header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us

An imperfect quango?

© Copyright LexisNexis 2025. All Rights Reserved.
14 August 2019 / Veronica Cowan
Issue: 7853 / Categories: Opinion , Criminal
printer mail-detail

Veronica Cowan explains why the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority is in the dock

The conviction of former nurse and inspector for the Care Quality Commission, Carl Beech, for perverting the course of justice, and fraud goes some way to assuaging the pain he has caused to those whose reputations he so outrageously traduced. But it also exposes the ease with which the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) can be defrauded, triggering a media backlash. The Ministry of Justice body was set up to provide awards to blameless victims of violent crime, but Matthew Scott, a criminal law barrister at Pump Court Chambers, describes it as ‘a fickle and imperfect quango which awards or refuses government compensation to the victims of crime. It almost always gets it wrong: it pays far too little to those genuinely injured, it often refuses to pay anything at all for quixotic reasons, and it sometimes fails to identify fraudsters.’

Uncorroborated claims

A Ministry of Justice spokesman for the CICA said: ‘False claims are rare but if they occur

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Mazur under scrutiny
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
NLJ this week: Does dishonesty always mean strike-off?
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
NLJ this week: Potanin, prenups & privacy
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
NLJ this week: Malaysia’s arbitration overhaul
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
NLJ this week: Greed but no fraud in £1.4bn SKAT case
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll