I'm the victim of insurance fraud, my

daveonline

Just one final question, you said that the payout was for £18k but they claimed you only knocked over a motorbike ? If most of the £18k was legal costs then your insurance company must have considered it worthwhile fighting it that far ?

Teddy_Picker

Thanks, Dave. Original claim was for roughly £9,000. Half for repairs to the bike , (he'd only bought it that day) Half for rental to replace the bike while his was being fixed. So I assume the other £9,000 was legal fees, plus my own insurers solicitors incurred costs.

RabbitMad

go to the police mate - it is perjury and that is jail time.

If you've got the evidence (e.g.witness statements signed etc) then you've done half the police's job for them.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

RabbitMad wrote: »

go to the police mate - it is perjury and that is jail time.

If you've got the evidence (e.g.witness statements signed etc) then you've done half the police's job for them.

How do you know that?

At no point has he said how they lied in court, if he is saying simply because they knew each other then thats not the case

He would need to prove they lied about the case and the seriousness of the lie would depend upon the criminal penalty

Apart from anything I dont see how any of this will achieve having it removed from his record, without the witness one would assume that it would still be their word against his and hence the insurers may end up paying out less but he would still have it on his record

Teddy_Picker

They both stated in their signed statements that they didn't know each other,and my solicitor made a point of asking them in court if they knew each other and they denied it. We didn't know at the time, but suspected they might as they turned up together in the same car. The evidence about them living together and having a child together only came about after we'd been to Court. I would have thought these lies would have discredited the rest of their evidence,but, I don't know much about the Law.

RabbitMad

Why didn't your solicitor at that point ask why they arrived in the same car then?

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

Teddy_Picker wrote: »

They both stated in their signed statements that they didn't know each other,and my solicitor made a point of asking them in court if they knew each other and they denied it. We didn't know at the time, but suspected they might as they turned up together in the same car. The evidence about them living together and having a child together only came about after we'd been to Court. I would have thought these lies would have discredited the rest of their evidence,but, I don't know much about the Law.

Tbh it sounds like shoddy lawyer work

Why the hell would you challenge them on it then not have the proof that they lied?

I would be questioning your solicitors re this

Regarding getting the fault claim removed, tbh even with the perjury as said its still your word against his and whilst your insurers pay out may reduce I dont think your own personal situation will improve, probably best letting it go

raskazz

Who appointed the solicitor - you or the insurer? If you did then it may be worth contacting the Law Society's legal complaints service, though they are notorious for looking after their own, so I wouldn't hold your breath. Whether the solicitor acted correctly really depends on what evidence was available at the time of the hearing, not what happened afterwards.

If it was your insurer, put a complaint in writing about how the case was handled, and ask if they will mark the claim as non-fault given the circumstances.

jeppy

Its not clear whether you were even there!!

Last year we paid a deposit on a car but the co sold it. They couldnt find a similar one at the same price so after a lot of complaining they lent us a similar car until they found one that met the criteria! They took our car in place of the one on loan. They took it and had and accident/hit and run and drove off!!

The co - Davids of Harrogate!!

We have had numerous letters and explained the position to everyone we have chased it up but no-one responds so not sure if its sorted or not!

Initially Davids denied all knowledge possibly thru ignorance as the car was on loan - possibly not!!

However someone was driving that vehicle and didnt stay around and report it and left it to us!!

They were terrible!! Basically we lost the car we wanted and paid for cos the salesman took our deposit and then went home!! Came back 2 days later to finish his paperwork - only to find someone else had bought the car!!

It was a rare colour and a great price!!

This was bad enough but to then take the car we had placed in custody with them - hit another car and drive off - leaving us to take the back lash is criminal - The co was taken over but the staff are the same!!

BEWARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Teddy_Picker

raskazz wrote: »

Who appointed the solicitor - you or the insurer? If you did then it may be worth contacting the Law Society's legal complaints service, though they are notorious for looking after their own, so I wouldn't hold your breath. Whether the solicitor acted correctly really depends on what evidence was available at the time of the hearing, not what happened afterwards.

If it was your insurer, put a complaint in writing about how the case was handled, and ask if they will mark the claim as non-fault given the circumstances.

My insurer appointed him. He wasn't very good, but didn't have that evidence until afterwards, so can't be blamed for that. I don't think the claimant was insured as my insurers couldn't find any evidence of it. He just went to a 'no win, no fee' solicitor. The bike wasn't even registered in his name, as he claims to have only bought it that morning.