I'm interested in…

  • Strategy & Procedure
  • Motor
  • Fraud
  • Disease
  • Catastrophic Injury
  • Commercial Insurance
  • Costs
  • Liability
  • Local Authority
  • Professional Indemnity
  • Scotland

DWF's Scottish counter fraud team defeat late notified claim

The Scottish Counter Fraud team have secured another saving of £13,500 in respect of damages and costs for ERS following the successful repudiation of a personal injury claim.  This increases the total savings for ERS made by DWF's Scottish team to £51,500 in the last 4 months.

- The claim related to an accident on 21 December 2013 when the insured emerged from a junction in to the path of the pursuer.  Liability was admitted.  The personal injury claim was intimated on 28 October 2015, 22 months post-accident.  The claim was repudiated on the grounds of late notification and proceedings were raised.  DWF were instructed to defend.

- The Pursuer had communicated with ERS between 27 January 2014 and 10 February 2014 regarding recovery of his policy excess charge.  During this time he made no mention of having sustained any injury or that he wished to claim in respect of injury. 

- DWF recovered a copy of the FNOL call recording from the pursuer’s insurers.  The call was made on the day of the accident approximately 30 minutes after the incident occurred.  The Pursuer advised in the telephone call that he was not injured. 

- This was inconsistent with what the Pursuer advised his medical expert: that he had immediate pain in his neck, right shoulder, upper back and chest as a result of the accident. 

- DWF recovered the pursuer’s medical records and despite the pursuer’s complaint to his expert that he suffered immediate pain there was no attendance at A&E or the pursuer’s GP.

- DWF presented the FNOL call recording, medical records and questioned why no injury had been reported when the pursuer was in communication with ERS.  At the same time an offer of abandonment on a no expenses basis (drops hands offer) was put forward which was accepted by the pursuer.

In the case the pursuer had no claims history, there was no adverse evidence on social media or any adverse financial evidence.  However, the case demonstrates that it is not essential to have all elements of adverse credibility evidence in order to defeat late notified claims.

For further information, please contact Justine Reilly, Solicitor on +44 (0)141 228 8460 or at Justine.Reilly@dwf.law

DWF are hosting a Late Claims Forum in Glasgow on 15th November.  Find out more and register to attend >

Share your views

Please complete your details below to share your views. All comments are moderated and only your name and comment will be visible.

Your Comment

This information is intended as a general discussion surrounding the topics covered and is for guidance purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and should not be regarded as a substitute for taking legal advice. DWF is not responsible for any activity undertaken based on this information.

Top