Showing 1 - 10 of 59
The use of surveillance and when to disclose has always been the subject of contention, as defendants have legitimate reasons for delaying disclosure, but equally claimants must be given sufficient opportunity to review the evidence.
Attempts to regulate claims farming and its impact have shaped the evolution of claims farming practices and the way businesses operate.
The traditional model of operating a claimant personal injury law firm has long gone. Squeezed margins as a result of the fixed costs changes have impacted profit margins and, therefore, the viability of a number of claimant law firms.
Case review 28/11/2019
Gavin Alexander v Gary Wheeler [18.10.2019]. In this case, the claimant’s personal injury claim for damages originally pleaded in excess of £800,000, was dismissed on the grounds of fundamental dishonesty. Kennedys were instructed to act on behalf of the defendant’s insurer, esure.
On 31 October 2019, Deputy District Judge Lalas found that Mr Williamson’s discontinued claim against Sunderland County Council was fundamentally dishonest. He has been ordered to pay the Council’s costs on the indemnity basis, which are likely to exceed £19,000.
In the second installment of our claims farming series we explore the modus operand. How does claims farming work? Who are the parties involved? What are the behaviours it creates in claims? Who is gaining financially? And what is the impact of the practice?
We are pleased to announced that a team of motor and general insurance lawyers from Withers KhattarWong in Singapore has joined us, making us one of the largest local providers of volume defence work and one of the largest motor insurance teams at any law firm in the country.
In the previous installments of our series ‘The Future of Fraud’ we discussed the industrialisation of claims. In this new series, we will explore the practice of Claims Farming: what it is, how it works, current examples and future possibilities.
“He cannot recall one lie from another” says Judge, as claimant is found fundamentally dishonest in Mr Wahab Khan v Mr Mindaugas Gudauskas & Premier Insurance Company Limited [July 2019].
Technology has always been an enabler of fraud and this is an interesting development in mandate fraud, also known as ‘Friday Frauds’.