What is life like with your car? Let us know and win £500 in John Lewis vouchers | No thanks
Crash for cash
I am a motor insurance claims investigator and have noticed a sharp increase in spurious personal injury claims arising from minor road traffic incidents (particularly from Asian and Eastern European motorists). I am fairly confident that this increase in an already existing problem is linked to the recession and motorists are targeting insurers as a source of obtaining financial gain. I propose a solution, which I believe will slash insurance fraud significantly and eliminate whiplash claims. I propose doing away with the general damages financial settlement paid directly to the individual (which often varies between £500 - £2,500) and enforcing a system where payment for physiotherapy is paid directly to the practice, after therapy has been sought. This removes any financial incentive for either making a claim for a feigned injury or staging an accident for pecuniary advantage in the first instance. I don't doubt that the same rings of accident management companies, with their solicitors and medical examiners, will turn to setting up their own physiotherapy practices. However, this is only for the hardcore fraudsters and would at least cut down the individual opportunists who cost innocent motorists over £1bn per year in increased insurance premiums. No doubt some human rights activists will object to this idea. I invite them to examine some of our cases, which include gangs slamming on their brakes at roundabouts in front of old ladies.
Asked on 12 September 2009 by
Answered by
Honest John
Good thinking. However something has just been done. The Manchester Evening News reported on 11th July 2009 that a bridegroom and his parents have been jailed for a year each for perjury after making false compensation claims. They claimed they were injured in two minor coach crashes involving some of their wedding party. “Their lies were uncovered when Andrew Singh, 26, was caught on camera dancing and being carried aloft by guests at the wedding party. The wedding video was shown at the resulting civil case and a host of inconsistencies were also found in their accounts.
During the civil trial at Manchester County Court in September 2006, the judge saw enough evidence to persuade him some claims were almost completely fabricated. Only two of the 27 contested claims were deemed genuine and the Singhs were each ordered to pay £73,000 costs. The case was then passed to the Crown Prosecution Service and finally became a police matter.”
During the civil trial at Manchester County Court in September 2006, the judge saw enough evidence to persuade him some claims were almost completely fabricated. Only two of the 27 contested claims were deemed genuine and the Singhs were each ordered to pay £73,000 costs. The case was then passed to the Crown Prosecution Service and finally became a police matter.”
Similar questions
Two years ago, another vehicle reversed into mine. I was parked but in the vehicle. Minor damage to both vehicles, no personal injury. My vehicle was repaired by the main dealer, with no cost to me, claiming...
Some time ago I had an accident when I was hit by a car while I was going round a roundabout. The other driver admitted liability because she was on her mobile phone and had not seen me. I was advised...
An article in the motoring section recently talked about the rising cost of insurance. It failed to mention some of the reasons for these increases. 1) The high, almost obscene charges made by solicitors...