Benefits law change for miscarriage of justice victims comes into force
Until now, compensation for miscarriage of justice sometimes dragged people above the threshold for claiming certain welfare payments.
Under a legislative change taking effect from Tuesday, these payouts will now be exempted when assessing eligibility for: income-based jobseeker's allowance, income-related employment and support allowance, income support, housing benefit, pension credit and universal credit.
Social security minister Sir Stephen Timms MP said the move was part of wider Government action aimed at 'rebuilding trust in our systems', which he said 'begins by restoring trust with those the system has failed'.
'We can't return the years lost by miscarriage of justice victims — but we can, and must, ensure they have every opportunity to restart their lives so they can make the most of the years ahead,' he said.
He encouraged anyone who has received miscarriage of justice compensation to 'come forward, so we can ensure they receive the help they are entitled to'.
The law change comes after campaigners including Andrew Malkinson, who was wrongly convicted of rape, called for greater access to support for those like him whose names have been cleared.
Mr Malkinson, who was the victim of one of the worst miscarriages of justice in British legal history, has said while the new rule 'ends a stark injustice', further reforms are needed.
Speaking earlier this month, he said he was 'intensely relieved' by the law change but would continue calling on the Government to lift the cap on legal compensation payments.
The Ministry of Justice is to raise the amount paid to people wrongly jailed for more than a decade to £1.3 million, but Mr Malkinson has described the proposed increase as 'insulting'.
He has also spoken out against rules under which payouts are only awarded to people who can prove innocence beyond a reasonable doubt.
'I remain determined to challenge the completely unfair cap on compensation for the wrongfully convicted – and the ridiculous requirement that a person in my position be required to prove their innocence a second time to get compensated,' he said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
22 minutes ago
- The Sun
British Gas send dead man's family a letter demanding payment of a penny
BRITISH Gas sent a dead man's family a letter demanding payment of a penny. Christopher Storer, 65, was found dead in his one-bed flat in March. 4 4 4 His relatives notified the firm and were assured his account had been closed. His sister Margaret, 63, set up a ' redirect ' on her brother's post and was sent the bill for the final penny. She said: 'I opened the letter and I was absolutely furious. "I was staring at it for 15 minutes. 'I couldn't believe what I was reading. "It made me bloody angry and upset.' Margaret, of Hinckley, Leics, added: 'It's ridiculous. "I feel like I haven't had time to mourn my brother because of having to deal with this. 'They make hundreds of millions in profit. "Where is their compassion in chasing a dead man's family for one more penny? How to cut energy costs and get help with FOUR key household bills "How low can anyone go? They knew he was dead. "It felt like a sick joke at his expense.' Margaret said she had complained and was offered £20 compensation. British Gas was asked to comment. When a customer dies, relatives should notify British Gas so they can be removed from its database. But there have been multiple examples of the company, owned by Centrica, continuing to send bills. 4
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
These British Donald Trump fans reckon they've sussed his secret plan for the Epstein files
"I can see what's happening," said Tom English, who travelled from Blackburn to see Trump in the flesh - before explaining the sneaky game he thinks the US President has been playing Donald Trump probably hoped he'd get away from the raging scandal about Jeffrey Epstein when he came to Scotland for the weekend. He certainly seems like he'd rather not talk about it, and tries to divert the conversation to literally any other topic every time it comes up. But questions about his relationship with America's most notorious paedophile, and over why - if, as he says, he isn't in them - he's so reluctant to release the FBI files relating to him, continue to dog his presidency. It's created the biggest backlash from the MAGA movement since he first ran for office - with even the President calling people who question him over it "cowards" and "former supporters". So when we spoke to a small group of British Trump fans today near his golf course in Turnberry, we asked them whether the whole thing bothered them. "I can see what's happening," said Tom English, who travelled from Blackburn to see Trump in the flesh. He said he was not bothered by the scandal - here's why. "If you follow Trump from day one, and you know how he works, and you've read his book, The Art of the Deal, and you know he's studied the art of war, then you can see the tactics he's using." Asked what the tactics he's using are, Tom said: "The Dems don't want it releasing. You've got judges and people in congress who don't want the Epstein files releasing for years on end now. "So he says, it's all fake. It's fake news. The Democrats are making it up. "All of a sudden it's the Republicans that are blocking it and the Democrats are voting for it to be released." Still with us? Good. He went on: "Now what will happen is he'll order the MAGA lot to reverse the vote, and they'll be Trump won't be in there. "But his adversaries will. That's my prediction." So, to recap, the whole of the last few weeks, where Trump has been pulling out all the stops to divert attention away from discussions about the Epstein files, has been a massive red herring. It's a sneaky ruse to trick the Democrats into releasing the files - because it's only them who will actually be damaged by them. This seems like a high risk strategy to us, especially considering the weight of evidence and reporting that contradicts every element of it.