Firm accused of misleading court over PI claim

A Lancashire law firm is preparing for a grilling by the Crown Prosecution Service and Law Society after a judge accused it of failing in its duty not to mislead the court in a road traffic accident case.

District Judge Lingard rapped Scott Rees & Co after the firm's client, Mohammed Aslam, claimed damages from insurers for injuries sustained in two road traffic accidents which took place four weeks apart.

However, he failed to inform either side that injuries had been sustained in another accident.

Mr Aslam also claimed that his wife was in the car during one of the incidents, which later proved to be untrue.

Mr Aslam was represented by Scott Rees in both claims, and the facts only came to light when the firm sent the wrong medical records to Liverpool-based Hill Dickinson, acting for Norwich Union in one of the cases.

Judge Lingard accused Mr Aslam of perjury and attempting to gain a pecuniary advantage by deception.

He said the claimant had fed the court a 'tissue of lies' and suggested that Scott Rees failed in its duty not to mislead the court or other parties.

He said he would be referring the firm to the director of public prosecutions for a criminal investigation and the Society for professional misconduct.

'It is not something I do lightly,' the judge said.

The Office for the Supervision of Solicitors had no comment.

A Scott Rees spokeswoman said: 'We emphatically deny any complicity in dishonest activity, and will co-operate should any Law Society investigation arise.'

Hill Dickinson partner Peter Oakes said it was clear that fraudulent claims were not worth it, as Mr Aslam could face a prison sentence as well as losing his compensation.

'Fraudulent motor claims are an ever-increasing concern for insurers, and this case sends out the message that insurance companies are not willing simply to pay out,' he added.

Paula Rohan