Her word againt theirs and it's up to her insurers if she's fully comp?

so presuming as someone was injured a police presence was requested ? and the incident lodged ?

She's fully comp so she's batting it to them.

so presuming as someone was injured a police presence was requested ? and the incident lodged ?

so presuming as someone was injured a police presence was requested ? and the incident lodged ?

Exactly. All she needs to do is remind the company that the van was empty, which is why she went into their office to tell them about it. If someone had been injured, and if it was on the public highway, tell her insurers to demand a police reference for the incident and the H&S log of the company. And remind the company of the penalties for fraudulent insurance claims...!

Missus ran into the back of someone a few months ago, very light impact. Passenger instantly got out of the car and complained of neck pain. To which my wife's response was "That's handy, I'm a physio. I can assess it for you if you want" Never heard anything more about that....

so presuming as someone was injured a police presence was requested ? and the incident lodged ?

Not sure this is required for a whiplash claim, as the 'symtoms' can develop later (once they've had a chance to google them).

That is ridiculous. I would contact the company again regarding this as to why there is a whiplash claim as there was nobody in the vehicle. At same time request video footage (if they have the area covered)

She should report the false claim to the police and write to both the owner of the van and the ambulance chasers stating that a fraud has taken place and give them details of her visit to the cops. If she gets a crime number, give them that.

This is the sort of thing where it's worth talking to someone significant at her insurance company and setting the facts straight (that the van was empty). Her insurers will want to avoid any kind of pay-out and will spend a bit of time making sure they've got her side of the story. This will be covered by any insurance policy, by the way, this comes under "third party".

Tricky one, without witnesses then it does come down to her word against there's. I take it it's not a big company as I can't believe anyone but a cowboy firm would risk insurance fraud.

An employee of my dads backed a company pickup truck into a stationary car and broke the door mirror. The car was occupied, details swopped, it went quiet and a whiplash claim was put in and a new door was claimed for (back before phones had cameras so no photos were taken - the only damage was to the door mirror the claim was the door had a huge dent in it) the insurers paid out, dad decided it wasn't worth trying to counter claim.

Let her insurance company deal with it, that's what she pays the premium for.

Tricky one, without witnesses then it does come down to her word against there's.

Thats why I'm curious as to whether its and individual claiming or the employer claiming for the individual. Either way there are witnesses to the conversation that followed the incident so the would be being asked to lie to the police / court if there was a counter claim to support the claimant.

Let her insurance company deal with it, that's what she pays the premium for.

No. Her insurance company will just pay out and get the money back from her in increased premiums and she will have an injury accident on her record making it wickedly expensive to get cover anywhere else.

To which my wife's response was "That's handy, I'm a physio. I can assess it for you if you want" Never heard anything more about that....

Can I get my 🙄 out please?

Tell her to drive off next time she hits something!

Based on my wife's accident; her insurance co. will just pay up.

To quote them "your wife admitted liability, so we pay the claim".

Yes, she admitted that she ran into the back of the other vehicle, but she was going so slow there was no damage whatsoever to her car...

All in about £15k
- rear door damage to other vehicle (transit)
- whiplash to passenger (surname ending in an 'ski')
- hire of vehicle while own off road

Let her insurance company deal with it, that's what she pays the premium for.

No. Her insurance company will just pay out and get the money back from her in increased premiums and she will have an injury accident on her record making it wickedly expensive to get cover anywhere else.

Hmm, I would imagine that her insurance company will be very interested in the fact that a fraudulent claim is being made against them and will fight it, if necessary in court. Insurance companies REALLY don't like paying out when they don't have to.

Because a physiotherapist at the side of a road is best placed to diagnose a genuine whipwash claim...

Diagnosis of a genuine whiplash claim is probably best left to ambulance chasing lawyers right enough. Treatment wise - physio is probably as good a profession as any.

Treatment wise - physio is probably as good a profession as any.

FWIW, my wife still suffers badly after her whiplash experience almost six years ago (and regularly visits her osteopath for treatment still) - the £2.5k seemed a nice bonus at the time but she would rather be pain free - and what looks like a lifetime of treatment will use up all the money she got as well.

solicitors letter advising of a trip to hospital for whiplash treatment

What, for the van?

If there is a driver claiming to be in the vehicle, she should start saying it was his fault. Then it's knock-for-knock and no additional claims will be entertained.

they'll be claiming because they will have been advised that the industry has a standard practice of £1500 without a medical nowadays, it's the insurance industries attempt to reduce the bill.

