regulation 12

Home Office Consultation On Regulation 12 Of The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006

IODPA Admin newsflash, regulation 12
Home Office Consultation On Regulation 12 Of The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006

In 2020, following a successful claim by Ron Thompson of Haven Solicitors and David Lock QC of Landmark Chambers, the Government agreed a discretionary payment equal to a regulation 12 settlement for one of their clients.

It was accepted that regulation 12, being time limited to 12 months from the date of receiving an injury on duty was potentially discriminatory against officers whose injuries only manifested to total and permanent disablement some time later. This is particularly relevant to those who suffered a mental health injury.

As part of the settlement, the Home Office agreed to consult further on the issue, and has now released a public consultation paper, which we’ve reproduced here.

If you feel as though you have something positive to contribute to the debate, you may complete the online form found here –

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/regulation-12-of-the-police-injury-benefit-regulations-2006.

 

 

Government Capitulate Over Psychiatric Injury Award

IODPA Admin newsflash, regulation 12
Government Capitulate Over Psychiatric Injury Award

The Government have capitulated over the granting of psychiatric injury awards when faced with a looming court challenge.

Regulation 12 of The Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations 2006 allows for an additional ‘Disablement gratuity’ to injured officers where it could be shown that within 12 months of so receiving their injury, they become or became totally and permanently disabled as a result of that injury.

It was successfully argued that the regulations discriminated against officers with mental health conditions such as PTSD, as often the full extent of these types of injuries are not fully recognised until after the 12 month time limit. This will provide parity for officers with mental health injuries compared to those with physical injuries.

The Government have also agreed to review this part of the regulations.

Congratulations to Ron Thompson of Haven Solicitors, David Lock QC and Leon Glenister of Landmark Chambers for bringing this successful case.

Here is the press release –

 

 

Regulation 12

iodpa regulation 12
Regulation 12

The word ‘secret’ on the blog featured picture is conveniently obscured by the text.. This works as a good analogy with explaining regulation 12:

If, within 12 months of an injury on duty, you are totally and permanently disabled so that you are unable to earn any money in any employment, you will be entitled to a disablement gratuity under the provisions of the Police (Injury Benefit) Regulations. • The gratuity is the lesser of (a) five times the annual rate of your pensionable pay on the last day of service or (b) four times your total remuneration during the 12 months ending with the last day of service together with your total pension contributions. • The gratuity is reduced by the amount of any other gratuity payable under the Police Pensions Regulations and takes account of damages or compensation recovered in respect of the disability.

Up to 5 times the last pensionable pay.  Quite a substantial monetary figure.

This gratuity is provided under regulation 12 and is rarely known about.  The permanently disability isn’t physical disability, it is the disability of earning capacity and therefore includes the mind as well as the body.  It is the total inability to earn.

The scandal is that it is never given.  People given a 100% band 4 are never told about it by the federation.  Those that do find out about are often told they have passed the 12 months and therefore not eligible.  Those that apply within the 12 months are told that their 100% disablement of earning capacity is not permanent and so aren’t eligible.

Do you see the paradox?  An award of a lump sum gratuity is never given due the hurdles put in place – the police pension authority use a circular argument to deny its application and the federation neglects to inform its members of it and to fight for it on their behalf.  There are hundreds of IOD award recipients retired on 100% band 4 awards that should have had the regulation 12 gratuity but were deliberately misled about their entitlement to it.

The permanence can not argued as that it is a defining criteria of an injury on duty award (under regulation 30) BEFORE the degree of disablement is calculated.  If the degree of disablement is 100% then the IOD recipient has total disability of earning capacity.  Therefore the gratuity should be given automatically  – why should the onus be on a claimant to claim given they are suffering a debilitation that amounts to them being totally disabled from earning due to the injury they received in the execution of their duty.

Given that conjecture is prevented as there is a power to review under regulation 37 the decision of entitlement to the gratuity should be given in the here and now.  There is no remit to speculate about an improvement – if the 100% remains for 12 months post retirement regulation 12 is applicable.  If someone has been a band 4 for years, missed the 12 month window due to maladministration and has never been able to have any earning capacity then regulation 32 may be used to reconsider the entitlement to a regulation 12 gratuity.