Historically, people who developed mesothelioma after workplace exposure to asbestos with employers who were no longer trading and whose insurers could not be found would not receive compensation. When the Diffuse Mesothelioma Payment Scheme (DMPS) was introduced in 2014 for those diagnosed with mesothelioma it filled this void as mesothelioma sufferers could then receive some payment under a “one size fits all” tariff scheme.

The DMPS was set up in 2012 and, according to the DMPS' Annual Review for 2023-2024, it has paid awards to over 2,170 people with mesothelioma and awarded over £304 million to them in compensation.

There is no denying that the Scheme has enabled thousands of mesothelioma sufferers to recover compensation in circumstances where they would otherwise have received nothing. However, it has faced criticism in recent years not least because the Scheme is only open to those with mesothelioma and awards have failed to keep up with rising inflation, meaning that those who successfully apply under the Scheme usually receive significantly less than that which they would have recovered through a civil claim.

What are the changes?

We very much welcome the recent increases in the tariff for all those diagnosed with mesothelioma after 4 November 2025.

As an example, under the new tariff a 75-year-old would receive a gross payment of £211,996 instead of the £142,279 they would have received previously. This sum continues to include all government benefits paid, which will be recouped, together with a contribution towards legal fees in the sum of £13,700. This has increased from £7,000.

The increase is long awaited and very welcome, but the DMPS still does not mirror typical civil compensation payments, as it was originally intended to do.

How does the DMPS compare to typical civil compensation payments?

Firstly, it only covers mesothelioma. Individuals with other dust diseases like lung cancer, asbestosis or even silicosis, which can also be deadly, who were unfortunate enough to have worked for a defunct or uninsured company recover nothing.

It also only covers employed exposure to asbestos. Many people are exposed outside of employment. For example, secondary exposure from a loved one’s work clothes – this is not covered. Alternatively, a person may have been effectively treated as an employee, but their employer did not pay their tax or national insurance, so it does not appear on their record. Such Claimants will ‘slip through the net’ and will not be entitled to a DMPS payment which only covers employees.

There are, at least, government benefits available to those who fall into the above-mentioned categories. Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit, for example, is available to those who have been diagnosed with any asbestos-related disease that is causing a respiratory disability and was contracted as a result of employment in the UK (other than through self-employment). There is also the Pneumoconiosis etc (Workers’ Compensation) Act 1979 lump sum payment, which is payable to those who fall into the same category. Furthermore, if a person with mesothelioma was exposed to asbestos dust other than through their own employment then they can apply for a lump sum payment under the 2008 Diffuse Mesothelioma Scheme. However, the awards under the latter are considerably less than those available under the former with a range of between £18,047 for those aged 77 and over and £116,152 for those aged 37 and under - yet another government scheme in need of reform.

Private medical treatment exemptions

Secondly, the DMPS allows nothing for funding for private medical treatment. Within the context of a successful civil claim it is possible to access funding for bespoke medical treatment in addition to compensation. Applicants who are only able to recover a DMPS payment would have to fund bespoke treatment themselves from their payment, whereas those who pursue a civil claim can have an indemnity put in place to fund private treatment in the future should it be needed, and this indemnity is for an indefinite period, and an indefinite amount. Therefore, if there are advances in medicine and new treatments become available, those with mesothelioma may be able to access them and have the funding to do so – where their claim is pursued through the normal process.

Those who can only obtain a payment under the Scheme may face the invidious choice between paying for care and assistance or paying for treatment. This is an even more difficult choice when the mesothelioma sufferer is a carer for other family members, as the person with mesothelioma may feel torn in choosing whether to use the money for their own care and treatment, or a loved one’s when they are no longer able to provide the care they once had.

Furthermore, those wanting to use their DMPS payment to fund private medical treatment will find that it does not go far when one treatment cycle typically costs around £10,000; a problem that those who have brought a successful civil claim do not have, as their claims now typically allow for funding of future medical treatment for an indefinite period and an indefinite amount. It would be awful for a person with mesothelioma to find a private treatment which benefits them, prolongs their life and then runs out of money to continue with the treatment because the DMPS compensation is not equal to that recoverable in a civil claim.

Time limits

Thirdly, the time limit for applying to the DMPS scheme is three years from the date of diagnosis. This is different to civil law where the time limit is three years from the ‘date of knowledge’ – which may be later than the date of diagnosis. Also, in civil claims, if a mesothelioma sufferer were to die within the three years from their date of knowledge, their Estate has a further three years from their date of death in which to pursue the claim. Under the DMPS scheme the time limit does not reset.

Class of dependants

Finally, the class of dependants under the Scheme is narrow. The DMPS will only make payments to mesothelioma sufferers and those who are financially dependent on them. There is no recourse for the Estate of the person who has died from mesothelioma - children and other family members who are bereaved but who are not financially dependent on the sufferer. They cannot claim a payment under the Scheme.

Conclusion

Although we welcome the recent tariff increases, the opportunity has been missed to use this review of the Scheme to address some of the inequities highlighted in this piece, which will continue to unfairly impact those with asbestos-related illnesses.