Report comment

" 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. "

Because they didn't know for certain. And had they lost at trial, they'd've been on the hook for the full amount claimed (surely a lot more than £135k), their own costs, and double the Claimant's costs thanks to the genius of conditional fees.

As it is, they are in a worse position than someone who did NOT suspect fraud, because the Court of Appeal has effectively said "you considered fraud, but didn't go far enough, so tough." We all know now what the next step will be - the insurer will look to its solicitors.

I've read the decision a number of times. It is intellectually and morally impossible to accept it.