Two sisters who were abused by the same man are fighting for a change in a law which means only one of them is able to claim compensation.
The Law Clinic at Teesside University is leading a legal challenge to overturn what is commonly known as the “same roof rule”.
This means compensation is not paid if the injury happened before October 1, 1979, and, at the time of the incident, the victim and the abuser lived together as members of the same family.
The rule was designed to prevent the assailant benefiting from any compensation awarded.
It was abolished on October 1, 1979, but victims prior to that date cannot claim retrospective compensation.
Teesside University Law Clinic, a student-run legal advice service, has launched a legal challenge on behalf of one victim to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme.
The victim, who is not being identified to protect her anonymity, has been left angry and hurt by the rule after their abuser died last year, and they then told police about the abuse they had suffered.
Both were abused by the same man over a period of time – one before the abolishment of the rule in 1979 and one afterwards.
She said: “It took a great deal of courage to report these crimes and it has been an extremely painful process for us.
“To then find out that the rules state that only one of us is worthy of compensation, because the abolition of the same roof rule in 1979 was not made retrospective, was like a kick in the teeth to both of us.
“My sister is so angry at this flawed system that she has not yet decided whether she even wants to make a claim. I feel extremely upset that after all we have been through, and are still going through, as the damage done is hard to erase, that we have this further battle to fight.”
She added: “The same roof rule not being made retrospective is absurd and wrong. My sister and I both suffered the same abuse, at the same age, at the hands of the same man and are both still suffering the long-term effects of that abuse today.
“Why should one sister be entitled to bring a claim and the other not, purely because we are different ages?”
Andrew Perriman, a senior law lecturer at Teesside University, runs Teesside University Law Clinic and has been meeting with MPs and victim support groups to raise awareness on the rule.
He said: “We are representing a client whose case is proceeding through the courts and it is the first step on a long journey to secure compensation for victims of historic sexual abuse. If the case is successful it will be a catalyst for other claimants.
“Very rarely does an opportunity arise when lawyers actually get a chance to change the law and the fact that the law students at Teesside University Law Clinic are fighting for such an important change is hugely significant.”
Mr Perriman, who has also started a petition, added: “Where victims are treated differently by virtue of the date in which they were abused, it is morally and ethically wrong and changes are required to ensure fairness for all victims.”
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice said: “The so called ‘same roof rule’ was part of the original Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme and was introduced to stop offenders benefiting from compensation paid to victims who lived with them.
“It was amended in 1979 so the restriction only applied to adults who remained living together after the incident. This was to protect payments to the most seriously injured victims of crime, while reducing the burden on the taxpayer.
“We sympathise with anyone who has been the victim of abuse but we cannot comment on individual cases.”
• Find out more about the same roof rule and sign the petition here.
No comments:
Post a Comment