Report comment

The insurers believed the claim was exaggerated. They pleaded the exaggeration (maybe they did in every case, who knows?), and yet with the evidence that underpinned that pleading went onto to settle the claim. They took it into account.

Then with evidence, which was available to them at the time, but later offered they sought to re-open the case. The judges weren't happy, but the decision was right.

Given our increasingly litigious age, and the no win - no fee regimes, no deal, contract, settlement, sale or agreement would be safe from attack if the alternative prevailed.

Moral. Have the courage of your convictions.