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

Anon @ 8.36 You are of course correct.

But the insurers and their lobbyists do not assert that some claims have unsatisfactory aspects, they assert that they are frauds.

Just as the claimant must prove its case if the defendant wishes to assert fraud then they must prove that.

The extract from the Judgment you cite indicates that after 3 days in front of a recorder the defendant was unable to get their allegation over the line even to the civil standard.

If there is no judicial finding of fraud then there is no fraud.

I have been on both sides of the fence and clients (whether claimant or defendant) often come out with a load of gilded bolleaux; for example I was only doing 2 mph (the front of the defendant's care is stoved in) 'he was speeding like a loon' (the collision occurred 50m after an active speed camera which did not activate) and so on and so on.

That clients make assertions which cannot be substantiated does not mean that a finding of fraud should be inferred.

Your details

Cancel