Some politicians are suggesting that our society is suffering from “compensation culture”, that is where no one takes any personal responsibility for anything and expects “them” to pay. If true, there is one area where it is thinly spread and that is for victims of crime.

Being a victim of crime can result in a whole range of losses to the individual. It may involve financial loss either directly by something being lost to you or indirectly such as a loss of employment. It frequently involves emotional loss and suffering. I remember with wry amusement the habitual housebreaker whom I had had locked up writing to me insisting that he had to be released on bail immediately as someone had broken into his sister’s home and she was so upset that he just had to get out to help her. It did not seem to occur to him that his many victims had felt the same.

In crime, he, or sometimes she, can be identified as the person responsible for creating the loss and it would seem fair that he makes it good. Indeed this is the basis of a number of legal systems throughout the world. In those it is the victim who brings the prosecution and restitution or compensation is expected as one of the results of conviction. It is not however ours. Here prosecutions are brought by the Fiscal acting in the interests of the public as a whole and not simply the victim. It follows that in Scotland there was simply no tradition of compensating the victim.

Clearly where compensation can be readily identified and a value given, such as the repair cost for the broken window or the replacement cost of the stolen or damaged article, then repayment of that before the accused comes to be sentenced will always be looked on favourably by the courts. If nothing else it makes the universal cry of “I’m sorry” sound as if it might apply to remorse for what he did rather than being sorry he was caught.

It will be noted that such repayment is inevitably limited to the financial loss and does not include compensation for the emotional trauma. This is part of the problem. Not everything has a monetary value. The value of the pendent inherited from your grandmother is the fact that it came from her. Such is truly beyond price. What is the value of the loss of peace of mind and feeling vulnerable in your home after someone has broken in and searched through it? Each of us is an individual and may well be affected differently by similar crimes. How is this to be factored in?

If that was not bad enough, usually thieves steal because they do not have money. Where is the money to come from to pay the compensation? Should the wealthy offender be treated differently because he can afford to make good the loss he caused?

It will come as no surprise that victims of crime are rarely adequately compensated for their losses. You can always sue him, but only if you wish to throw good money after bad.

There is a little light, glimmering faintly in this dark tunnel. If found guilty, the sentencing court can order him to pay compensation. Compensation is collected like a fine and, if he does not pay, he can go to jail. However if that happens, once again the victim is not compensated. Even here the court is restricted to ordering compensation only where there is personal injury, loss or damage caused. There is no compensation payable for emotional loss or trauma. Nor is compensation payable in traffic cases. It is unusual for a compensation order to be made where the sentence is imprisonment. The criminal court is not the place to argue minutiae of loss details and a fairly broad brush is used to assess the value. Finally any figure fixed has to be one he can reasonably be expected to pay. Hence even if the value can be readily ascertained it may be too much and the victim receive only a percentage of his loss. It surprises me how often victims do not tell the police or the Fiscal the value of their loss as, without that information, the court will find it difficult to make an appropriate compensation order.

Since 1964 the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority has been compensating certain victims of crime from Government monies, presently paying out over £200 million each year. You will have noted that it is not the criminals paying compensation, but the innocent tax paying public. You will also have noted the substantial amounts involved in a scheme, which principally deals with the victims of serious crimes. For example to obtain compensation for loss of earnings caused by the crime, the victim has to be off work for a minimum of 6 months. Nor does it deal with traffic victims, unless the vehicle was used to deliberately injure. However, unlike court ordered compensation, the Authority can, and does, make payments even if no one is convicted. Applications must normally be made within 2 years of the crime and the crime must have taken place in Scotland, England or Wales. The Authority is user friendly and helpful. The application system is designed to allow victims themselves to apply directly. Help can be obtained from Victim Support, the Citizen’s Advice Bureau and solicitors who practice in the civil courts.