0:00:02 > 0:00:05Insurance fraud in the UK has hit epidemic levels.
0:00:05 > 0:00:09It's costing us around £2 billion every year.
0:00:09 > 0:00:11That's almost £6 million a day.
0:00:12 > 0:00:15Deliberate crashes, bogus personal injuries,
0:00:15 > 0:00:18even phantom pets.
0:00:18 > 0:00:22The fraudsters are risking more and more to make a quick killing,
0:00:22 > 0:00:27and every year it's adding over £50 to your insurance bill.
0:00:27 > 0:00:29But, insurers are fighting back,
0:00:29 > 0:00:33exposing around 14 fake claims every hour.
0:00:33 > 0:00:35Armed with covert surveillance systems...
0:00:35 > 0:00:37Subject out of the vehicle...
0:00:37 > 0:00:40..sophisticated data analysis techniques...
0:00:42 > 0:00:45..and a number of highly skilled police units,
0:00:45 > 0:00:49they're catching the criminals red-handed.
0:00:49 > 0:00:50Just don't lie to us!
0:00:50 > 0:00:54All those con men, scammers and cheats on the fiddle
0:00:54 > 0:00:55are now caught in the act
0:00:55 > 0:00:58and Claimed And Shamed.
0:01:06 > 0:01:08Coming up:
0:01:08 > 0:01:11A bus company pulls out all the stops.
0:01:11 > 0:01:14A blue Nissan Almera pulled out in front of it,
0:01:14 > 0:01:18and then the driver slammed on the brakes in front of the bus.
0:01:18 > 0:01:22A claimer goes completely overboard with a personal injury claim.
0:01:22 > 0:01:25The claim was a substantial figure -
0:01:25 > 0:01:29in excess of £500,000 for his ongoing losses.
0:01:30 > 0:01:34And IFED are on the trail of a suspected crash for cash criminal.
0:01:34 > 0:01:37Well, we've got an intercom with a camera on the door,
0:01:37 > 0:01:41which isn't really fitting with the area or the premises, is it?
0:01:47 > 0:01:50Being a bus driver can be a tricky business.
0:01:50 > 0:01:54There are just under 200,000 casualties a year on British roads.
0:01:54 > 0:01:57One in 40 of these involve a bus or coach.
0:01:57 > 0:02:01Buses provide an important service, so drivers are highly trained
0:02:01 > 0:02:03to be amongst the safest motorists in the world.
0:02:03 > 0:02:07But, when accidents do happen, it is not always the bus's fault.
0:02:07 > 0:02:10This incident involved our 301 service,
0:02:10 > 0:02:12which runs from Peckham to Waterloo.
0:02:12 > 0:02:15It was in the summer, 6pm in the evening,
0:02:15 > 0:02:17and our bus was proceeding along the road
0:02:17 > 0:02:22when a blue Nissan Almera pulled out in front of it,
0:02:22 > 0:02:26and then the driver slammed on the brakes in front of the bus.
0:02:27 > 0:02:28In a matter of weeks,
0:02:28 > 0:02:32the bus company received a claim from the Nissan driver for £3,500.
0:02:32 > 0:02:35Abellio did not hesitate in investigating it.
0:02:37 > 0:02:39The circumstances were quite peculiar.
0:02:39 > 0:02:43As a matter of course, we did everything that we usually do,
0:02:43 > 0:02:46contacting the call centre, filling out the incident report.
0:02:46 > 0:02:49Luckily, each bus is fitted with the latest technology.
0:02:49 > 0:02:54On average, across our fleet, we've probably got about 12 cameras,
0:02:54 > 0:02:57but it can go up to 15 cameras on some of our double-decks,
0:02:57 > 0:03:01and the minimum is about ten on a single deck.
0:03:01 > 0:03:04They cover all the angles outside and inside.
0:03:04 > 0:03:06There's nothing you won't be able to see
0:03:06 > 0:03:07when we've got an incident.
0:03:09 > 0:03:13They watched the CCTV footage back, and what they saw rang alarm bells.
0:03:13 > 0:03:17The Nissan car pulled out in front of the bus,
0:03:17 > 0:03:18and then started to travel slowly.
