View Full Version : Exaggerated Insurance Claim - Fraud
CB1ROCKET
03-09-07, 12:31 PM
Hi guys
Bad news but here goes
I had an accident not long ago on one weekend with a cyclist. Ok it wasn't my fault as the cyclist wasn't looking. However as i braked to a stop, his bike bounces off my car and hit another car that was stationary in traffic. Its a dual carriage way road, with a cycle path on the left of the road which then ends at the kerb. The traffic was grid lock on the nearside lane and my lane, the outside lane, was free flowing. At 0.1 meters this cyclist pulls out without looking, so end up clipping him and his bike. There was no time to react and i was already slowing down for the roundabout at the time. Anyway as the bike bounce off my car and hit another car, the car sitting stationary got some few minor scrapes and mini dents. My car took the worse blunt of the impact requiring a new wing. The cyclist was taken away in an ambulance but is on the mend.
I also got a letter from police saying I was NOT at fault, which is good news.
However I get a letter from other drivers insurance company for the damages.
Now this is what makes me angry. The driver who was unharmed, (sitting in traffic of course), is trying to pursue damages to personal injury to his shoulder, his medical expenses and miscellaneous expenses.
However the only thing that was damaged was his car! I'm in a state of despair as he trying to claim thousands by lying in from what actually happen. I'm also not at fault on any counts.
Anyone got any suggestions? Thanks for reading
I also got a letter from police saying I was at fault, which is good news.
However I get a letter from other drivers insurance company for the damages.
Suerly the polcie said you "Weren't" at fault????
Don't fret it. Jsut give the details to your insurers. Let them deal with it.
Did you get the details of any witnesses?
Worst case scenario, you dispute, they dispute etc you go to court...they decide against you. Your premiums go up next year.
CB1ROCKET
03-09-07, 01:07 PM
Thanks just corrected that
btw: Most likely your insurers will want to settle with as little cost to them as possible.
That is most likely to mean they will pressure you into admitting liabilty, unless you took down details of a witness that said you're in the clear. OR unless the cyclists admits liability.
Your insurers won't want to go to court because if they lose they'll have to pay court costs on top of the third parties claim. But if you admit liability early it softens the blow for them & they recoup the cost by your inflated premiums!
Treat your insurance co as if they're working for the third party, question everything. Make notes of the date/time when you call them/who you spoke to & keep copies of all correspondence just to be sure. Remember, it's a business: They're in it for their profits not for you.
CB1ROCKET
03-09-07, 01:43 PM
The police took witness statements, but i'm unable to get that information under the data protection act.
However i overheard their converstation with the police, which puts the blame on the cyclist.
The police took witness statements, but i'm unable to get that information under the data protection act.
However i overheard their converstation with the police, which puts the blame on the cyclist.
Right, speak to your insurers, they can apply for a copy of the police report. It's not expensive. Get the ball rolling. You'll have to quote the police reference number you were given in the police letter.
Bluepete
03-09-07, 02:13 PM
Or just phone up the office the Cop dealing works at, get him to give you the details you need. Also, if the other driver had any injury, it would have been recorded by the Cops. If he didn't but now claims some, let the officer know. He may contact the bloke and set him straight.
Leave it to your insurance company - they see and deal with this sort of thing every day.
I'm sure that they will remind the other drivers' ins co that fraud is a criminal offence and that the police actually attended this incident ;)
Jelster
03-09-07, 04:21 PM
I had this when I wrote off my naked. Bloke said he had "whiplash". I may have believed him but I hit his stationary car, not the bike, I didn't get hurt at all I hit him so slowly...
When he started saying "I've had to go to the doctor because of my neck" I just told the insurance company that I thought he was having them on. They later confirmed that no personal injury claim was made..... :rolleyes:
Point this out to your insurance company and demand that they ask for disclosure of the medical evidence. Insurance coys generally don't like fraud and will almost certainly do it.