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Two-tier policing is the nail in the coffin for Britain's social contract
Has a British Government ever appeared so terrified of its own people? More to the point, can you think of one that deserved it more? The social contract has been shredded. You go to work and pay your taxes for a state that seems to be crumbling into disrepair. In exchange, the Government takes your money, and uses it to fund an alleged secret scheme to fly in Taliban fighters to live on your street. But don't worry – we've got a new 'elite police squad' to prevent trouble. That police unit won't be patrolling your neighbourhood to keep you safe from harm. Rather, it will be tasked with scouring social media for protest pre-crime, monitoring your opinions for anti-migrant sentiment. The police might not have enough resources to deal with shoplifting. They might not have solved a single theft or burglary, or recover a stolen bike, across a third of England. But we are to believe they have resources for what really counts: scrutinising your views for wrongthink. The current state of affairs is so absurd that simply writing it down feels almost subversive. But each element is true: we do appear to have flown unvetted Taliban members into Britain. The Government really will be watching your posts for signs of dissent. This isn't some accident, some Civil Service blunder. It's by design. It truly appears that Labour's strategy is to impose ever more restrictions on the freedoms of the law-abiding, in the hope that eventually people will acquiesce with a resigned shrug. The problem is that it isn't working. The population is fed up with being punished for doing the right thing. The hectoring about slavery, imperialism, war and all the other iniquities of history used to justify sacrificing our comforts and liberties on the altar of mass migration is no longer having the desired effect. British citizens living today did not build the empire. They didn't enslave anyone. Why should they foot the bill for housing illegal migrants up in four star hotels in central London? Why should they put up with them working in the shadow economy? Unfortunately for the Government, the previously silent majority is beginning to vocally express its frustration. MPs and ministers are fearful that the country is becoming a 'tinderbox'. But even this isn't enough to convince them that we must change course. Why? Perhaps because doing so would be an admission of past failures. For decades we were told that mass migration was an unalloyed good while critics were denounced as bigots. To concede, after all this time, that it has not come without costs – at times intolerable costs – would be catastrophically damaging to the political class. The pro-migration fanatics, who promised to control numbers while throwing open our borders, who overrode objections to impose their policies despite what they were repeatedly being told at the ballot box, would be discredited. So instead, the state appears to be passing through the stages of grief. At first there was denial that people were worried about migration at all; Brexit had allowed us to be liberals. Then there was anger after Southport, with Starmer's denunciation of the 'thugs' taking to the streets. Now we seem to have reached bargaining: if we can stop people talking about it, perhaps they'll stop caring? It was a strategy that might have worked prior to the social media era, and in particular prior to Elon Musk's buyout of Twitter. Now, even the censorship of protest videos, arrest of people for incendiary content, and threat of mass scanning of output isn't sufficient to quell dissent. And though many of the protests now cropping up across Britain are peaceful, shows of police force are not enough to deter outside agitators from hijacking them. Tiff Lynch, the head of the Police Federation, which represents rank-and-file officers, last week warned that officers were being 'pulled in every direction' and commanders were 'forced to choose between keeping the peace at home or plugging national gaps'. Where do we go from here? As the costs of legal migration become apparent, with talk of labour market infusions and attracting the 'best and brightest' seeming increasingly hollow, overall numbers must be reduced. As the impact of illegal migration becomes clearer, the establishment must stop trying to guilt us into acceptance, and finally stop the influx. It's highly doubtful Yvette Cooper has the will or the way. The Home Secretary would prefer to silence opponents, by censoring and arresting those who speak out.
