For more information about this case, or how our Insurance Litigation team defends insurers and self-insured organisations against fraudulent motor claims, please contact us on 01332 226 109 or complete the form below.
Conveyancing
Explore All ConveyancingCriminal Defence
Explore All Criminal DefenceEstate Planning
Explore All Estate PlanningEstate Administraion
Explore All Estate AdministraionDispute Resolution
Explore All Dispute ResolutionFamily & Matrimonial
Explore All Family & MatrimonialMotoring & Driving Offences
Explore All Motoring & Driving OffencesResidential Property
Explore All Residential PropertyResidential Property Disputes
Explore All Residential Property DisputesWills, Trusts & Estate Disputes
Explore All Wills, Trusts & Estate DisputesAgriculture
Explore All AgricultureBusiness Recovery
Explore All Business RecoveryCharities & social enterprises
Explore All Charities & social enterprisesCommercial Disputes
Explore All Commercial DisputesCommercial Law & Contracts
Explore All Commercial Law & ContractsCommercial Property
Explore All Commercial PropertyCorporate & Finance
Explore All Corporate & FinanceData Protection
Explore All Data ProtectionDebt Services
Explore All Debt ServicesEcclesiastical Law
Explore All Ecclesiastical LawEducation Law
Explore All Education LawEmployment Law
Explore All Employment LawFamily Businesses
Explore All Family BusinessesFinance Dispute Resolution
Explore All Finance Dispute ResolutionFinancial & Business Crime
Explore All Financial & Business CrimeInsurance Litigation
Explore All Insurance LitigationIntellectual Property
Explore All Intellectual PropertyLicensing
Explore All LicensingRegulatory & Corporate Defence
Explore All Regulatory & Corporate Defence
How our Insurance Litigation team used social media activity, medical reports and financial analysis to deliver a tactical Part 36 offer that saved our insurance company client over £190k.
13 November 2019
Case Study
The claimant claimed damages for significant neck and back pain and a psychological reaction arising out of a road traffic accident, whereby the defendant, our insurer client’s policyholder, collided with the rear of the claimant’s vehicle.
The claimant’s orthopaedic expert considered the injuries that he sustained to be severe enough to cause an indefinite impact on his ability to carry out day-to-day activities and paid employment. This resulted in him seeking over £203,615.38 in his schedule of special damage, plus general damages to be assessed.
Challenging the claim, the defendant maintained that the collision was innocuous, and while capable of causing minor injury, the claim presented was highly exaggerated.
Case Study
Careful consideration of the claimant’s medical records and expert medical evidence revealed altering and inconsistent symptoms across the timeline and a failure by medical experts to fully consider his history before and after the collision.
Evidence highlighted by the defendant’s medical expert suggested that of the injuries sustained by the claimant, the neck pain would have lasted no more than a few weeks in duration and the back pain would have subsided within six to 12 months.
Proving this was difficult as the claimant stated within his witness statement that he has “good days and bad days”; therefore, surveillance alone was unlikely to uncover enough evidence.
In an attempt to back up the inconsistencies already identified, including those with the claimant’s employment history and past earnings, our team turned to social media. The claimant’s Facebook account revealed regular posts about his participation in activities such as partying in Ibiza, which contradicted the contended disability, need for care and capability to work.
Although there was little doubt that the claimant did have spinal problems, be they degenerative or otherwise, their extent and attributing them entirely to the incident aroused suspicion.
Following the cross-reference of the claimant’s social media activity with forensic consideration of expert medical reports and medical records, the evidence culminated in putting the claimant at considerable risk of a finding of fundamental dishonesty at trial.
Upon presenting our findings to the claimant, the claim promptly settled by the late acceptance of a £10,000 Part 36 offer which our client had offered seven months earlier, achieving a substantial saving on damages and costs for our client and affirming the importance of an early tactical Part 36 offer.
For more information about this case, or how our Insurance Litigation team defends insurers and self-insured organisations against fraudulent motor claims, please contact us on 01332 226 109 or complete the form below.
Related Services


A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal case demonstrates some of the issues that may arise in a voluntary redundancy situation.
Read More

Flint Bishop and InterAssista have collaboratively defended a complex cross-border insurance claim.
Read More

Claimant found fundamentally dishonest after pretending to be a passenger in vehicle, as he could not get the accident circumstances or location correct.
Read More

Insurance Litigation Associate, Paul Large, secures another finding of fundamental dishonesty.
Read More

Fundamental dishonesty ruling results in a £10k saving for our insurer client.
Read More

The courts ruled a finding of fundamental dishonesty against a director of BR Motors Services Ltd resulting in our insurer client being awarded £8,000…
Read More

Successful defence for an insurer client against a case involving a claim for a credit hire vehicle following a road traffic accident.
Read More

Paul Bayliss, successfully saved our insurer client in excess of £1.6m in a case brought about by a 17-year-old immigrant who was knocked from…
Read More

Senior associate, Philip Thompson, successfully obtains six-figure compensation award for a Derby resident involved in a catastrophic personal injury accident.
Read More

Another great result achieved by our Insurance Litigation team, saving our insurer client over £40,000 in damages in a recent credit hire matter.
Read More

The case details the work our Insurance Litigation team carried out for one of our insurer clients, who was facing a pleaded schedule of…
Read More

We used a combination of investigations, technical applications and tactics to force two claimants to discontinue their claims shortly before a three-day trial.
Read MoreScroll to next section
Scroll back to the top
