A SYSTEM designed to protect victims of crime has been branded as “arbitrary and discriminatory” against survivors of childhood sex abuse.

Under Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme (CICA) rules, applications from people groomed before turning 16 cannot claim compensation if the abuse was carried out by a family member.

The Government agency’s same roof rule effectively aligns anyone who was under the age of 16 and abused before October 1, 1979, by someone living in their home as consenting to being groomed, according to campaigners.

This is despite the age of consent standing at 16.

An open letter has now been sent to Justice Secretary David Lidington in a bid to force an urgent review of the CICA rule that has seen survivors turned away from the scheme set up to compensate blameless victims of violent crimes.

Cleveland Police and Crime Commissioner Barry Coppinger has supported the letter penned by Northumbria Police and Crime Commissioner Dame Vera Baird.

Mr Coppinger said: “It’s become quite clear that these particular rules under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme are letting victims of sexual abuse down and failing to compensate them following the most horrific of crimes.

“There needs to be an urgent review of the way the scheme defines consent in sexual violence cases.

“At the moment, these out of date rules dangerously equate grooming with ‘consent’ despite the law being very clear that there is no issue of consent for children under 16.

“The same roof rule is denying compensation to those who have experienced horrific abuse in their own homes, often for many years.”

Successive Governments have agreed not to change this same roof rule for over a decade and the current Government confirmed in April 2016 that there were no plans to review the rule.

He added: “Partner agencies have informed me about cases where victims here in Cleveland have fallen foul of these out of date rules and the Ministry of Justice must urgently look at them to ensure victims are fairly compensated.”

Andrew Perriman, a senior lecturer in law at Teesside University and a campaigner to change the scheme, is currently spearheading a legal challenge against the same roof rule through the Teesside Law Clinic.

He said: “This rule can no longer be justified, especially for victims of historic sexual abuse.

“To deny victims the right of recognition under the scheme is simply arbitrary and discriminatory and the rule should be abolished.”