the personal injury and clinical negligence blog

A collaboration between Rebmark Legal Solutions and 1 Chancery Lane

Go straight to gaol, do not pass go, do not collect £££


Mr and Mrs Loveday were involved in a road traffic accident. They brought proceedings for personal injury and the insurers admitted liability. Surely this was just another straightforward case of assessing damages? Mr Loveday signed his witness statement which said he had suffered injuries, he could not work or drive, he was reliant on a wheelchair as he could hardly walk, he had to be cared for by his wife, he had flown to Italy and had been wheeled around the airport in his wheelchair and he was housebound. He said he had returned to work and produced a letter from his employer. ‘This must surely be a sizeable claim?’ I hear you say. It might have been were it not for the fact that surveillance revealed that he was not housebound, he could drive and walk unaided, he went on a caravanning holiday and he was able to work on a vehicle. In fact he did not fly to Italy at all but drove and the letter from his employer was forged. Large parts of his witness statement were wholly untrue and the same went for his wife. The insurers applied for the committal of the Lovedays. Mr was imprisoned for 9 months and his wife was given a suspended sentence as she had admitted her contempt of court (Neild and Acromas Insurance Co Ltd v Loveday and Loveday  13th July 2011 (Unreported)). Insurers have been alleging fraud in more and more claims – are they now opening up another front with applications for committals? We may well be seeing more of these reports….

Comments (2) -

  • jason @ personal injury lawyer

    7/19/2011 9:46:01 PM |

    It's the fraudsters that give a personal injury lawyer a bad name. And the red top hypocrisy with 'stupid' claims like 'Hot Coffee spills', while at the same time highlighting these fraudulent cases.

    But how comes it is acceptable to over-estimate theft claims, and not exaggerate injuries. Maybe it's just the extent of exaggeration?

  • Ian Miller

    7/20/2011 4:46:03 PM |

    You are right to point out that there is morally no difference in exaggerating a claim with an insurance company following a theft and exaggerating a personal injury claim: both involve deception. It is an interesting question as to why the Lovedays were not prosecuted for fraud. Perhaps that is the next move for insurers in such cases.

    As for us personal injury lawyers, we have to live with an unfortunate reputation which derives from the adverts on TV, the texts sent to mobiles and a general perception that personal injury involves unmeritorious claims. The destitution that could befall a victim of an accident in Victorian times (as well as ours) as a result of an industrial accident is rarely mentioned...

  • nanosat nano

    7/26/2011 10:14:57 AM |

    Nice post. I learn something more challenging on different blogs everyday. The article has really peaks my interest.

Comments are closed