Biker Biggles
03-09-07, 04:28 PM
I think you have to leave this to your insurance.Having said that I think you will probably end up losing your no claims bonus.This could be because the cyclist who caused the crash has no insurance,and so the other party(the other car driver) will claim against you.Not fair and right,but it seems to be the way they do things.
I think you have to leave this to your insurance.Having said that I think you will probably end up losing your no claims bonus.This could be because the cyclist who caused the crash has no insurance,and so the other party(the other car driver) will claim against you.Not fair and right,but it seems to be the way they do things.
I hope you're wrong on this!
If the cyclist is liable, then it's his bill no-one elses. He's bound to have some sort of household insurance, perhaps he could use that?
CB1ROCKET
03-09-07, 05:02 PM
My dad has helped me deal with most of this, and so far the police don't seem interested. So probably telling the police about the fraud isnt gonna work, after all our justice system is that poor and in too many guilty people getting no charges.
The only thing where it will get interested on the fruad is the courts i assume.
Biker Biggles
03-09-07, 05:56 PM
The insurance company that is footing the bill will be interested in any fraud going on in order to reduce their outlay.If that turns out to be your insurance company they will no doubt be grateful to you for pointing out any fraud,but it won't save your NCB if they have to pay out at all.
If the cyclist is liable, then it's his bill no-one elses.
This is correct, but how many cyclists do you know who have specific insurance? It's unlikely a household policy will provide third party cover. But this still doesn't mean they aren't liable.
Your description says you only collided with the cyclist, who then went on to clatter other vehicles. Therefore, in theory the other driver needs to claim against the cyclist (who could possibly then counter claim against you). CB-1, the other driver is probably coming at you directly because he thinks he's got no chance of recovering his costs from the cyclist unless he sues and takes him to court.
You need to challenge your insurance company not to accept this as a legitimate claim and push them to refer the other driver to the cyclist (and his insurers). You have proof you are not liable. Don't let em stitch you up. Unfortunately, it's not about right & wrong - the insurance companies want the cheapest outcome. If it's only a few scratches, they may think it'll be cheaper to pay a paintjob claim than pay for the admin in fighting it off. They certainly won't care about the effect on you of a claim on your policy/loss of your NCB/inflated premium, so you need to keep on at them to do what's acceptable to you as the policyholder.
Oh, and I also think you should be claiming off the cyclist for your repair costs etc.!
muffles
04-09-07, 08:11 AM
I'm shocked that there is any chance you could be liable simply because the cyclist is unlikely to have insurance! I'd be fuming if someone tried to blame me simply cos I happened to be the nearest person with insurance!
Ceri JC
04-09-07, 09:24 AM
I'm shocked that there is any chance you could be liable simply because the cyclist is unlikely to have insurance! I'd be fuming if someone tried to blame me simply cos I happened to be the nearest person with insurance!
My POV exactly. Cyclist was at fault, if the cyclist was uninsured, surely they can still claim against him (funds in savings accounts, value of his house, repo his TV, etc?) If they can't get anything from him, that's their misfortune. Nothing to do with you, you've got a police statement saying you were not to blame...
This thread reminds me of someone I used to work with in Plymouth. She was a passenger in a car that was rear-ended. I mentioned that you get hefty damages for whiplash. Next day she came to work in a surgical collar moaning about pain and stiffness in her neck. She'd spent the evening at A&E. Can't think why:rolleyes:
I'm shocked that there is any chance you could be liable simply because the cyclist is unlikely to have insurance! I'd be fuming if someone tried to blame me simply cos I happened to be the nearest person with insurance!
It's not about who's liable, it's about who they can get to pay up. Sad to say, it's a game of money, not of right and wrong.
