Recent reporting in The Telegraph has brought fresh attention to concerns about how the Infected Blood Compensation Authority (IBCA) is approaching some compensation claims.
For those affected by the infected blood scandal, these are important issues. We have previously written about the difficulties applicants can face when trying to establish events that happened decades ago, and the importance of decisions being made fairly, consistently and with an understanding of the circumstances involved.
A case we are currently dealing with has brought these questions into sharper focus.
When a claim could set a precedent
Our client has been denied compensation despite evidence which, in our view, supports their eligibility under the scheme. One of the considerations raised by IBCA is the potential precedent that allowing the claim could create.
This raises an important question about how individual claims should be assessed.
The compensation scheme is intended to consider the circumstances of people affected by the infected blood scandal, and no two cases will necessarily be the same. Where the evidence supports an individual’s eligibility, it is important that their particular circumstances are carefully considered alongside the wider implications of any decision.
Where medical records are no longer available, including because they have been destroyed or lost over the many years that have passed, IBCA should consider the remaining evidence as a whole and apply the ‘balance of probabilities’ test – whether it is more likely than not that the individual was infected as a result of a blood transfusion or blood product.
We are aware of cases where there are concerns about how this test is being applied. In some circumstances, it appears that greater weight may be placed on statistical or historical considerations rather than considering all of the available evidence together. This can have a significant impact on whether an individual receives compensation.
For applicants and their families, understanding how those decisions are reached is equally important.
Knowing what happens if a claim is refused
It is also worth remembering that an IBCA decision does not necessarily have to be the end of the process. Applicants can ask for a decision to be reviewed and, where appropriate, appeal to an independent tribunal.
However, after waiting so many years for recognition and compensation, many people may understandably not realise that these options are available.
There are also questions around the legal advice available through the scheme, and whether applicants have sufficient independent support when they want to understand or challenge an eligibility decision.
We are experts in pursuing negligence claims and are already helping a number of victims of the infected blood scandal and their families seek compensation. If you have been affected by the scandal Call or Email today to discuss your options.
