Fund legal advice for HSS claimants before scheme choice

DBT broadly accepts this recommendation. DBT accepts that some HSS claimants require access to legal support on their decision to take the Fixed Sum Offer or the full assessment route. However, claimants’ legal advisors would not have sufficient capacity to submit claims on behalf of large numbers of additional clients within the few months prior to scheme closure. Creating an entitlement to up-front legal advice would run contrary to the impending closure of the scheme to new applications, as urged in Recommendation 15. Paragraph 6.65 of the report states: “It is also worth stressing that if funded legal advice is made available (for those who wish to take it up) in order to choose between the Fixed Sum Offer and assessment, the need for funded legal advice “up front” probably becomes unnecessary.” The department therefore interprets this recommendation as requiring the provision of funding for legal advice, not “up front” but at the point at which the postmaster chooses between accepting the Fixed Sum Offer or seeking individually assessed redress by seeking permission to appeal under Recommendation 9. The Department broadly accepts the recommendation on that basis. We have also accepted Recommendation 5, which means applicants can have their claim assessed by the HSS Independent Panel and decide to revert to the Fixed Sum Offer (within 3 calendar months of the first fully assessed offer). This provides a further safeguard for applicants to have their claim valued by experts without the need for upfront legal advice. DBT notes that, because it is also accepting Recommendation 9, this interpretation of the Inquiry’s recommendation will make legal advice available to a wider range of postmasters than would the alternative of up-front legal advice. That would be confined to those yet to apply, whereas DBT’s approach would also encompass people who have already settled. DBT predicts that a postmaster will only need to be able to show a ‘prima facie’ case in order to be given permission to appeal against a Fixed Sum Offer. For instance, there might be a head of loss with potentially significant impact which the postmaster did not consider when accepting the Fixed Sum Offer; or the postmaster’s own assessment of their losses might have been close to £75,000. As a result, the evidence requirements at this stage will be light. For example if mental health impacts had not been considered, all that would be required would be the postmaster’s own testimony or GP notes about the effect on their health, rather than an independent medical assessment. It will be relatively simple for a legal advisor to identify and present such a prima facie case. Once permission to appeal is granted, full legal advice would be needed. Postmasters already have access to that full legal advice under the tariff for the HSS Appeals process, which is higher than that for the GLO scheme. In response to Recommendation 4, DBT will offer early access to part of that tariff to support the preparation of a prima facie case for permission to appeal. If permission is granted, the full tariff will be available. As an alternative to legal advice, DBT has also put in place an information and support service to help postmasters claim redress. The service will provide impartial information and support to HSS claimants on their options with regards to submitting a claim through the FSO or full assessment route, in order to make their own choice. The service will: explain information regarding the scheme, processes and requirements in simple straightforward language help claimants to understand the key details of their claim provide high-quality support and information to describe complex, technical redress issues in a simple, user-friendly way to claimants’ which promotes understanding describe the heads of loss which could be included within the claim and provide help in completing the application form work with the claimant to help them to understand how the redressed issue affected them and then help them set out the full information relating to their claim explain the sorts of information or evidence that they may be able to provide to support the claim explain the role of expert evidence, such as from a medical specialist or a forensic accountant, to assist claimants to decide whether this should be requested DBT will share more information about this service with eligible claimants soon. DBT has discussed this approach with the Horizon Compensation Advisory Board. They support DBT’s approach.

BIST accepted this recommendation. As detailed in the Government’s response, the Department will provide funding for legal advice at the point at which the claimant chooses between accepting the HSS Fixed Sum Offer or seeking individually assessed redress by seeking permission to appeal under Recommendation 9. Separate to the provision of legal advice, BIST has put in place an information and support service to help claimants apply for redress; this opened on 9 December 2025. Further information about this service can be found at "Get support from the Information and Support Service – GOV.UK". Further information on the process for requesting permission to appeal, including the available legal advice, can be found in the FSO Permission to Appeal process guide, which was published on 20 May 2026. We have published the tariff of reasonable legal costs, which will include a list of legal firms that have signed up to the tariff. We expect this process to launch in the Autumn.

HC 1598 concluded the government has not properly implemented Sir Wyn Williams's recommendation to provide legal advice for HSS claimants. Legal advice is funded only at the HSSA appeal stage, not upfront as recommended. The committee recommended that any eligible individual currently going through the HSS who has not yet settled should also be entitled to funded legal advice.

Business and Trade Select Committee noted the government provides funded legal advice at appeal stage rather than upfront as recommended. The committee questioned whether this departure from the recommendation disadvantaged claimants during initial assessments.