|
|
| Fraudulent Claims in the UK - C4F News Archive |
The recent heavy-handed television advertising for personal injury claims has sky-rocketed the number of people trying to pass themselves off as victims. The promise of a no win, no fee arrangement bolsters their confidence as they feel they cannot be persecuted for "giving it a shot". The situation has not been helped by the insurance industry's lawyers pushing for an out-of-court settlement to avoid extensive costs.
In a recent move against the apathy, the names of twenty-four people trying to claim compensation from Knowsley council for injuries sustained on their pavements have been turned over to Merseyside police. This comes as the council changes it stance from easy-payouts to defending each action vigorously. The 24 cases in question were thrown out of court as each claimant was suspected of attempting to defraud the council's compensation scheme. The move is welcomed by leaders in all sectors of the legal industry as a sign that Britain can restrain itself from achieving the "suing" society currently plaguing the United States.
Kevin McGlone, the assistant director of finance for the council confirmed the council's shift by saying: "In the past there was a tendancy for us to just settle out of court; now it's the lawyers who push for that."
In 2003, Knowsley council paid out a record £3million for the 1,200 personal injury claims made against it by people claiming to have injured themselves on defective pavements. This year it believes this number will have dropped to around £2.2million due to the new policy of defence. It has also introduced new training measures for staff involved in investigating claims as well as a hotline for anonymous tip-offs by the public.
Knowsley council is bucking the trend across the board with the even more recent court decision where a man found guilty of making a fraudulent claim to the council was ordered to pay £3,000 in legal fees. Again, the name of the individual was passed to police for further investigation. The 22 year old involved in the fraudulent claim had obtained a no win, no fee arrangement from a local solicitor to pursue a claim that he had fallen from a footbridge in Mill Farm, Kirkby.
The district judge stated that the claim was "obviously fraudulent" and that it would have been impossible for the individual to have received the injuries he was claiming for from such a fall. Councillor Norman Keats from Knowsley's finance department stated after the ruling: "I hope this will serve as a warning to anyone considering making a fraudulent claim ... if we believe the claim to be fraudulent, we will fight it all the way. We are working with police and will continue to pursue prosecutions against anyone making a false claim."
These recent cases beg the question as to how the solicitors involved did not receive any form of retribution for allowing such fraudulent cases to be put forward. If the personal injury claims industry wishes to solicit people to claim through their heavy-handed television adverts and promises of big payouts then a large portion of the blame for an increase in fraudulent claims lies with them. Following the recent police involvement several Merseyside MPs have backed calls for a ban on advertising injury claims services.
Having attended several court hearings regarding compensation claims I was dismayed at the number of insurance firms willing to pay out early on to avoid possible legal costs. On only one occasion, whilst attending as part of an insurance party's legal team, did the barrister state that the insurance company would sooner spend "triple the amount" in defence legal costs than giving in to what was "obviously" a fraudulent claim.
The main issues surrounding fraudulent claims is that strict guidelines have been introduced to limit the amount of time wasted by councils in investigating claims. Most of these guidelines achieve the desired affect of reducing fraudulent claims but in many cases it hurts genuine people such as Margaret Armstrong, a 54 year old woman from Edinburgh who tripped in a hole left by a missing paving slab. Mrs Armstrong smashed her thumb requiring two operations and suffering permanent numbness. The guidelines for such cases state that the defect needs to be 20mm deep for the claim to be valid - the height of the missing paving slab was only 18mm. This gave the council grounds to dismiss the claim and Mrs Armstrong was refused compensation. Her response to this was "my thumb is as badly damaged no matter how deep the hole was". No comment could be obtained from the council regarding the matter.
Understandably, councils, the NHS, insurance firms and others targeted by fraudulent claims now treat every case with suspicion. This ensures the long-term survival of our compensation structure which is currently hanging by a thread - unfortunately many genuinely suffering individuals are being passed over for compensation they most definitely deserve and most urgently need to compensate not only for financial losses incurred by accidents, but also for treatments not covered by the NHS. - Written 24/09/04*
Other Archived Articles:
> The Meaning of the Word Accident?
> Claims: The Rising Cost to the UK?
> Compensation Claims Pros & Cons
> The Claims Management Company
> Is there a Huge Rise in the Number of Claims?
> NHS Compensation Claims
*Disclaimer: This article has been marked as "archived" because, although most of the information may still be relevant, the article was written more than two years ago which may mean that some information may be outdated. Although this site is updated as often as possible the information provided may not accurately reflect the current laws, procedures and/or facilities available to you. To ensure that you get the most up to date information make sure you consult an actual solicitor before pursuing any action. The articles on this site are for informational purposes only and are not intended to advise any particular action or inaction. Please read our terms of use for more information.
|
|