@IHN - trouble is how are they going to fight it? Unless a witness can give evidence that the shows the claim is fraudulent then they're more likely just to pay out rather than risk a much more expensive day in court. Sure they hate paying out if they can wriggle out due to T&C's but a single pay-out whiplash case with no witnesses is much more likely to be paid out.

johndoh - maybe try a different healthcare professional for her if osteopath is not getting any long term benefits without regular treatment.

BTW, my brother was once involved in an accident where the other party started to make injury claims and claimed my brother was at fault. His insurance company wanted to just pay out but he refused and took it to a tribunal - it didn’t take them long to decide the other party had no claim as he couldn’t even lie consistently during questioning and couldn’t remember the road conditions - saying rubbish like 'I think it was raining' whereas my brother was more detailed, saying things like 'It had been raining but it had stopped. The roads were still wet but drying'.

ohndoh - maybe try a different healthcare professional for her if osteopath is not getting any long term benefits without regular treatment.

So your mum went into the [i]front[/i] of the other car?

Get her to change her story to 'the other car drove into the back of me'. Then SHE can claim for injuries too!

Fraud is still a criminal offence. If the whiplash claim is rubbish and fraudulent, then the police should be involved immediately and a crime number included with any response to the insurers.

If the insurance company pays the claim, then it's just paying off criminals and perpetuating a criminal activity yes?

[i]Unless a witness can give evidence that the shows the claim is fraudulent then they're more likely just to pay out rather than risk a much more expensive day in court.[/i]

Surely, looking at it the other way, unless there's a witness to say that there was someone in the van then will the other party risk a criminal conviction for fraud? It's one thing claiming for 'convenient' whiplash when you're in a vehicle that's hit, it's quite another claiming it when the vehicle was unnoccupied.

Either way, I'd be turning it all over to the insurance company and making it very clear that there was no-one in the other vehicle when the incident occured, and by saying otherwise the other party is attempting a clear fraud.

Could she see into the back of the van ? Could have been various workmen in the back 😀

and what willard said

Were things better back in the 80s..? I had a non-fault head on with a car (crossed into my lane) and my then girlfriend got pretty bad whiplash and neck pains for a couple of years. Never occurred to us to sue for injury claims. Let alone try to defraud an insurance company (scum that they are)

I think some people are confusing how it should be with how it is...

my then girlfriend got pretty bad whiplash and neck pains for a couple of years

Well having chatted with her further - the claim is coming from the individual - not the employer. But the mention of the H&S / accident book above is an interesting one. So she's suggesting to her insurer they ask to see the employers log of the accident as it happened on their time and apparently resulted in a hospital visit. At least to give the no-win-no-fee folk a bit of exercise.

Up to this point it seems the employer is not involved or perhaps even aware of the claim - its not coming from them or their insurer and relates to injury only and not any damage to the vehicle. So might as well be sure his boss and colleagues know what he's up to, eh.

Does the company involved have a facebook/twitter presence? If so set up a new clean account on FB and post the whole story on there, see how they like them apples.

Hi mate, I used to be a claimant lawyer dealing with RTA claims and now work on the other side for an insurer looking into fraud.

All claims for compensation are lodged with the Department of Work and Pensions, they will say whether he actually attended hospital, if he did then the insurer pays the bill for his visit.

If she is insistent that he was not in the vehicle, then she need sto raise this from the off with her insurers, some are a lot better than others in actually looking into it though.

They need to do the following:
- Get both vehicles inspected by an independent forensic engineer looking for discrepancies in the level of damage.
- Get them to look into the claimant himself, all insurers have a database (called CUE) that shows how many claims a person has made, is he a serial claimant?
- If they get a medical report from him stating he was injured, get them to send the engineering evidence to the doctor and ask questions about how he could be injured if no damage to the vehicles involved?
- Get here to take photographs of her vehicle and send them to her insurers.
- If they provide a repair invoice for more damage than there actually was, get them to investigate the garage and solicitors, there is a list of suspicious organisations whose names crop up repeatedly in these matters.

Finally the insurers should dispute if what you say is correct, we call them LVI or Low Velocity Incidents, in addition if there was actually no-one in the vehicle it is called an Occupancy dispute, both are very much on the rise and insurers are doing all they can to fight both

johndoh - maybe try a [s][b]different[/b][/s] healthcare professional for her if osteopath is not getting any long term benefits without regular treatment.

FIFY

Scud - thats a lovely bit of comprehensive advice, hopefully get the insurers (RAC) to raise their game.