0:03:18 > 0:03:21The bus driver had to slow the bus down
0:03:21 > 0:03:24to increase the distance between the two vehicles.
0:03:24 > 0:03:27The Nissan in front then suddenly slammed on his brakes.
0:03:27 > 0:03:29The bus went into the back of it.
0:03:31 > 0:03:35The reality of the situation was obvious, just purely from the CCTV.
0:03:35 > 0:03:39There was nothing in front of the vehicle to cause him to brake.
0:03:39 > 0:03:43The Nissan driver's behaviour was also a little unusual.
0:03:43 > 0:03:45The driver then acted very peculiarly.
0:03:45 > 0:03:48He got out of the car, would not talk to our driver,
0:03:48 > 0:03:51and immediately was talking on his phone.
0:03:51 > 0:03:53All in all, it was very clear to us
0:03:53 > 0:03:56that something suspicious was going on.
0:03:56 > 0:03:58We instructed the police straightaway.
0:03:58 > 0:04:02DI David Hindmarsh from the Met Police came on board
0:04:02 > 0:04:05to help Abellio with their case.
0:04:05 > 0:04:09David heads up Operation Catcher, a police unit which identifies
0:04:09 > 0:04:12and prosecute crash for cash offenders, with the unit
0:04:12 > 0:04:17handling up to 50 investigations and making over 300 arrests since 2010.
0:04:17 > 0:04:20Abellio came to us because they were suspicious.
0:04:20 > 0:04:24Having reviewed the CCTV that was on board the bus,
0:04:24 > 0:04:27they believed that the car in front
0:04:27 > 0:04:30had deliberately slammed on its brakes,
0:04:30 > 0:04:34doing an emergency stop, causing the bus to crash into the back.
0:04:34 > 0:04:38The bus had about 30 passengers on board that day,
0:04:38 > 0:04:40some of which may have been standing.
0:04:40 > 0:04:44Even the simplest of braking on a bus could have caused them
0:04:44 > 0:04:47to fall over, injure themselves seriously.
0:04:47 > 0:04:49The cops could clearly see what had happened
0:04:49 > 0:04:51and put two and two together.
0:04:51 > 0:04:54Having reviewed the bus CCTV,
0:04:54 > 0:04:57and having the experience of these type of incidents,
0:04:57 > 0:05:02we decided that this was potentially an induced collision.
0:05:02 > 0:05:06It had been deliberately induced so that the car in front,
0:05:06 > 0:05:08the Nissan Almera driver,
0:05:08 > 0:05:12could defraud the insurance company and get some compensation.
0:05:12 > 0:05:15Suspicious that this was an attempted crash for cash accident,
0:05:15 > 0:05:18the Nissan driver was called in for questioning.
0:05:19 > 0:05:22He was interviewed under caution and on tape.
0:05:22 > 0:05:26The allegation was put to him that this was a deliberate act
0:05:26 > 0:05:30for the purposes of claiming off the insurance companies.
0:05:30 > 0:05:31He denied this.
0:05:31 > 0:05:34He simply said the bus had been driving too close
0:05:34 > 0:05:37to the back of his car and had collided with him.
0:05:37 > 0:05:40The fraudster was convicted at Woolwich Crown Court
0:05:40 > 0:05:43of dangerous driving and fraud by misrepresentation.
0:05:43 > 0:05:45He was disqualified for 12 months
0:05:45 > 0:05:48and given 100 hours of community service.
0:05:49 > 0:05:51This was a good result for us.
0:05:51 > 0:05:56It's good that the jury recognised that this was a cash for crash
0:05:56 > 0:05:58and believed the bus driver.
0:05:58 > 0:06:01They are difficult to prosecute.
0:06:01 > 0:06:04There were 30 passengers on board that bus.
0:06:04 > 0:06:08Any one of those could have been seriously injured or even killed.
0:06:09 > 0:06:12I am happy that he's now got a criminal record
0:06:12 > 0:06:15and will think twice about doing this in future.
0:06:15 > 0:06:20A lot of thought goes into making the claim after the incident.
