Report comment

Please fill in the form to report an unsuitable comment. Please state which comment is of concern and why. It will be sent to our moderator for review.

Comment

Whilst I agree it is unacceptable for a criminal act to lead to financial reward, a little perspective is required legally I feel. The insurers had evidence in their view that showed him to be a fraud. Why settle at £135,000 if that was the case? That is nearly ten times what a Court ultimately would have awarded.

That same finding would in all likelihood have been made, or thereabouts at Trial. In making that offer, at that time, at that level, with whatever knowledge and suspicions they had at that time, the insurer confirmed that was a price they were willing to pay to compromise the claim, EVEN WITH their concerns and evidence in their possession.

A legally binding contract of settlement was made, with the insurer fully armed with knowledge of what they were doing, and chose not to take that matter to Court.

Had on the other hand, the Claimant in fact suffered more than anticipated, and in fact been entitled to more compensation later down the line, what would the approach be then? A settlement and a contract is a settlement and a contract. The Claimant would have been precluded from returning to the claim unless he had obtained a settlement incorporating provisional damages, which does not sound applicable here.

I agree with the Court that there is a policy at stake. Access to justice in the UK has had a severe hammering to the point of being illusory during the life of the last government. Insurers have had far too much their own way during the last number of years, at the expense of all GENUINE Claimants. Remember, the fraudsters are the few, seeking to spoil it for the majority.

Further, the vast majority of Claimant Injury Solicitors work hard and tirelessly, for little reward to secure the right compensation for injured victims.

Claimants are advised that once you have chosen to settle, taking all factors of the matter into account, you have finalised the claim once and for all, and cannot revisit the matter at a later date. That principle has to be true for both parties. Settlement was entered into with open eyes, by both parties to the agreement, and quite frankly, that is the end of the matter.

It's not as if they did not have their concerns. Why make such a high settlement proposal? If they were that certain, they should have held out to Trial. Their own medical expert could not be certain, and so they took advice available at the time.

Your details

Cancel