Source · Select Committees · Home Affairs Committee
Fifth Report - The Windrush Compensation Scheme
Home Affairs Committee
HC 204
Published 24 November 2021
Recommendations
2
Deferred
Urge Wendy Williams to review Windrush Compensation Scheme as part of Home Office progress.
Recommendation
Many people who have applied for compensation have yet to receive a penny and we have heard too many stories of people struggling with impossible demands for evidence, poor communication from the Home Office and a lack of understanding of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government's response focuses on its revised planning assumption for the number of eligible claims, stating it now estimates between 4,000 and 6,000, without directly addressing the committee's concerns about the difficulties of the application process.
Home Office
View Details →
12
Deferred
Publish Windrush compensation data every six months, including impact on life payments
Recommendation
We welcome the recent publication of data on full and final offers. The Home Office should publish this data at least every six months; it should also publish data on the number of full and final impact on life payments …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government's response focuses on its past and ongoing outreach and engagement efforts to various communities, including evaluation of these initiatives, rather than addressing the recommendation to publish specific data on full and final compensation offers.
Home Office
View Details →
24
Acknowledged
Ensure Windrush scheme communications clarify eligibility, conduct targeted outreach, and evaluate effectiveness for all communities.
Recommendation
The Home Office must ensure that all communications about the Windrush schemes make clear that eligibility is not limited to the Caribbean Commonwealth, and that there is dedicated outreach and targeted communications for those from non- Caribbean Commonwealth countries. It …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government intends to publish the Scheme’s overall Equality Impact Assessment in the new year once it has been updated to reflect recent changes, without directly addressing the specific calls for targeted outreach or clarification on High Commission support.
Home Office
View Details →
41
Deferred
We urge the Home Office to enable We Are Digital to book as many additional...
Recommendation
We urge the Home Office to enable We Are Digital to book as many additional support sessions for claimants as are needed and to monitor feedback from claimants carefully to ensure any gaps in support are identified. We believe that …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government response focuses on existing urgent financial support processes and plans to support further training for caseworkers to gather information more efficiently, but does not address enabling 'We Are Digital' for additional support sessions or ensuring the service complements legal support.
Home Office
View Details →
46
Accepted
Para 156
Examine Windrush cases to assess fair application of 'balance of probabilities' standard of proof.
Recommendation
We are not yet convinced that the Home Office has done enough to embed a light touch approach to evidence: for example, we note that the revised caseworker guidance provides no detail as to what the changes made to the …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government describes its existing two-stage independent review process for claims, stating that recommendations from the Adjudicator’s Office (Tier 2) are normally accepted and implemented, with disagreements reported to the Oversight Board.
Home Office
View Details →
47
Deferred
Urgently publish the equalities impact assessment for the Windrush Compensation Scheme.
Recommendation
Given the concerns about the Department’s understanding of the eligible cohort and the difficulties with obtaining documentary evidence, in the interest of transparency we further recommend that the Home Office urgently publishes its equalities impact assessment for the Windrush Compensation …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government response outlines its existing two-stage review process for compensation claims and clarifies the criteria for preliminary payments, but does not address the recommendation to publish the equalities impact assessment for the scheme.
Home Office
View Details →
52
Rejected
Para 192
Increase general award for lost earnings to at least next year's National Living Wage.
Recommendation
We recognise that it might be possible to reflect better the losses incurred by some individuals by looking at pay levels in the sector they worked in, regardless of the direct evidence of the wages they can provide. The Government …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects increasing the general award to align with future National Living Wages, justifying the use of the 2017 National Living Wage for consistency and speed, and explicitly states the scheme excludes occupational pensions.
Home Office
View Details →
56
Deferred
Para 199
Review decision not to refund claimants for fees paid for successful citizenship and ILR.
Recommendation
The Home Office should review its decision not to refund any claimants for past fees paid for successful citizenship and Indefinite Leave to Remain.
Government Response Summary
The government is reviewing its approach to payments made by claimants seeking to prove their lawful status through charged immigration applications, which would encompass past fees for successful citizenship and Indefinite Leave to Remain.
Home Office
View Details →
64
Accepted
Para 214
Require Home Office transparency on discretionary award compensation types and consistency in decision-making.
Recommendation
The Home Office should be more transparent about the types of loss it is prepared to compensate through a discretionary award and should set out what types of claim under this category have previously been accepted. The Home Office should …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government confirmed policy and operational teams are reviewing the discretionary category, provided examples of previously accepted awards (travel, medical, legal advice reimbursement), and stated consistency is maintained through technical specialist sign-off.
Home Office
View Details →
66
Not Addressed
Conduct analysis of all discretionary claims and report findings to the Committee within two months.
