Car Crash URGENT help needed!!

LadyIndecisive

KatP wrote: »

Depends upon the insurers, the circumstances of the accident and a variety of other factors. I am aware of a good many cases where the cost of investigations has exceeded the value of the case precisely because some insurers are taking a stand against fraud.

A bunch of young men having an accident late at night with no other vehicles involved would raise my suspicions, there are some very sophisticated analysis of claims out there to detect fraud.

In any event it does no harm to let the "friends" think that they will be found out if they are faking.

Yes there are some test cases where investigation and legal costs may exceed potential savings, but they are rare and carefully chosen. There are insurers who may not have investigation costs versus savings targets; they are rare too.

You are talking about two different types of fraud here though. The incident described is one where the driver is not complicit and the injuries claimed are likely to soft tissue and minor in nature. Unless the claimants are claiming they could not drive or work and the sum claimed is many thousands, surveillance of these claimants would be disproportionate and unlikely. Proportionality is key under Human Rights legislation too.

A single vehicle accident with passenger injury claims is suspicous in an entirely different way but would require complicity on the part of the OPs brother which is not the case here.

cogito

I can't see where the OP has said it's a whiplash injury and from the accident circumstances described, it's hard to see that it could be. Whiplash injuries are pretty much invisible but soft tissue injuries which are more likely in this sort of accident are easy to see. The claimants would presumably have to show that they received treatment and if they couldn't, why would insurers pay out?

LadyIndecisive

Whiplash is a soft tissue injury. The claimant may be expected to show they received treatment (not always) but it's quite easy to go to one's GP for some pain killers.

lisyloo

I can't see where the OP has said it's a whiplash injury

No they haven't, but it's a damn site easier to fake than say a broken leg.
Most other injuries would be very hard to fake.

Quentin

Why do you suggest whiplash is easy to fake? It isn't.

Some insurers pay out without going to the cost of verifying the condition themselves.

But the problem with whiplash injuries is more to do with sufferers minimising their symptoms and not making claims for fear of being labelled fake.

LadyIndecisive

I've looked at staged and contrived RTA claims and phantom passenger claims for quite a few years now and my experience is that a whiplash injury is relatively easy to fake if you know the symptoms and/or if the medical expert is not thorough (or let's say 'has their own agenda') and/or if you send someone else to the medical exam on your behalf.

cogito

I saw an interesting statistic recently that the incidence of whiplash injuries is twice as high in the UK as it is in Germany. I wonder why.

Quentin

LadyIndecisive wrote: »

I've looked at staged and contived RTA claims and phantom passenger claims for quite a few years now and my experience is that a whiplash injury is relatively easy to fake if you know the symptoms and/or if the medical expert is not thorough (or let's say 'has their own agenda') and/or if you send someone else to the medical exam on your behalf.

Exactly - a "proper", truly independent doctor can easily spot a fake.

As far as symptoms go, a proper doctor wouldn't just go on what the patient tells them.

LadyIndecisive

Allianz have been involved in lots of research work in this area, in Germany, I believe.

LadyIndecisive

Quentin wrote: »

Exactly - a "proper", truly independent doctor can easily spot a fake.

As far as symptoms go, a proper doctor wouldn't just go on what the patient tells them.

Many independent 'proper' doctors can be deceived too Quentin, it is the nature of the beast.

Often exams will take place after the injury has allegedly resolved, hence the medical expert has no real option but to believe the symptoms as described by the claimant. Much of the exam is down to what the claimant tells the expert.