Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority Claims for Victims of Domestic Violence – The Challenge

Compensation through the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA), which is a Government funded scheme enabling innocent victims to gain compensation for physical and psychiatric injuries resulting from a crime, isn’t at all as straightforward as it may seem at on the outset.

The CICA has strict conditions on making a claim which can result in Applicants having their claims rejected and having to go through a distressing Appeal process, which can result in an Applicant having to again relive the abuse to have a rejection overturned at the Appeal.

One of the conditions which the CICA has implemented within their Scheme is that a victim has two years to apply for compensation, if they apply outside of that timeframe then there is a very strong chance that their claim will fail. The CICA Scheme notes that the claims officer has the discretion to remove this however; there are many victims of domestic violence who have had their claim rejected on the basis that there was no reason why they couldn’t apply within those two years.

We have recently carried out discussions with someone working in the Social Services field.

They were able to refer to a real case example when discussing the difficulties which arise when making a claim, but anonymised names will be used for confidentiality reasons.

Case Study

Mrs Smith was in an abusive relationship for six years which involved emotional and physical abuse throughout. In the 5^th year of the relationship Mr. Smith violently attacked her, resulting in a broken eye socket and severe bruising to the head and body. Mrs. Smith reconciled with Mr. Smith following the assault and although she reported the incident to the police, she was emotionally blackmailed by Mr. Smith to retract her statement and withhold access to her medical records.

This resulted in Mr. Smith receiving a conviction of Actual Bodily Harm rather than Grievous Bodily Harm, and a suspended sentence. At the time, Mrs. Smith was unaware of the right to claim compensation as she had reconciled with Mr. Smith, she was also not informed that if she was to separate from Mr. Smith in the future that she would have a potential claim under the Scheme.

One and a half years later, Mrs. Smith separated from Mr. Smith with the support of her family, who she returned to live with. Mrs. Smith came across the CICA some months later whilst researching help and support for victims of domestic violence. She decided to make an application (approximately four months after the two-year time limit) which was instantly rejected on the basis that Mrs. Smith had applied outside of the timescales.

Following review, Mrs. Smith decided to Appeal the decision, it was heard at a tribunal where she was not invited to attend and was dealt with as a paper exercise. It again was rejected on the basis that there was no reason why she could not apply within the two-year period, and in addition to that, she retracted her statement and reconciled with the perpetrator.

Mrs. Smith decided not to give up and brought about Judicial Review stating that the CICA was in fact discriminating against victims of domestic violence and generalising victims of crime, rather than recognising the unique situation of someone who has not only suffered a physical injury, but years of emotional abuse.

A response was received from a Judge from the Upper Tribunal which agreed that the CICA had failed to acknowledge the victim’s psychological state within the time she had lived with her family, following the separation. They also criticised them for not inviting Mrs. Smith to the oral hearing in order for her to be able to put forward her case.

It was agreed that the CICA would re-open their case and hold an oral hearing where Mrs. Smith attended and ultimately had to revisit the disturbing experiences which she had been a victim of for a long period of time.

At this hearing, it was agreed that the two-year timeframe would be waivered. However, there were further obstacles to come. The claim was then rejected as Mrs. Smith did not fully cooperate with the police, Mrs. Smith had to go through the Appeals process once again, which resulted in an award initially being reduced by 75% to her then attending another oral hearing.

At this hearing she had to relive her experiences yet again in order for her to be listened to, so that she would not be judged on the basis of her ‘behaviour’ as a result of being a victim of domestic violence. The outcome was that Mrs. Smith received an award with 25% reduction for her injuries, which was £4,250.

The impact of this process on Mrs. Smith was significant, she felt like she was being treated as though she was in the wrong, she felt like she was not being listened to, like no one believed her, she had to relive her experiences at two different tribunals, with different people making decisions on whether or not she was worthy of compensation following six years of abuse, she was re-traumatised.

Mrs. Smith went through this process regrettably without legal advice, it wasn’t until after, when she reflected that if she had the help and support of the solicitor that maybe the process would not have been so distressing. She would have had someone to fight her corner, someone to speak on her behalf, someone who knew the process well and could have resolved this much more quickly and efficiently for her, and even may have been able to receive a better outcome.

Statistics show that applicants who did not have any legal advice between 2017 and 2018, the average pay-out was £6,934. Those that had legal advice received on average an additional £3,804, with a total average payout of £10,738.

WHAT TO DO NEXT

Get in touch today for a free initial consultation. Select one of the methods on the right of the page, or call us on 0113 200 9787 to find out how we can help you.