Compensation for crime victims fails to keep pace

Victims of violent crimes who suffer life-altering injuries are currently facing financial challenges, as the compensation they can receive is dramatically less than that offered in the 1990s. Kim Harrison, the immediate past president of the Association of Personal Injury Lawyers (APIL), has highlighted the concerning state of the Government’s Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (CICS). The highest payment of £500,000 was set in April 1996, and has not been adjusted for inflation since, leaving victims to bear the brunt of rising costs. APIL’s analysis indicates that had this payment been inflation-adjusted based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI), it would amount to just over one million pounds today at £1,015,284.

Harrison expressed the gravity of the situation, stating, “The payment is for victims of crime with the most catastrophic injuries, including brain damage and paralysis, who need compensation to support their care and equipment needs. It might be hard to believe but the money does not stretch a long way.” She further commented on the inadequacy of the scheme, stating, “While having a cap on compensation for survivors of crime is not perfect, at the very least it should be recognised that the amount established when the cap was set in 1996 will not go as far in today’s money, three decades on.”

The plight of crime victims, particularly those with severe injuries, continues to be overlooked, as Harrison pointed out, “This small, vulnerable, group of people who deserve help have been overlooked for too long. Other government support schemes for people in need are reviewed and uprated but the provision for injured victims of crime has been left to fester.” The pressing need for a comprehensive review is underscored by her assertion that “the situation puts into stark light how much the CICS is not working properly and is in need of a full review.” She called attention to various shortcomings in the scheme, such as issues regarding eligibility and time limits on claims, as well as the necessity to adapt the scheme in response to modern crimes like online grooming.