Recommendation
We call on the Home Office to conduct an analysis of all discretionary claims received to date to establish the types of loss people are claiming for. The Department must provide its findings to this Committee within two months of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government reiterated its commitment to keeping all categories under review and described existing monitoring processes, but did not commit to conducting the specific analysis of discretionary claims or providing findings to the Committee within the requested timeframe.
Home Office
View Details →
67
Accepted in Part
Explain award determination for individuals unable to return to UK and introduce specific tariff payment.
Recommendation
We call on the Home Office to explain how awards across all categories of claim are determined for individuals who were unable to return to the UK, including those unable to return for multiple decades, and to introduce a tariff …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explained that awards for individuals unable to return to the UK are determined using existing scheme rules and guidance, primarily through the Impact on Life category, and confirmed such compensation has been paid. However, it did not commit to introducing a specific tariff payment for these individuals.
Home Office
View Details →
71
Rejected
Independently review future decisions on Windrush awards reduced due to previous criminality.
Recommendation
Given the concerns raised by the independent adviser on the design of the Windrush Compensation Scheme, as well as the risks of costly legal challenges, we recommend that future decisions on whether to reduce or decline an award because of …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government explains its existing policy on how severe criminal behaviour affects compensation, citing a duty to the public purse and precedent from CICA, and states decisions are signed off by Ministers, thereby rejecting the recommendation for independent review.
Home Office
View Details →
80
Accepted in Part
Publish routine data and review operations of the Vulnerable Persons Team.
Recommendation
We are disappointed that the Home Office has yet to resume routine publication of data relating to the support in urgent and exceptional circumstances policy and the work of the Vulnerable Persons Team. This information must be published regularly. We …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government commits to publishing Urgent and Exceptional Payment and Vulnerable Persons Team data. However, it states it will only consider formalising customer feedback processes and does not address the calls for the Home Secretary, Permanent Secretary, or Wendy Williams to review the team's operation.
Home Office
View Details →
83
Rejected
Para 273
Establish an independent single-stage review process for Windrush Compensation Scheme claims.
Recommendation
We call on the Home Office to establish a demonstrably independent single-stage review process in which claimants have greater confidence, such as a judge-led panel. The Home Office should accept and implement decisions of the independent review. Where an initial …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government rejects establishing a single-stage, judge-led review process, stating it already has a two-stage independent review process with Tier 1 internal reviews and Tier 2 reviews by the Adjudicator's Office. It notes that Adjudicator's Office recommendations are normally accepted but does not commit to the proposed feedback mechanism.
Home Office
View Details →
88
Accepted
Urgently address fundamental problems within the Windrush Compensation Scheme
Recommendation
We welcome the personal commitment expressed by the Home Secretary to the operation of the scheme and the improvements that have been made to the scheme over time; however, these changes have taken far too long and have not gone …
Read more
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the need to do more to rebuild trust and address issues, detailing ongoing engagement and outreach efforts through community leaders, surgeries, the Windrush Working Group, and the Windrush Community Fund, and committing to continue these efforts.
Home Office
View Details →
Conclusions (73)
1
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 22
We are deeply concerned that, as of the end of September, only 20.1% of the initially estimated 15,000 eligible claimants have applied to the scheme and only 5.8% have received any compensation. The troublingly low level of applications and payments are evidence enough that the scheme has not worked as …
Government Response Summary
The government highlights improvements made to the scheme since December 2020 and states it will consider any further recommendations once received from Wendy Williams' ongoing review of the Windrush Lessons Learned Review.
3
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 31
We are troubled that over four times as many people have had their status or citizenship confirmed under the Windrush Scheme as have applied for compensation, and we are concerned that the Home Office is lowering its estimates of the total number of potential claimants based on the low level …
Government Response Summary
The government's response argues against transferring the Windrush Compensation Scheme to another organisation, citing potential delays, hardship, and data security concerns, and highlights existing internal and external scrutiny mechanisms.
4
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 32
It reflects the deep and far-reaching problems with the compliant environment policy that, four years on from the emergence of the scandal, the Home Office still does not know how many people were affected and how many are eligible to apply to the Windrush Compensation Scheme.
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the need to rebuild trust and describes extensive ongoing engagement and outreach efforts with community and faith leaders, including running events and working with the Windrush Working Group.
5
Conclusion
Accepted
The Home Office should provide more details of how it is identifying the assumptions underpinning its claim volume scenarios and how it is establishing its planning estimates in its response to this Report. (Paragraph 32) 88 The Windrush Compensation Scheme A lower than expected number of applications
Government Response Summary
The government commits to providing an update with the number of full and final impact on life payments made at each level of award, in addition to its regularly published transparency data.
6
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 37
It is clear from the low level of claims submitted to the compensation scheme to date, and from evidence we have received, that there is considerable work to be done in order to rebuild trust and confidence in the Home Office to deliver the Windrush Compensation Scheme, and to demonstrate …
Government Response Summary
The government is proactively writing to individuals who have been granted documentation under the Windrush Scheme but have not yet applied for compensation, with the first batch of 2,500 letters already sent and the rest to follow in the next two months.