The main thing is it draws the vehicle owner into the game, which means mr achey neck and his solicitors have to play this game with an audience.

It's taken me over a year to get a claim settled after someone ran into the side of my car. The third party admitted liability at the scene, but the police weren't involved as there were no injuries.

I took loads of photos, and even included maps showing the various roads (there were no markings, but it wouldn't have made any difference, because the third party never looked before pulling out). It was a good job I did, because shortly after I sent all this to the insurance company the third party claimed it was my fault.

The damage wasn't excessive - about £2800 all in - and my insurance company initially wanted to go shared liability. I refused, as it was obvious who'd driven in to who because of the damage on both cars.

In the end a court date was set, but then the third party's insurance company made a lodgement in court of 50% of the repair costs, which meant if I lost the court case then my insurance company would have been liable for any additional costs, plus the legal costs of the third party's insurance company.

I refused again to accept shared liability - while muttering about insurance ombudsmen - and insisted that it went to court. A week later the third party finally admitted liability and the claim was settled in full, without going to court.

But, I suspect if I hadn't pushed my insurance company so hard they'd have been happy to go with shared liability for the incident, at my expense.

Keep pushing them is my advice.

johndoh - Member
To which my wife's response was "That's handy, I'm a physio. I can assess it for you if you want" Never heard anything more about that....

Because a physiotherapist at the side of a road is best placed to diagnose a genuine whipwash claim...
Can I get my out please?

scud - can I contact you by email to discuss an idea we have had within my business relating to insurance claims fraud? Need an insiders view as to whether it is a pants idea or not.

Sounds to me that the letter is coming from a no win no fee solicitor? If the claim was coming from the claimants insurance company, surely they would just contact your mum's insurer directly?

FWIW - she must get her insurance company to dispute this false claim. My wife had an accident on the M3, in the morning rush hour in September 2006. The traffic was more or less stationary and she lightly rolled into a Honda CRV in front but the cars no more than kissed each other! There was no damage to her car and "no visible damage" to the Honda. They exchanged details and went on their way. Months later my wife heard from her insurer that they had paid out over £8000. My wife didn't ask what this related too, but at no point did her insurer contact her to confirm her side of events. Unfortunately that claim against her, has meant she has been paying stupid premiums ever since.

- whiplash to passenger (surname ending in an 'ski')

What relevance has the three letters at the end of the claimants surname got to do with anything?

Surely you can "find" a witness if you look hard enough .

I would pop down to the local police station. You might just find a police officer who is willing to pursue this. I wouldn't warn or threaten the other side first. As presented by you it is clearly insurance fraud. A dilligent officer would be visiting the receptionist you reported it to, together with the 'driver' (who will need to explain why he didn't report it to the police, and may collect some points (5 minimum!), the same question would be asked of your mother but even if it were found that there was someone inside (perhaps in the back of the van) she would have a reasonable excuse if completely unaware of it and left details with owner in the belief the van was empty. Even if they take NFA it might be enough to make someone 'remember' that they weren't hurt afterall!

are you sure it's not an ambulance chaser that just has notification of an accident contacting your wife to see if she wants to claim?

Back of her car damaged then did they not drive into her 😉

I really can't believe some of the crap I'm reading on this thread, just report it do both insurance companies and police although they will probably wait for the insurance to go after the fraudulent claimant. It's quite simple really.

[i]What relevance has the three letters at the end of the claimants surname got to do with anything? [/i]

Eastern European in the SE, about the same as someone of a certain origin in Oldham...

- whiplash to passenger (surname ending in an 'ski')

Eastern European in the SE, about the same as someone of a certain origin in Oldham...

Seriously, if you have a racist point to make just do it, don't be coy.

[i]Seriously, if you have a racist point to make just do it, don't be coy. [/i]

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news/31590/four-more-jailed-for-crash-scam

I can only give you our experience and the comments of friends/family. Its a problem and whether you like it or not more likely performed by certain minorities.

You're doing it again.

Sounds to me that the letter is coming from a no win no fee solicitor? If the claim was coming from the claimants insurance company, surely they would just contact your mum's insurer directly?

FWIW - she must get her insurance company to dispute this false claim. My wife had an accident on the M3, in the morning rush hour in September 2006. The traffic was more or less stationary and she lightly rolled into a Honda CRV in front but the cars no more than kissed each other! There was no damage to her car and "no visible damage" to the Honda. They exchanged details and went on their way. Months later my wife heard from her insurer that they had paid out over £8000. My wife didn't ask what this related too, but at no point did her insurer contact her to confirm her side of events. Unfortunately that claim against her, has meant she has been paying stupid premiums ever since.

