Veterans
- Tinnitus and Military Service: A Guide for Serving Personnel and Veterans
- What Is rM-NIHL? The Military Hearing Loss Diagnostic Method Explained
- Abbott v Ministry of Defence (2026): What the Military Hearing Loss Judgment Means
RemedyBridge is a claims management company, not a law firm, and nothing on this page is legal or medical advice. You never have to pay anyone to apply to the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme or the War Pension Scheme — the free routes are here.