7
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 38
It would have been far better for establishing trust if the compensation scheme had been administered independently from the Home Office from the start, as many Windrush campaigners have called for. By keeping the compensation scheme within the very Department that caused the Windrush scandal, the Government has undermined confidence …
Government Response Summary
The government explains that the Historical Cases Review was not intended to identify all affected individuals and argues against extending it further due to cost and inefficiency, stating efforts are instead focused on outreach and engagement.
8
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 38
In order to increase trust and encourage more applicants, we believe that the scheme should be transferred to an independent organisation.
Government Response Summary
The government does not address the recommendation to transfer the scheme to an independent organisation, instead focusing on its ongoing outreach and engagement events, which have moved to digital platforms during the pandemic.
9
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 41
The changes to the Windrush Compensation Scheme which were announced in December 2020 were long overdue and the increase in applications since then is to be welcomed. The Department’s work to understand better why eligible people have yet to apply for compensation is also to be welcomed. However, that application …
Government Response Summary
The government details various ongoing and future communication and outreach strategies, including filming new video guides in multiple languages and planning the next phase of its campaign with new video, audio, and editorial content, to rebuild trust.
10
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 42
Given the continued uncertainty around the number of eligible claimants and the fact that some eligible claimants currently lack the confidence, patience or trust in the Home Office to apply for a scheme administered by the Department, we strongly welcome the removal of the formal end date for the scheme. …
Government Response Summary
The government highlights its ongoing proactive engagement efforts, including funding grassroots organizations to run awareness events and the £500,000 Community Fund, and states it continues to seek new ways of collaborating with community groups.
11
Conclusion
Acknowledged
We hope that the changes since December 2020 that have increased the level of award available and made the process simpler will also help encourage more people to apply for the scheme. The Home Office could improve trust and confidence amongst claimants by being more transparent about the value of …
Government Response Summary
The government states it currently collects some information in the Primary Claim Form and is looking to include collection of this data in future updates to other claim forms, but does not commit to greater transparency about the value of awards made.
13
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 49
As previously stated, whilst we recognise the challenges faced by the Home Office in both estimating the number of, and identifying, people who may be eligible for the Windrush Compensation Scheme, we agree with the NAO, the Public Accounts Committee and Wendy Williams that more could be done proactively to …
Government Response Summary
The government states it consistently reviews processes for improvement, works smarter, and is embedding a continuous improvement culture to deliver operational excellence, but provides no specific actions for proactively identifying affected individuals.
14
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 50
All those who received help from the Windrush Scheme to get their papers and documentation resolved should have been contacted and offered help with applying for the Windrush Compensation Scheme.
Government Response Summary
The government commits to rapidly expanding the Compensation Scheme team to increase casework capacity and speed up claim processing, but does not address the recommendation to proactively contact specific individuals who received help with documentation to offer compensation application support.
15
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 50
The Home Office should clarify how many of those 13,800 people were proactively contacted and offered support to apply for compensation as well. It should contact them again to ensure they have full information about the changes to the compensation scheme and the help available to apply.
Government Response Summary
The government provides statistics on applications and offers made, and states it has changed its monthly transparency data publication to include more detail on offers and case age. However, it does not clarify how many of the 13,800 people were previously contacted or commit to contacting them again with updated information.
16
Conclusion
Deferred
The Home Office should also explain clearly how it has considered and is seeking to mitigate any risks it identified when making the decision not to broaden the scope of its historical cases review, including but not limited to the risk of failing to identify non-Caribbean Commonwealth nationals who may …
Government Response Summary
The government states the Windrush Compensation Scheme is open for applications and that it is unable to directly identify individuals who have not made contact, thereby sidestepping the request to explain risk mitigation for not broadening the historical cases review and declining to provide cost estimates for such a review.
17
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 59
We share claimants’ and their representatives’ concerns that digital engagement events and advertising may be less effective in reaching this cohort.
Government Response Summary
The government provides an extensive list of improvements made to the Windrush Compensation Scheme since December 2020, including increased award values, simplified processes, and funded claimant assistance, but does not directly address the committee's concern about the effectiveness of digital engagement events.
18
Conclusion
Deferred
As restrictions are lifted, planning and preparations must commence to ensure that the Department is ready to launch a new and extensive programme of face-to-face engagement events as soon as it is safe to do so. (Paragraph 59) 90 The Windrush Compensation Scheme Grassroots campaign
Government Response Summary
The government outlines a package of support for individuals claiming on behalf of deceased relatives, including reimbursement of probate fees and legal advice costs, but does not address the recommendation to plan for new face-to-face engagement events as restrictions lift.
