People seeking compensation for the Windrush scandal are fundamentally disadvantaged compared with those claiming in other schemes because of a lack of funded legal support, legal reform charity JUSTICE claims today. 

JUSTICE and Shaila Pal, director of clinical legal education at Kings College London, compared the plight of Windrush claimants compared with their counterparts affected by the Post Office and infected blood scandals. Each is entitled to claim from a government-backed compensation scheme but the authors found inconsistencies in the application of evidential standards and decision-making across all schemes.

The infected blood and Post Office schemes, the report concluded, have a greater degree of institutional independence, access to legal and other expertise, recourse to independent panels and appeal mechanisms capable of making binding compensation decisions.

JUSTICE said the Windrush scheme is at least as complicated as the others, involving assessments of historical laws, facts and evidence that are complex even for lawyers and judges. But the lack of any legal support means that victims have no idea whether they are being offered a fair compensation settlement.

The report cites research showing that Windrush compensation awards are up to eight times higher when claimants have legal support. Claimants received an average of £11,400 when they applied by themselves, but this figure rose to £83,200 when they had legal representation.

Read more

Zoe Bantleman, JUSTICE’s legal director, said: ‘Our research shows that all the compensation schemes are difficult to navigate, and legal representation is crucial when it comes to securing a fair settlement. There is no justification for treating Windrush claimants differently to Post Office or infected blood victims.

‘Windrush survivors have already endured years of mistreatment at the hands of the state. If the prime minister is serious about righting this historic injustice, he must level the playing field and give them the legal support they need and deserve.’

The Post Office compensation scheme was initially heavily criticised – including by the chair of the statutory inquiry – for the way that claimants were treated and the lack of funded legal support. The government amended the process last year to allow victims access to free legal advice.

Researchers who spoke to victims of all three scandals found all three struggled to prove they qualify for compensation and secure a fair settlement. Without funded support, Windrush claimants need to track down decades-old immigration forms, which may have gone missing or been destroyed by public bodies.

Meanwhile Windrush claimants do not have the opportunity to take a fixed compensation payment as has been offered in Post Office cases.

To improve fairness and accountability, the report calls for the provision of funded legal advice and the creation of an independent, expert appeals body with the power to make binding compensation awards for the Windrush scheme.

Shaila Pal added: ‘Victims of the Post Office, infected blood, and Home Office Windrush scandals have all suffered profound injustices at the hands of the state. This report highlights that Windrush victims continue to face an additional injustice through what has become a two-tier system of redress, with the Windrush Compensation Scheme marked by significant structural failings.’

The Home Office has insisted that the Windrush Compensation Scheme has been designed to be as simple as possible to access and individuals are not required to argue complex points of law, so funding for legal support is not necessary.