Categories of Loss and Award Heads
Infected Blood Inquiry · Second Interim Report · Issued 5 April 2023 · Addressed to: UK Government
Government responseUK Government: Accepted (Dec 2024)
DeliveryNo statement from UK Government found
Recommendation, verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
I recommend that the appropriate award in any case should be composed under the following categories of loss, applicable to both eligible infected and affected persons: a) an Injury Impact Award for past and future physical and mental injury, emotional distress and injury to feelings caused by the infection and treatments for it, or (whilst not being personally infected) being affected by them or by the death of an eligible infected person (including, as part of this, an award for loss of society of the deceased); b) a Social Impact Award for past and future social consequences of the infection including stigma and social isolation; c) an Autonomy Award as additional redress for the distress and suffering caused by the impact of the disease, including interference with family and private life, including where relevant: personal autonomy, loss of marriage/partnership prospects, loss of chance to have children. It should include sums for the aggravated distress caused by interferences in their autonomy and private life such as lack of informed consent, lack of sufficient information about the risks of treatment, and about diagnosis, treatment and testing, or being the subject of research without their informed consent. It should include the effects of lack of candour and inadequate responses by authority. d) a Care Award for the future care needs of the eligible infected person, and to compensate for past losses in respect of care necessitated by their infection (to be paid directly to the infected person where they have paid for care, and/or directly to an affected person who has provided care); and e) a Financial Loss Award for past and future financial losses suffered as a result of the infection.
Infected Blood Inquiry, Second Interim Report · 5 Apr 2023 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
AI-generated evidence summary
The Inquiry recommended structuring compensation awards across five specific categories of loss. In December 2024, the UK Government stated that it had accepted the recommended categories and designed the scheme to include injury impact, social impact, autonomy, care, and financial loss awards (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). It noted a slight deviation, routing the care award through the infected person or their estate to distribute for speed and simplicity (Cabinet Office response, Dec 2024). In April 2026, the National Audit Office found that the scheme uses a tariff payment system awarding set amounts across the five categories (Gareth Davies, Apr 2026).
AI-generated summary of the record on this page, checked by a second model and automatic checks, 5 Oct 2026.
Government response
●UK Government · Accepted · 17 Dec 2024
With respect to recommendation 6 of the Second Interim Report, the Government has accepted the Inquiry's recommended categories of award, and has therefore designed the Scheme to award compensation to include the following: Injury Impact Award; Social Impact Award; Autonomy Award; Care Award; and Financial Loss Award. The Government has deviated slightly from the exact recommendation, as in the interest of speed and simplicity, the Care Award is routed through the person with an infection or their estate to distribute.
Extract from: Government response to the Infected Blood Inquiry
Delivery
No statement on delivery from UK Government has been found in the sources searched. This is separate from the response above.
What other bodies have found
●National Audit Office · 15 Apr 2026
The scheme uses a tariff payment system, where different levels of harm are awarded set amounts across five categories: injury impact, social impact, autonomy, financial loss, and care awards.
From: Government's compensation and financial recognition schemes, Gareth Davies, Comptroller and Auditor General
How this page is built
The recommendation and the government responses are verbatim from primary documents. Delivery statements and other bodies' findings are shown in their own words, each with its source. The summary is written by this site and labelled as such. The Index does not paraphrase sources or characterise intent; it records what has been published.