19
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 68
We believe that a community-centred strategy is vital for building trust in the compensation scheme given the pervasive distrust of the Home Office within the affected communities.
Government Response Summary
The government states it is currently reviewing its customer contact strategy and considering feedback from stakeholders and individuals, but does not commit to implementing a specific community-centred strategy.
20
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 68
The Home Office should look at more innovative ways of reaching communities, for instance video guides.
Government Response Summary
The government states it has introduced a direct referral to We Are Digital for claimant assistance and monitors this support, but does not address the recommendation to explore more innovative ways of reaching communities, such as video guides.
21
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 68
Whilst the Home Office’s grassroots campaign and the launch of the Windrush Community Fund are welcome, it is unacceptable that they took so long to get off the ground and didn’t even start providing funds for community projects until two years after the compensation scheme opened. As a result of …
Government Response Summary
The government response outlines the existing support provided by "We Are Digital" for claimants, detailing how they are encouraged to offer flexible appointment times and how their service is quality assured. It emphasizes the scheme's design for accessibility without legal assistance.
22
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 68
The Home Office should bolster the support and funding available to grassroots campaigns and community groups tasked with raising awareness of the Windrush schemes, ensuring that those in which the community has confidence and which have expertise in this work are adequately supported. It should look to scale up its …
Government Response Summary
The government states the Compensation Scheme is accessible without legal assistance, with caseworkers providing support. It is continuously evaluating how to improve claimant help and working with "We Are Digital" to ensure their service is accessible.
23
Conclusion
Deferred
When individuals apply for the Windrush Compensation Scheme, the Department should collect data on how they heard about it. This would allow for proper evaluation of their outreach work and help decide where more resources should be targeted. (Paragraph 69) Reaching all affected communities
Government Response Summary
The government response details the internal processes for embedding changes to the standard of proof, including staff training, quality assurance, case conferences, and independent review mechanisms, without addressing the recommendation to collect data on how claimants heard about the scheme.
25
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 89
Given that the Windrush Compensation Scheme was set up to right the wrongs done by the Home Office to a predominantly older generation, many of whom had suffered considerable hardship as a result, there should have been a clear focus from the start on ensuring that compensation could be paid …
Government Response Summary
The government response details the "Impact on Life" compensation category, explaining its payment levels from £10,000 to over £100,000, the minimum £10,000 payment introduced by recent changes, and the public availability of casework guidance. It does not address the delays or operational failings highlighted in the recommendation.
26
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 90
We welcome the reviews the Department is now undertaking to get to grips with the application and casework process and the plans to increase casework capacity further. However, we believe it has taken far too long for this to happen given the concerns—such as the evidential requirements of the scheme—which …
Government Response Summary
The government explains its approach to using medical evidence in decision-making, stating that it does not routinely seek expert medical advice to avoid delays and that it is committed to establishing a process for customers to obtain expert medical evidence on their own behalf.
27
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 90
The Home Office must build on the work of the NAO and undertake a comprehensive analysis of its current workflow system to identify precisely where and why bottlenecks, backward steps, inefficient processes and slow decisions are occurring. It must interrogate these findings rigorously and be prepared to act swiftly and …
Government Response Summary
The government explains its calculation method for loss of employment compensation, including pegging the tariff to the 2017 National Living Wage, and states that arrangements are being finalised across government to correct National Insurance positions for State Pension entitlement.
28
Conclusion
Deferred
The Department must act urgently to improve its performance management information and clarify its casework capacity and staffing needs, ensuring that casework capacity is expanded as quickly as possible. The Department should share its findings and the actions it is taking to address them with this Committee. It should provide …
Government Response Summary
The government explains that caseworkers are trained to holistically assess claims, accepting various forms of information like impact statements, and that compensation is not declined solely due to a lack of documentation.
29
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 98
The Home Office should clarify what progress it made on processing cases submitted prior to 14 December 2020 between 14 December 2020 and 31 March 2021; additionally, going forwards, the scheme data it publishes monthly should include: the number of offers made; whether offers are interim, preliminary or final, and …
Government Response Summary
The government states it is reviewing its approach to payments made by claimants seeking to prove lawful status through charged immigration applications, without addressing the request for specific scheme data and progress metrics.
30
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 101
Whilst we strongly welcome the introduction of the preliminary payment for impact on life, we are disappointed by the Home Office’s estimate that only 40–50% of claimants will benefit from it. It is right that the Home Office created a mechanism to accelerate payments in light of unacceptable delays, but …
Government Response Summary
The government refers the Committee to its response for recommendation 29, thereby avoiding addressing the substance of this recommendation concerning the adequacy and scope of preliminary payments for impact on life.