It happened to me twenty years ago! In the car, a dog runs out infront of me and I hit it. I only broke it's leg and it didn't run off. Dutifully, I rang the police (dogs were licensed then and it's a reportable incident if you hit a licensed animal.) Police attended, took statements etc. I asked what I should do about the dog and they said they'd deal with it, so off I went, thinking I'd done the right thing. Six months later a letter from the police lands on my mat claiming £hundreds for vet's fees, kenneling etc. Thankfully my dad wasn't intimidated by this, refuted all liability and sent them packing to look for the dog's owner. During the subsequent chain of correspondence, the police admitted that they couldn't trace the owner and it was their policy to seek reimbursement from other parties (or their insurers) to keep their costs down. Still not intimidated, my dad sent 'em packing again on the basis that I wasn't liable for an uncontrolled dog on the streets. Eventually they capitulated, but we had to fight for it!
So, CB1, deny deny deny! Put it in writing to your insurance company that you are not liable. Send them copy of the police letter to back this up (despite what people may think, it's still about the best witness you can get!) Tell them that they should not pay this claim against your policy, that the claim should be against the cyclist. Keep copies of everything you send them. They won't want to do what you want at first, but stick to your guns - you are not in the wrong and you shouldn't have to pay.
muffles
04-09-07, 08:58 PM
It's not about who's liable, it's about who they can get to pay up. Sad to say, it's a game of money, not of right and wrong.
Well, I agree with what you're saying, but it's said in a vague enough way to be taken the wrong way.
I was arguing that legally there shouldn't be (and isn't, as far as I know) a way to blame the OP for the accident, since he wasn't liable.
What insurance companies & third parties actually try and do is another matter entirely - it was the way Biggles put it:
This could be because the cyclist who caused the crash has no insurance,and so the other party(the other car driver) will claim against you.Not fair and right,but it seems to be the way they do things.
...that makes it sound as though going after the OP is actually legal. That's really what I was commenting on :thumbsup:
CB1ROCKET
04-09-07, 09:59 PM
Thanks for the encouragement, as I was NOT at fault at all. I'm going to deny everything that the other party will try to pursue. The main thing hopefully is that my insurance co will tell the other to set the record straight and warn the guy about the fake claims he is making. His insurer’s don’t know that you see...... With a police letter this will clear the matter up, sending photos in as well. Hopefully this will be settled quickly as possible.
CB1ROCKET
04-09-07, 10:01 PM
This thread reminds me of someone I used to work with in Plymouth. She was a passenger in a car that was rear-ended. I mentioned that you get hefty damages for whiplash. Next day she came to work in a surgical collar moaning about pain and stiffness in her neck. She'd spent the evening at A&E. Can't think why:rolleyes:
The driver in this case had a very minor impact from a bicycle that has the same affect as going over a pothole bump. Hardly that can cause any injury
Well, I agree with what you're saying, but it's said in a vague enough way to be taken the wrong way.
I was arguing that legally there shouldn't be (and isn't, as far as I know) a way to blame the OP for the accident, since he wasn't liable.
What insurance companies & third parties actually try and do is another matter entirely - it was the way Biggles put it:
...that makes it sound as though going after the OP is actually legal. That's really what I was commenting on :thumbsup:
Sorry if I mis-understood, we're in agreement.
Unfortunately insurance companies tend to twist reality to suit their own purposes, don't they? I imagine in this case, they'd be trying to get round any legality issue by claiming that because OP hit the cyclist who then hit the other car, then it's OPs fault, on the basis that if he hadn't hit the cyclist then there would have been no damage to their policyholder. They conveniently forget that the cyclist actually caused the inital collision by violating OPs right of way!
Anway, you're bang on - they shouldn't simply be able to chase the nearest insured party.
CB1ROCKET
05-09-07, 07:35 PM
I have just had another company trying to claim money, the same guy. This has been 3 different company all from the same person to date. I believe he hasn't actually contacted his insurers but is trying it on with no win no fee companies. Its all a con, as far as i can see. So i will be having and instructing my insurance company to make no pay outs what so ever.
Surely 3 claims from the same person is a scam, he must be that desperate for the money......
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.