The Parliamentary Ombudsman has called for improvements to the Windrush Compensation Scheme after it failed to provide proper compensation to a family, a year after other similar failings had been identified.  

In 2024 the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman (PHSO) published a report highlighting that the Scheme, set up by the Home Office in response to the Windrush scandal, was in some cases making wrong decisions and withholding payments.  

Failings included wrongly telling people they were not eligible for compensation and not looking at all the evidence provided. 

PHSO’s latest investigation looked at a complaint from a father and daughter who said the Scheme had not properly addressed their claims. The Ombudsman found that the Scheme had failed to properly compensate the family because it excluded from the claim the father’s private pension loss. 

Following the investigation, Thomas Tobierre, 71, and his daughter Charlotte, 40, will now receive £25,000 between them and the Home Office is reviewing its decision to exclude private pension losses from claims. This could mean others are entitled to more compensation.  

Thomas was seven when he came to the UK from St Lucia in 1960. He married Caroline, a British citizen, in 1975.  

After working for over 40 years, he was made redundant in June 2017. He was unable to start a new job as he did not have documentation to prove he could live and work in the UK. He was forced to live on his savings and cash in his private pension worth around £14,000. 

Following the Windrush scandal, Thomas was granted the right to live and work in the UK and he returned to work in 2018. Sadly, within a few weeks his wife Caroline was diagnosed with stage 4 bowel cancer and later a brain tumour.  

In July 2019 Thomas made a claim to the Scheme for loss of access to employment and the impact this had on his life. After several reviews he accepted an offer in January 2021. 

Caroline, who was 64 at the time, applied for compensation in August 2021 when she had around six months to live. Her claim was expedited to allow her to organise her affairs, including her funeral, but the Scheme did not consider all the evidence properly. Caroline passed away in November 2021 before her claim was settled and Thomas accepted a revised offer a month after she died. The Scheme contacted the family seeking detailed financial information for an urgent payment following Caroline’s death to cover funeral costs and caused unnecessary and avoidable stress.  

Our investigation found a number of failings. The Scheme did not properly action Thomas’s claim, or properly consider its decision to exclude private pensions. Its decision-making and communication about its pensions approach was confusing and inconsistent. Thomas was not fully compensated for the impacts experienced, and the lengthy review process meant Thomas and his wife suffered financial hardship for longer than they should have. 

For Caroline’s claim, the Ombudsman found the Scheme did not properly consider the evidence she had provided. The Scheme also mishandled communication about a funeral costs payment and did so insensitively, while failings in the Home Office’s complaint-handling compounded the family’s distress and meant they missed out on precious time with Caroline ahead of her death.  

In addition to the £25,000 payment and the review of the Scheme’s decision to exclude private pension loss, the Ombudsman recommended the Scheme apologise to Thomas and Charlotte, review its complaint handling and communication, and reconsider its decision to exclude compensation for Thomas’s pension loss. The Home Office has agreed to comply. 

Charlotte said: 

“It almost feels like my mum and dad had done something wrong. It didn’t feel like they were victims at all, it felt hard and harsh and the time that it took was just unbelievable. 

 

“When I started the first claim about pension loss, we started it as a three, my Dad, me and my Mum, and it's sad that we end it with just me and my Dad. 

 

“It was exhausting. We were absolutely consumed by it and that overshadowed my Mum’s cancer journey. I felt sad afterwards thinking we wasted so much time talking about Windrush and we missed spending precious time together. 

 

“It was a relief and refreshing to have the experience with the Ombudsman. 

 

“I would urge everyone, if they are not happy with the Scheme, lodge a complaint. It really needs to be held to account.”  

Since 2021, PSHO has looked into 68 complaints about the Scheme and has secured over £430,000 in compensation for people wrongly denied payment.   

Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman Chief Executive Rebecca Hilsenrath KC (Hon) said: 

“The Windrush Compensation Scheme was set up to right wrongs, but complaints like this show it is not working as it should. Improvements in how the Scheme operates are needed and I hope the appointment of the new Windrush Commissioner will drive forward these much-needed changes. 

 

“The impact of this case has been profound for Thomas and Charlotte. Not only was the whole process long and confusing, but Thomas was not properly compensated for his pension loss. The Scheme’s insensitive handling added to the family’s grief after Caroline’s death and compounded their distress as they missed out on precious time together.  

 

“We know those impacted are less likely to make complaints. However, it is really important that people come forward with their concerns. We know that there is important learning we need to do nationally about how we develop effective, user-friendly compensation schemes. By making a complaint and sharing their story, those affected can help improve public services for everyone and help stop mistakes from being repeated.”