31
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 102
The Home Office should provide the preliminary £10,000 impact on life award to all those the Department has previously acknowledged were wrongly subjected to immigration enforcement measures or were wrongly denied proof of their lawful status as a result of the Windrush scandal. The award should be issued irrespective of …
Government Response Summary
The government's response focuses on compensating legal fees up to £500 for immigration applications, rather than addressing the recommendation for a preliminary £10,000 impact on life award.
32
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 103
We also strongly welcome the increased payments for impact on life. However, we are troubled that one of the reasons identified by the NAO for this change was, effectively, to supplement other categories of loss where compensation is either insufficient or inaccessible due to the evidential requirements. We are saddened …
Government Response Summary
The government committed to reviewing its definition of Homelessness within the compensation scheme, noting that claimants are currently not precluded from awards in this category if staying with family and friends.
33
Conclusion
Accepted
The changes made to the scheme in December do not go far enough to address the delays and the unreasonable demands for evidence which claimants are facing. (Paragraph 103) Estate claims
Government Response Summary
The government stated it will review the discretionary category, which was introduced to cover financial losses not captured by other categories, and will provide updates.
34
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 108
Given the very apparent delays in processing estate claims and the clear reason for this, it is unacceptable that the Home Office has only recently provided a solution.
Government Response Summary
The government explained that policy and operational teams are closely examining the Discretionary category, outlining current procedures for awarding claims and citing examples of previous awards.
35
Conclusion
Accepted
The Home Office should monitor the impact of its package of support carefully to ensure that it is meeting the needs of people who are claiming on behalf of an estate. (Paragraph 108) Communication with caseworkers
Government Response Summary
The government stated it is committed to keeping all scheme categories under review, utilising feedback from existing quality assurance processes and Tier 1 and Tier 2 reviews to identify trends and areas needing scrutiny.
36
Conclusion
Deferred
Claimants facing long delays deserve to know where their claim is in the process and to understand what progress has been and is currently being made on their claim. Updates should be substantive and all communications must maximise opportunities to make further progress. (Paragraph 111) Changes to the application form …
Government Response Summary
The government's response clarified how awards are decided for individuals wrongly prevented from returning to the UK, stating that published rules and guidance apply, but did not address the recommendation for substantive updates and communication on claim progress.
37
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 122
We welcome the improvements that have been made to the claim forms and accompanying guidance. However, we are disappointed that the Home Office did The Windrush Compensation Scheme 93 not act upon the advice of its then independent adviser and that it took more than two years to make these …
Government Response Summary
The government stated it will continue to listen to feedback to ensure the scheme operates effectively and specifically committed to reviewing rules on mitigation of loss.
38
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 122
Reissuing the claim form guidance in plain English is a welcome first step in improving the application process, but the Department must continually be aware that the demands of this form may still represent a significant challenge to this cohort, many of whom may be vulnerable. As we were told …
Government Response Summary
The government's response detailed its policy on how severe criminal behaviour affects compensation eligibility and the reduction or denial of 'Impact on Life' awards, entirely unrelated to the recommendation about application support.
39
Conclusion
Accepted
We welcome the Home Office’s decision to enable individuals to contact We Are Digital directly for assistance with their application form; this recognises that some people who are eligible for compensation will not feel comfortable accessing assistance through the Department. (Paragraph 126) Assistance with completing applications
Government Response Summary
The government reaffirmed the Home Secretary's unreserved apology to Windrush victims and families, stating its commitment to ensuring proper compensation and that all claimants receive a personal letter of apology.
40
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 131
It is essential that claimants to the scheme have ready access to the end-to-end support they need in ways which are comfortable for them. Given the nature and the complexity of the impacts suffered, we are very concerned that support sessions are limited to three hours.
Government Response Summary
The government committed to delivering on the recommendation by building on existing outreach and engaging with stakeholders and expert facilitators to sensitively design and implement support, but did not specify changes to the three-hour limit on support sessions.
42
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 139
There are strong arguments for facilitating access to legal advice for people who wish to seek help with their claim. Having access to funded legal representation may help more people to feel confident accessing and engaging with the scheme. It would also facilitate a greater number of comprehensive, well-ordered claims …
Government Response Summary
The government response discusses the cap-less nature of Urgent and Exceptional Payments and updated guidance on information sharing for these payments, but does not address the recommendation for facilitating access to funded legal representation for claimants.
43
Conclusion
Deferred
We do not believe that the limited service provided by We Are Digital is sufficient to obviate the need for specialist legal advice. We therefore urge the Home Office to introduce new arrangements to ensure that everyone who wishes to access legal assistance with their claim is able to do …
Government Response Summary
The government response details the Urgent and Exceptional Payments policy, its publication, and the update to decision letters to clarify that such payments may be deducted from future compensation awards, but does not address the need for new arrangements for legal assistance.
