Using history checks and witnesses to prove fundamental dishonesty

CASE STUDY

The case

The defendant, who was our insurer client’s policyholder, hit the rear of the claimant’s vehicle. The claimant then presented injury claims for herself and her three children, who she stated were all in her vehicle at the time of the collision.

The defendant and her passenger disagreed that there were three children in the claimant’s vehicle at the time of the incident and confirmed that there was only one child in the rear of the car.

CASE STUDY

The outcome

Through combined investigations with our insurer client, we uncovered that in a previous similar claim brought about by the claimant, she had withdrawn her claim upon being challenged as to how many occupants were in her vehicle.

In addition, there were inconsistencies between the injuries reported by the claimant for her and her three children in the index claim, to those stated in the claims notification forms and the medical reports.

When this case proceeded to trial, the court found the claimant to be a poor witness, due to her previous claims history and discrepancies in reporting injuries, whereas the defendant and their witness were seen to be credible and honest.

The claim presented was dismissed, and the court concluded that the claimant had been fundamentally dishonest, saving our insurer client nearly £30k in damages and costs.

Our client was also awarded £3.5k of indemnity costs, which were pursued with the claimant, and a payment plan was enforced within two weeks of concluding the claim.

Raj Sumal, a partner in our Insurance Litigation team, commented on this case:

“We defend claims robustly where there is evidence that the claim is not genuine. Our client’s concerns with this claim from the outset were validated by the judgment.”

Using history checks and witnesses to prove fundamental dishonesty

The case

The outcome

Find out more