Can't believe that an insurance company would pay out £8k with absolutely no input from the insured party. She must have reported it to them and also admitted liability at the same time, thus leaving herself open to any type of claim. Insurance companies do not just hand out cheques for no reason.

[i]Can't believe that an insurance company would pay out £8k with absolutely no input from the insured party. She must have reported it to them and also admitted liability at the same time, thus leaving herself open to any type of claim. Insurance companies do not just hand out cheques for no reason. [/i]

See my comment further above. I had a number of calls to my wifes' insurance company on the subject - and they were paying out irrelevent of what we said.

Well b r, there is a number on the article you link to for reporting Insurance Fraud, take it you have done this?

My point above is that it appears that the insured party must have reported the incident to their insurers and admitted liability. The impression is that £8k was paid out just after swapping details.

All the above show's that it may be a good idea not to admit liability at the time.

All the above show's that it may be a good idea not to admit liability at the time.

You're not meant to admit liability at the time... During lessons you should be expressly told not to admit liability in the event of a crash.

"You're not meant to admit liability at the time... During lessons you sld be expressly told not to admit liability in the event of a crash."

read the small print of any car insurance documentation. explicitly tells you not to admit liability regardless of situation.

So, if you do not admit liability why in the above cases have the insurance companies paid out thousands without any further input from the client? i.e. no liability admitted, then surely the full circunstances need to be determined and the party at fault determined, and informed/agree?

Neice jusy had crash with passenger. Lucky to be alive really after hitting wall and few piroettes.

Of course insurance company cite mistakes in documentation to avoid paying out. They are demanding another grand (its a racket) apparently the dvla put the wrong engine size on the reg docs.

Anyway two weeks later neice just let on her mate has said her mums told her to claim whiplash which she is going to do as "it will pay for my holiday, you should do it too, we can do it together"

It is absolutely gauling given the the insurance has hinted this may lead to another more serious demand from the policy holder.

Can't believe that an insurance company would pay out £8k with absolutely no input from the insured party. She must have reported it to them and also admitted liability at the same time, thus leaving herself open to any type of claim. Insurance companies do not just hand out cheques for no reason.

AIUI insurance companies don't challenge whiplash claims and just pay out. The insurer doesn't lose money as our premiums have all gone up to cover the huge fraudulent rate in the UK (highest incidence rate of whiplash in the world apparently).

Insurers often don't challenge, because of the cost of doing so. There's no standard for medical or physical examination for whiplash, costs are high for what there is, fast track legal processes for small personal injury cases doesn't work, and legal precedents are stacked up against the insurers when trying to defend against fraudulent claims.

There's work ongoing to resolve these, but obviously it's not going to happen overnight.

All you wanted to know and more:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201314/cmselect/cmtran/writev/whiplash/m38.htm

And, as a whole, the UK motor insurance market hasn't made money for 20 years.

Holy thread ressurection batman!!

Isn't it?

I was hoping there'd be a happy ending update. 😕

oh hello

Hadn't noticed this had been revived - things dragged a bit which is why I've never updated and the insurance have never actually said "OK this is finished" but is seems to have finished.

In summary the driver (but not owner) of the other vehicle was claiming for injury in a tiny collision during which he wasn't actually in the vehicle. He was making the claim independently of the vehicle owner/employer but not for any damage to the vehicle (which has a cracked light).

The insurers were initially going to roll over - our course of action was: (thanks to advice from here)

we photographed the rear of my mums car - replete with no damage at all from the collision

asked the insurers to contact the no win no fee solicitors representing the claimant and forward the photo to them. We requested that the claimant took this picture and any evidence of damage to his works van to the doctor who assessed his whiplash and ask that doctor to confirm that collision of that magnitude correlated with the whiplash he'd diagnosed.

time passed

the claimant then submitted a new claim - forgetting all about the whiplash, but claiming instead for the broken light

we reminded the insurers that the claimant wasn't the owner of the van

no further response from the claimant so presumable the situation is settled.

Good work, well done.

Edit: add to my list of reasons above: "lazy claims handlers and/or crappy claims handling departments dealing with volume, not well set up or suited to developing independent thought and critical analysis."

Hardly rocket science, batting that back, was it? If he'd got away with it, he'd do it again and be another "Claim for whiplash, I did, and got £3K!"