44
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 154
We agree with Mr Forde that the higher standard of proof had no place in this scheme: its inclusion has damaged trust significantly and demonstrates a serious lack of understanding by the Home Office as to what caused the Windrush scandal in the first place. We are deeply concerned that, …
Government Response Summary
The government commits to working with data colleagues to publish Urgent and Exceptional Payment and Vulnerable Persons Team data, and will consider formalising customer feedback capture and clarifying the team's work, but does not address the issues of the higher standard of proof, undue burden, or the Wendy Williams review.
45
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 155
We strongly welcome the removal of the higher standard of proof from the scheme and the revised guidance for caseworkers issued in July 2021. However, we are extremely disappointed that it has taken the Home Office so long to respond to longstanding concerns about how the standard of proof should …
Government Response Summary
The government commits to reporting the outcomes of both Tier 1 and Tier 2 reviews to the Independent Advisor, and states that outcomes are shared with senior civil servants and the WCS Oversight Board, in relation to learning from reviews.
48
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 175
We welcome the increase in compensation that is available for impact on life; however, we have not yet seen evidence that the new tariff has addressed the underlying concerns about how this category of claim operates. There is a lack of clarity as The Windrush Compensation Scheme 95 to how …
Government Response Summary
The government describes the 'Impact on Life' compensation category, detailing its 5 levels of payment ranging from £10,000 to over £100,000 for non-financial impacts, and refers to publicly available casework guidance.
49
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 176
The Home Office must provide greater clarity about how impact on life awards are determined and should issue clear guidance on how different types of impact and levels of harm correspond to each tariff level.
Government Response Summary
The government outlines the 'Impact on Life' compensation category, stating that its determination is based on 5 levels of increasing severity and duration, with publicly available casework guidance defining how awards are considered.
50
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
Given that the Home Office has yet to use its capacity to seek expert medical advice to support determinations on these complex awards, it should be open to claimants to be able to request expert medical advice if they are seeking a higher level award and in particular as part …
Government Response Summary
The government uses medical evidence provided by or on behalf of applicants but does not routinely seek its own expert medical advice; however, it commits to setting out a process for claimants to obtain expert medical evidence on their own behalf where appropriate.
51
Conclusion
Acknowledged
Para 191
As the Home Secretary has acknowledged, it is not possible for some claimants to document what their earnings were or would have been when they lost access to employment because this information is not always accessible or may never have been recorded. We are concerned that too many people in …
Government Response Summary
The government explains that compensation for loss of access to employment is calculated using the 2017 National Living Wage for consistency and to avoid delays, clarifies that occupational pensions are excluded, but states National Insurance positions will be corrected for State Pension entitlement.
53
Conclusion
Accepted
Across all categories of claim, caseworkers must consider holistically the situation the claimant was in: where an eligible claimant was unable to demonstrate their right to live, work and access services in the UK, compensation should not be declined solely on the basis that they are unable to document a …
Government Response Summary
The government states that caseworkers are already trained to consider claims holistically and do not decline compensation solely due to a lack of documentation, encouraging various forms of evidence.
54
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 197
The Windrush Lessons Learned Review demonstrates the difficulties the Windrush generation faced when trying to navigate the immigration system. The exclusion of some immigration applications from the Windrush Compensation Scheme unfairly penalises individuals who have incurred considerable losses through making immigration applications in good faith to try and resolve the …
Government Response Summary
The government is reviewing its approach to compensating payments made by claimants for charged immigration applications used to prove lawful status.
55
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 197
Claimants should be entitled to receive compensation for any immigration application they made whilst seeking documentation to prove their lawful status.
Government Response Summary
The government is reviewing its policy regarding payments made by claimants for charged immigration applications while seeking to prove lawful status.
57
Conclusion
Rejected
Para 203
It is unfair that those who accessed legal advice should find themselves unable to receive compensation for their actual costs. The justification for limiting awards fails to recognise the particular difficulties the Windrush generation faced upon trying to confirm their lawful status with the Home Office. The reason people had …
Government Response Summary
The government maintains that legal fees will be compensated up to a value of £500 per immigration application, stating the system is designed so legal assistance isn't required.
58
Conclusion
Rejected
The scheme rules should be amended so as to remove the £500 per application limit on compensation for past legal fees that were needed and paid because of the Windrush scandal. (Paragraph 203) Homelessness
Government Response Summary
The government rejects the recommendation to remove the £500 limit on legal fees, stating that compensation will remain capped at £500 per immigration application because the immigration system is designed not to require legal assistance.
59
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 208
The Home Office appears to be applying an unduly narrow definition of homelessness which fails to consider the circumstances in which some members of the Windrush generation found themselves.
Government Response Summary
The government states it is reviewing its definition of homelessness and clarifies that claimants are currently not precluded from awards in this category if staying with family and friends.
