scheme. Injuries claimed for must have been caused by a 'crime of violence'. Annex B of the 2012 scheme sets out what this means. The first step is to establish that a crime has been committed. Whether it is a crime of violence is a more complex issue but the most typical examples are assault, murder, rape and sexual abuse. It is possible to claim for psychological injury resulting from witnessing an attack on someone else, in very limited circumstances. The time limit for claiming compensation is two years from the date the injury occurred. There are slightly different rules in the case of applicants who are children, or who were children when they were injured. The time limit may be extended in exceptional circumstances but is treated very strictly. Ignorance of the existence of the scheme and the availability of compensation is not usually accepted as an excuse for a late application. Residency criteria, introduced for the first time in Paragraphs 10 to 16 of the 2012 Scheme, restrict eligibility to those who are ordinarily resident in the UK, or are one of the following: "(a) a British citizen; (b) a close relative of a British citizen; (c) a national of a member state of the European Union or the European Economic Area; (d) a person who had a right to be in the United Kingdom by virtue of being a family member of a national of a member state of the European Union or the European Economic Area; (e) a national of a State party to the Council of Europe Convention on the Compensation of Victims of Violent Crimes (CETS No. 116, 1983); (f) a member of the armed forces; or (g) an accompanying close relative of a member of the armed forces." Compensation may be reduced or withheld altogether from applicants who: - contributed to or caused the incident in which they were injured - failed to co-operate with the police or prosecuting authority - failed to or delayed in reporting the incident to the police - failed to co-operate with the CICA in handling their claim - have one or more unspent criminal convictions it is also possible for decision makers to refuse claims on the basis that the victim still lives with their assailant, or that the assailant may benefit in some way from their award. In the latter case it is usually possible to