Victims of domestic abuse who are dependants on their sponsor are exceptionally vulnerable individuals. They can be isolated and may have limited knowledge of the systems in place for protecting survivors in the UK. On top of all this, some victims also have to contend with a counter-allegation made against them.
Counter-allegations, or the threat of them, are a means of exerting control. They can be used to weaponise a victim’s immigration status, reinforcing existing power imbalances between the victim and their sponsor. Victims might lack the language skills to explain to third parties that a counter-allegation is false and are often scared to go to the police in case they are criminalised themselves.
What are counter-allegations?
Counter-allegations can arise in the context of applications made for settlement under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse. In this article, we refer interchangeably to the person applying for settlement as the victim of domestic abuse as the ‘applicant’ or ‘victim’. The person with British citizenship, settled or refugee status who allegedly perpetrated the abuse is referred to as the ‘sponsor’.
Counter-allegations can be made by the relevant sponsor, a third party or can be disclosed by the victim themselves. The sponsor may deny being the perpetrator of the abuse, claim to themselves be the victim, or provide information that undermines the applicant’s account. If the counter-allegation is not properly addressed, it can incorrectly undermine a victim’s credibility and eligibility for settlement.
Types of counter-allegations
If a counter-allegation arises, you must first identify which type it is. They tend to fall into two categories:
Entirely fabricated counter-allegations
Fabricated allegations can be used as a tactic by the sponsor to undermine the victim’s credibility or their claims. If the victim calls the police, the sponsor may claim that they are the one being abused, shifting the blame back onto the victim. The Home Office accepts that these types of counter-allegations are ‘a common tactic used by perpetrators to maintain power and control’.
Example
The sponsor physically assaults your client. The victim calls the police and on arrival, the sponsor tells the police that your client also assaulted them. The police question your client as a result, but they tell you this never happened and the sponsor’s claims are false.
Counter-allegations based in fact (either entirely or in part)
These allegations are more complex. A victim may respond to domestic abuse with protective or defensive acts. These require a careful approach in identifying the primary victim and primary perpetrator, as retaliatory acts do not necessarily mean that the primary victim has not been subjected to domestic abuse.
The Home Office accepts that instances of ‘mutual abuse’, where both parties are equally perpetrators and victims, are ‘very rare’. This is supported by materials and guidance prepared by the Violence Against Women and Girls (VAWG) sector (the examples are listed below). The Safe Lives Guidance on Responding to Counter-allegations provides a useful list of indicators to look out for when identifying a primary victim and primary perpetrator.
Example
The sponsor physically assaults your client. Your client tells you that they were scared for their life and pushed their sponsor back. The sponsor fell over and got a minor injury. They call the police and on arrival the sponsor tells the police that your client pushed them and shows them the injury.
How the Home Office will consider a counter-allegation
Lawyers and others working in the sector raised concerns as it became clear that decision makers were taking the wrong approach to identifying and assessing victims once a counter-allegation had been made. Victims were unable to access protection and were having their settlement applications refused.
The Home Office updated its guidance for decision makers in April 2026 in response. It now places a duty on the decision maker to consider all allegations and assess them against the available evidence. This version of the guidance is significantly more comprehensive than previous iterations, indicating that any counter-allegations raised will be given greater scrutiny than they used to.
The guidance provides information for decision makers on how to apply its existing evidence table to deal with counter-allegations. It also states that a counter-allegation should be disregarded in two situations: first, if the victim provides conclusive evidence, in line with the evidence table in the guidance, that they are a victim of domestic abuse; and second, if the victim reaches the evidential threshold and the counter-allegation is only a personal statement.
Not all scenarios will be as simple as this. It can be difficult to meet the conclusive evidence threshold. Victims do not always want to engage with the police or social services. They may not have received specialised support from experts or professionals. Criminal convictions for domestic abuse are extremely rare. Sometimes witness statements are the main or only evidence in support of a settlement application.
How to handle counter-allegations
If you come across a counter-allegation, then you will need to provide evidence that ‘counters’ the counter-allegation to establish that your client is the only or primary victim. Our briefing on gathering evidence for an Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse application covers the wider evidence-gathering picture; the steps below focus specifically on the counter-allegation itself.
Start with your client’s account
Do not ignore any counter-allegations that come up or dismiss them as insignificant. Ask your client if this has happened, as it can also be used as evidence of domestic abuse that took place. Include a detailed response and description of events from your client in their witness statement.
A witness statement is an essential way to providing as much information and detail as possible that may not be in the third-party evidence. The primary victim may have been scared to make full disclosures of the abuse. They may have been threatened, or the sponsor could have made convincing arguments against the victim preventing them from safely disclosing full details to the police or anyone else.
Scrutinise the third-party evidence
Police reports can contain verbatim evidence of a counter-allegation and tend to be the most common place they appear. Some other places that counter-allegations can arise are in social services records, medical records, school records, or family proceedings. The mention of a counter-allegation within a piece of evidence may not always include an assessment by the relevant officer or set out clearly how a conclusion may have been reached.
A critical approach to the evidence is therefore required to work out what evidence may need to be provided and how to present the case to the Home Office.
The following are things to consider:
Was an interpreter provided for the victim?
If not, and your client required one to properly explain themselves, then the police report may not include an accurate report of the incident. This could undermine the reliability of a counter-allegation if the victim was not afforded a proper opportunity to explain what happened.
Where was the counter-allegation made?
This is an important detail to establish to identify what type of counter-allegation it is. For example, was it made by the sponsor in front of the victim at their home or other family members when the police were called? Did this prevent the police from correctly identifying the victim due to language barriers?
The assessment and identification process
- Is it clear that the relevant officer has conducted a thorough assessment to identify the primary victim?
- If there is a counter-allegation, is there evidence that the relevant officer has considered whether this could be false or misleading?
- Have they referred to the Crown Prosecution Service guidance if a conclusion about the counter-allegation is reached?
- Have they considered whether the counter-allegation could be used as a tool of domestic abuse?
Remember that the presence of a counter-allegation within third party evidence does not mean it is reliable. If the Home Office are going to be considering it when assessing your client’s identification as a victim of domestic abuse, then it must be scrutinised and the identification process verified.
Defensive/reactive violence or resistance
Has a third party considered whether the response was justified? Was self-defence necessary to prevent the victim from further harm? The cases involving this type of violence are trickier and require a detailed and holistic assessment to establish the primary victim.
Go back to the source for clarification
Ask the police or social services for clarification about their identification methods and tools. Sometimes, a police report contains the counter-allegation alone with little explanation. Contacting the officer with specific questions about the above can be helpful to clarify what happened. They may not want to provide the information, but it is important to ask.
This allows you to get a better picture of what happened and ensure that sufficient context is provided along with the counter-allegation, to ensure your client is correctly identified as the victim or primary victim.
Get an independent advisor’s assessment
If an Independent Domestic Violence Advisors (IDVAs), is involved, ask them about their identification method. Does the counter-allegation undermine their assessment of the victim? Was the counter-allegation considered when they identified the person a victim? Have they seen any evidence that the person was a perpetrator? Can they comment explicitly on how counter-allegations are used as a means of further control and a tool of abuse?
Often, independent advisors can provide expert opinions on the use the false counter-allegations to intimidate, create confusion, and reinforce a pattern of coercive control.
Independent advisors are the best equipped professionals for completing these assessments and considering the complexity of domestic abuse cases and their opinions can therefore be invaluable. This is considered strong and compelling evidence as per the Home Office guidance, and if available, can be the most useful evidence to respond to counter-allegations and establish the victim’s credibility.
It helps to do the work for the Home Office and analyse the counter-allegation properly. Remind the Home Office of its own guidance to deal with these applications sensitively, flexibly, and cooperatively.
Set out your case in the representations
You must make detailed submissions in your supporting representations. You will be submitting that the counter-allegation alone does not indicate that your client was not a victim of domestic abuse. Make submissions that look at the case holistically and identify patterns of domestic abuse. For example, you may present a list of indicators that your client is a primary victim, alongside an expert opinion from an independent advisor that your client is the primary victim and conclude that the counter-allegation should be disregarded.
If you have identified weaknesses within the third-party evidence (as above in the critical approach), then provide them within the representations, and provide submissions on how they support your client’s case, and the appropriate weight to place on them.
Key sources
It is important to rely on the relevant legislation and guidance drafted by experts. The following sources are helpful to contextualise counter-allegations:
The Home Office is also meant to give a victim an opportunity to respond to a counter-allegation if they require further information.
Summary
Counter-allegations are a common tool used by perpetrators to undermine a victim’s credibility, and they must be analysed carefully rather than taken at face value. Establishing whether an allegation is entirely fabricated, or rooted in a protective or defensive act, is central to identifying the true victim.
The Home Office’s April 2026 guidance is a welcome improvement, requiring decision-makers to weigh all allegations against the available evidence. While it is great to see these improvements, it is important to remember that each case is complex in its own way, and that we should be applying flexible and tailored approaches to these cases. There is no right of appeal if a settlement application under Appendix Victim of Domestic Abuse is refused, so frontloading is a must.
