Legal update egal
Email your opinions to
editorial@barkerbrooks.co.uk Fraud and RTA: New Guidance
Kerry Underwood provides a tongue-in-cheek update on the insurance industry's monitoring of fraud
Ash for Cash Bash for Cash
Cash for Cash Dash for Cash
Fash for Cash
Kerry Underwood is the chairman of Law Abroad. He is a solicitor, author, lecturer and broadcaster
Flash for Cash Lash for Cash Mash for Cash Rash for Cash
Slash for Cash Splash for Cash Tash for Cash
Trash for Cash Wash for Cash
Artificial volcanoes are erupted to cause ash cloud and accidents and claims.
Still the most popular scam; motorists have genuine accidents and claim on the insurance that they have paid for. Some consider this not to be true fraud; others think that any genuine claim must at least be fundamentally dishonest.
Banks. The biggest fraud of all.
Olympic runners take part in an apparently spontaneous 100 metres race on a motorway, causing crashes and claims.
Models stage fashion shows on roads, with the inevitable outcome. Models take their clothes off – see Fash for Cash.
A public whipping is staged on a main road. Not to be confused with whiplash. Mashed potato is spread on the road.
Children with spots painted on their faces appear in the road, causing concerned motorists to brake.
Self-explanatory. See Slash for Cash.
Fraudsters stop cars and offer to paint moustaches on the occupants, thus causing accidents.
Public Relations department of an insurance company. Doesn’t rhyme except in the North-East.
Whiplash for Cash An unpleasant and painful injury and therefore not at all fraudulent, but it suits insurance companies and the Constitutional Lord Justice Ministry of Chancellors Affairs Department and Truth and similarly honest bodies to lump it in with genuine fraud.
T
he Association of British Fraudsters has issued guidance and a glossary concerning fraud and road traffic accidents.
The aim is to create accidents so that a claim may be made.
Right to lawyer in BTE cases Meanwhile, in other insurance-related news, the
European Court of Justice has ruled that legal expenses insurers must allow insured people to choose freely a lawyer or suitably qualified legal representative, rather than forcing people to have the matter dealt with in- house by DAS employees. In DAS Nederlandse Rechtsbijstand
Verzekeringsmaatschappij NV, 7 November 2013 the ECJ held that Article 4(1)(a) of Council Directive 87/344/EEC of 22 July 1987 prevents legal expense insurers from insisting
that the matter will be dealt with by its own employees, even if that is stipulated in the contract of insurance. This is the case whether or not legal assistance
is compulsory under national law in the inquiry or proceedings concerned. This is the second such ruling against DAS following
the decision in (1) Brown – Quinn (2) Webster Dixon LLP v (1) Equity Syndicate Management Ltd and (2) Motorplus Ltd [2012] EWCA1633 that insured people had the right to choose their own lawyer. In the new case DAS accepted that, but argued
that its insured had no right to a lawyer at all under the terms of the policy and that DAS could insist on it being dealt with in-house. That argument was comprehensively rejected by the
European Court of Justice. DAS is dat then! ●
Claims Magazine/Issue 11/ 27
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60