HUNDREDS of sex abuse survivors could finally receive compensation as a Scots widower launches a bid to close a legal loophole which has barred them from making a claim.
Graham McKinlay’s wife Linda was sexually assaulted by her own father over a decade but died three years ago having failed in several legal bids to overturn rules preventing people abused in their own homes before 1979 receiving financial compensation.
After a quarter of a century campaigning, Mr McKinlay has now received legal advice that the Scottish Parliament could have the devolved power to change the rules as they apply north of the Border.
He has received the support of his local MSP, Education Secretary John Swinney, and has had a petition demanding a rule change accepted by the Scottish Parliament, in what is likely to be a final avenue for the law to be overturned.
The 63-year-old sales executive has also called for MSPs to set up a fund if the law is not changed, with victims who can prove they have had claims rejected or been recommended for counselling due to family abuse between 1964 and 1979 eligible for a payout of up to £2,500.
Mr McKinlay, from Inchture in Perthshire, said: “I’d previously understood that the Scottish Parliament was unable to change or amend such a rule. But the recent opinion obtained from counsel suggests that Westminster or Holyrood could indeed change it.
Under so-called "Same Roof Rules", compensation is not paid if the injury happened before October 1979, and, at the time of the incident, the victim and the abuser lived together as members of the same family.
The rule set by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority was designed to prevent the assailant benefitting from any compensation awarded and while abolished in 1979, victims prior to that date cannot claim retrospective compensation.
In one high-profile case in England only one of two sisters who were abused by the same man has been able to claim for compensation because of the time bar.
Mr McKinlay’s lawyer, Cameron Fyfe, who described the rules as “nonsensical”, also highlighted the case of one client, Alissa Moore, who was sexually abused by her father. Although he received a 24-year sentence she received no compensation.
Mr McKinlay said: “I’d been with Linda every step of the way from when we instigated this push for change in 1992 and its dismissal by various law lords.
“We even tried the Ministry of Defence for negligence because Linda’s father had been in the military.
“This has never been about the money and indeed Linda would have given it away to a relevant charity such as Rape Crisis.
“Then we have the recent flood of high-profile cases involving celebrities.
“Not to decry any act of sexual or indeed any kind of abuse. But being consistently abused from the age of two until 16 by a close family member must surely be more traumatic than a one-off incident from someone outside the family.”
Mr Fyfe said: “Graham must be congratulated for his perseverance in attempting to have this rule amended. I have acted for over 100 clients over the years who have fallen foul of this law.
“I have tried, without success to have this rule overturned by the court. The Scottish Parliament is our last hope and Graham is flying the flag for all the other victims. If he is successful I anticipate instructions from an army of claimants, many of whom have waited years for this nonsensical rule to be overturned.”
A spokesman for Mr Swinney said he was aware of the issues Mr McKinlay had raised, adding: “It will be for the committee to consider the petition and which organisations to contact for a response. That may include the Scottish Government and as such it would not be appropriate for any Ministers to comment further at this stage.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel