Legal Loophole For Victims Of Historic Sex Abuse
Law students at Teesside University are working to change a legal loophole known as the 'same-roof rule' that means some victims of historic sex abuse are missing out on compensation.
The Law Clinic at Teesside University is leading a legal challenge to overturn what is commonly known as the ‘same roof rule’.
As well as victims of sexual abuse, it has also received backing from MPs and the charity Victim Support.
What is the ‘same roof rule’?
Currently, compensation is not paid if the criminal injury was sustained before 1 October 1979 and, at the time of the incident, the victim and the perpetrator were living together as members of the same family.
The ‘same roof rule’, as it has become known, was designed to prevent the perpetrator benefiting from any compensation awarded to the victim.
It was abolished on 1 October 1979, but victims abused before that date are not entitled to claim compensation retrospectively.
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 in a bid to secure fair pay-outs for historic sex abuse victims.
It has also started a petition, and their campaign has the backing of Middlesbrough MP’s Andy McDonald and Tom Blenkinsopp, as well as the Victim Support Charity in Teesside.
Senior Law Lecturer Andrew Perriman is leading the campaign, he told us;
“Where victims are treated differently because 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."
You can find out more about the same roof rule and the petition here;