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 →
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 →
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 →
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 →
Conclusions (33)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.