60
Conclusion
Accepted
The Home Office should clarify that awards under the category of claim for homelessness are available to individuals who lived with family and friends whilst they were unable to access housing or because their financial situation meant they lost their home. (Paragraph 208) Discretionary awards
Government Response Summary
The government clarifies that claimants living with family and friends are currently not precluded from receiving homelessness awards, while also stating that their definition of homelessness is under review.
61
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 213
We are concerned that the number of claims submitted under the discretionary category may indicate a disparity between the Home Office’s intention for this provision and claimants’ understanding of the purpose of this aspect of the Scheme.
Government Response Summary
The government explains the purpose of the discretionary category and states that it will be reviewed, with updates to be provided.
62
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
The Home Office should clarify the basis upon which it drafted the rules and guidance on the discretionary award. (Paragraph 213) The Windrush Compensation Scheme 97
Government Response Summary
The government clarifies that the discretionary category was designed to cover financial losses not captured elsewhere, and states the scheme will be reviewed with updates provided, partially addressing the request for clarification on its drafting basis.
63
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 214
We are further concerned by the lack of clarity for claimants as to the circumstances in which they can apply for a discretionary award. It is also not clear why claimants appear to have been required in practice to meet different evidential requirements for this category of claim.
Government Response Summary
The government states the discretionary category of the scheme will be reviewed, and updates will be provided, acknowledging the committee's concern about clarity.
65
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 215
The high number of claims made for a discretionary award suggests that there are types of loss not yet accounted for within the scheme. It may also indicate a continuing lack of clarity about the headings under which certain types of claim should be made. It is important therefore that …
Government Response Summary
The government states it is already committed to keeping all categories under review and uses existing quality assurance and review processes to monitor trends and policy elements requiring scrutiny.
68
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 229
Whilst we welcome the changes that have been made to the mitigation policy over time, we have been unable to get clarity about how this policy is working in practice now. We agree with Mr Forde that it was not appropriate to include rules on mitigation of loss in this …
Government Response Summary
The government states it continues to listen to stakeholder feedback regarding mitigation of loss rules and commits to reviewing these rules.
69
Conclusion
Not Addressed
While the Home Office has said that awards for loss of access to employment are no longer capped because of a lack of mitigation action, we have been unable to clarify how the mitigation requirements are being applied to other claim categories, as appears to be allowed within the scheme …
Government Response Summary
The government stated it continues to listen to feedback and will review mitigation rules, but it did not provide the specific data requested on how mitigation requirements are applied to other claim categories or how often awards have been reduced or declined on this basis.
70
Conclusion
Deferred
We believe that rules on mitigation of loss are not appropriate for a compensation scheme of this nature: the Home Office should lift any remaining mitigation requirements. (Paragraph 230) Criminality
Government Response Summary
The government states it continues to listen to feedback on mitigation rules and commits to reviewing them, but does not commit to lifting the remaining mitigation requirements as recommended.
72
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 234
The Home Office must ensure that apologies to those affected by the Windrush scandal are issued at the earliest opportunity and that the Department’s role in causing any impacts or losses suffered is fully acknowledged.
Government Response Summary
The government confirms the Home Secretary has already apologised unreservedly, and every individual receiving a compensation offer receives a personal apology letter from the Home Secretary at the conclusion of their claim.
73
Conclusion
Acknowledged
The commitment to holding reconciliation events is a particularly important one and must not get lost. In its response to this Report, the Home Office should clarify what progress it has made on implementing a programme of reconciliation events with members of the Windrush generation, including what work has taken …
Government Response Summary
The government acknowledges the importance of reconciliation events and states it is committed to delivering them, engaging with stakeholders and facilitators for sensitive design, but does not clarify specific implementation progress or work on follow-up support.
74
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 248
The Urgent and Exceptional Payment Scheme was rightly, albeit belatedly, set up to help those who needed immediate financial assistance, including those facing real hardship. However, in too many cases it has failed to do so and it appears to have operated with the same bureaucratic insensitivities as those which …
Government Response Summary
The government outlines its existing process for providing urgent financial support to individuals facing hardship through the Windrush Help Team and Vulnerable Persons Team, indicating that a separate light-touch process is maintained for rapid assistance.
75
Conclusion
Accepted in Part
The Home Office and consecutive Home Secretaries have acknowledged and apologised for the losses faced by the Windrush generation as a result of failings within the Department, yet that acceptance has not translated into quick and adequate compensation, even where individuals are facing urgent or exceptional hardship. In order to …
Government Response Summary
The government outlines its existing process for urgent financial support, describes it as light-touch, and commits to providing further training for caseworkers and the Help Team to improve clarity for claimants in providing information for faster support.
76
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 250
The Department should also raise the standard payment cap of £5,000 to ensure that those who are in urgent need of greater financial support, or those who face multiple simultaneous financial challenges, are provided with adequate emergency funds to alleviate their hardship. It should ensure applicants receive a decision within …
Government Response Summary
The government clarifies that its policy on Urgent and Exceptional Payments does not have a cap, and it already makes payments exceeding £5,000 when appropriate. It states decisions are made as soon as possible but does not commit to a ten-day deadline, noting that additional information may be required.
77
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 255
In light of the evidence we have received, we reject the Home Secretary’s assertion that it is sufficiently clear to individuals that, in most circumstances, any payment they receive under the urgent and exceptional support policy will be treated as an advance on a future compensation award.
Government Response Summary
The government asserts that it is clear to individuals that urgent payments are advances on future compensation, citing the updated policy on GOV.UK (Feb 2021) and revised decision letters (March 2021) that explicitly state payments may be deducted. They also intend to remind staff to convey this information.
78
Conclusion
Accepted
The ‘Windrush scheme: support in urgent and exceptional circumstances’ guidance should be amended immediately to make clear that urgent and exceptional payments can be recovered in full from a subsequent offer of compensation; caseworkers should receive training to ensure that this is also made sufficiently clear in any direct communications …
Government Response Summary
The government states that the policy and decision letter wording were updated in February and March 2021 respectively, to clarify that urgent payments may be deducted from future compensation. They also intend to remind the Help Team and caseworkers to explicitly advise individuals of this.
79
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 261
We welcome the creation of a Vulnerable Persons Team to help claimants navigate difficult conversations with government departments and solve their cases. However, we are deeply concerned by reports that the team is failing to treat vulnerable applicants sensitively and, in some cases, further distressing vulnerable individuals through poor customer …
Government Response Summary
The government commits to publishing Urgent and Exceptional Payment and Vulnerable Persons Team data, and states it will consider how to formalise customer feedback and more clearly articulate the team's work to customers.
81
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 266
Given the significance of the Windrush Compensation Scheme in righting the wrongs done by the Home Office, and the importance of getting the scheme right, we cannot understand why the Home Office has designed a system which does not allow senior civil servants, Ministers or this Committee to monitor the …
Government Response Summary
The government clarifies that review outcomes are regularly monitored to inform policy changes, noting the Adjudicator Officer's existing publications. It commits to reporting the outcomes of both Tier 1 and Tier 2 reviews to the Independent Advisor and states that outcomes are shared with senior civil servants and the WCS Oversight Board.
82
Conclusion
Accepted
Para 272
Given the Home Office’s role in causing the initial harm it is extremely problematic that the Department is not only responsible for the design and administration 100 The Windrush Compensation Scheme of the Windrush Compensation Scheme, but that it also retains full control over interpretation of the scheme rules. We …
Government Response Summary
The government outlines its existing two-stage independent review process for claims, which includes Tier 1 reviews by dedicated staff and Tier 2 reviews by the Adjudicator's Office, whose recommendations are normally accepted.
84
Conclusion
Not Addressed
Para 274
We are concerned to hear that some claimants may be reluctant to access the review process due to concerns about the impact of further delay on their financial situation.
Government Response Summary
The government describes its existing two-stage review process and states that preliminary payments are available for certain criteria. It acknowledges the difficulty in providing review timescales but says Tier 1 will resolve cases at pace, without directly addressing the committee's concern about claimant reluctance due to delay.
85
Conclusion
Rejected
The Home Office should work to establish an estimated timescale for reviews which can be shared with claimants. Wherever possible, claimants should receive preliminary or interim payments; such payments should not affect a claimant’s right to seek a review of their full and final offer. (Paragraph 274)
Government Response Summary
The government states it is very difficult to provide estimated timescales for reviews, effectively rejecting this recommendation, although it notes Tier 1 will work to resolve cases at pace. It explains the existing criteria for preliminary payments but does not explicitly commit to ensuring these payments do not affect review rights.
86
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 275
The treatment of the Windrush generation by successive governments and the Home Office was truly shameful. No amount of compensation could ever repay the fear, the humiliation and the hurt that was caused both to individuals and to communities affected. This was a grave betrayal; lessons must be learnt by …
Government Response Summary
The government notes that over £38 million has been paid or offered through the Compensation Scheme and an overhaul has improved payments. It defers further action or consideration of lessons learned to Wendy Williams' ongoing review of the Home Office's progress in implementing the Windrush Lessons Learned Review recommendations.
87
Conclusion
Deferred
Para 276
The purpose of the Windrush Compensation Scheme is to ensure that those who have suffered loss due to their inability to demonstrate their lawful status can receive the maximum amount of compensation to which they are entitled and to right some of the wrongs done by the Home Office. That …
Government Response Summary
The government highlights improvements made to the Compensation Scheme since December 2020, including increased payouts. It states that Wendy Williams is reviewing the Home Office's progress and will consider further recommendations once received, deferring action on the systemic issues raised.