0:06:20 > 0:06:22People sometimes think they can get away with it,
0:06:22 > 0:06:26but given the equipment and the investment that the bus companies
0:06:26 > 0:06:29put in, it's highly unlikely that they will ever succeed.
0:06:33 > 0:06:34Coming up:
0:06:34 > 0:06:38A claimer doubles his chances with his insurance claim.
0:06:38 > 0:06:41The photographs that were supplied as proof of the damage
0:06:41 > 0:06:44that was caused looked remarkably similar.
0:06:44 > 0:06:48And, a claim for a piece of jewellery loses its glimmer.
0:06:48 > 0:06:51Either he'd lost two bracelets,
0:06:51 > 0:06:54or the bracelet that was lost on this occasion
0:06:54 > 0:06:55actually didn't exist.
0:07:00 > 0:07:04Exaggerated insurance claims come in all shapes and sizes,
0:07:04 > 0:07:08from claimers adding on designer clothes to travel insurance,
0:07:08 > 0:07:11to items of furniture onto home contents insurance.
0:07:11 > 0:07:14But, top of the list is exaggerated personal injury claims,
0:07:14 > 0:07:18especially those related to motor insurance. And they are on the rise.
0:07:19 > 0:07:23It does appear that these types of claims, where gross exaggeration
0:07:23 > 0:07:28in order to obtain financial gain is becoming more common,
0:07:28 > 0:07:30and insurers are finding more of them,
0:07:30 > 0:07:33and investigating more of them on a year by year basis.
0:07:33 > 0:07:36One insurer received a claim relating to a car accident
0:07:36 > 0:07:38in the summer of 2011.
0:07:39 > 0:07:43The claimant alleged he'd sustained the injury as a result
0:07:43 > 0:07:47of the defendant's vehicle shunting into the rear of his.
0:07:47 > 0:07:50There was some concern that the symptoms presented,
0:07:50 > 0:07:53and the manner in which he stated the incident occurred,
0:07:53 > 0:07:57was exaggerated - and he alleged it was forcible,
0:07:57 > 0:07:59but the defendant was actually disputing that,
0:07:59 > 0:08:02stating it was only a very minor incident
0:08:02 > 0:08:05that had occurred in a 20mph zone.
0:08:06 > 0:08:10An accident can be traumatic, especially serious car accidents,
0:08:10 > 0:08:13with those injured suffering both physical and mental injuries.
0:08:13 > 0:08:17The claimant was alleging that he was unable to stand or sit
0:08:17 > 0:08:21for any longer than 20 minutes without the onset of pain.
0:08:21 > 0:08:24He was also alleging he was not able to carry anything heavier
0:08:24 > 0:08:28than light shopping bags, and in addition, most importantly,
0:08:28 > 0:08:32he was unable to work, and had had to give up his job
0:08:32 > 0:08:35as a direct result of the injuries he suffered.
0:08:36 > 0:08:39With a prognosis of only 50% recovery,
0:08:39 > 0:08:43and the possibility of needing a full-time carer for the future,
0:08:43 > 0:08:45it wasn't looking good for the injured claimer.
0:08:45 > 0:08:49The claimant's claim was a substantial figure,
0:08:49 > 0:08:54which was reserved in excess of £500,000 for his ongoing losses.
0:08:54 > 0:08:57With the prospect of paying out such an enormous amount,
0:08:57 > 0:09:01the insurer called in their lawyers, BML.
0:09:01 > 0:09:03Following receipt of the instructions,
0:09:03 > 0:09:06we immediately started to investigate the claim,
0:09:06 > 0:09:10questioning the extent of the symptoms the claimant was suffering,
0:09:10 > 0:09:14and also putting him to strict proof that the losses
0:09:14 > 0:09:17were suffered as a direct result of the road traffic accident.
0:09:17 > 0:09:20When the lawyers contacted the claimer's employer,
0:09:20 > 0:09:22they couldn't believe their ears.
0:09:22 > 0:09:26His employers actually provided us with a statement
0:09:26 > 0:09:29to the effect that he was able to drive his van,
0:09:29 > 0:09:31he was able to actually lift and carry
0:09:31 > 0:09:34significant crates and containers,
0:09:34 > 0:09:38which weighed approximately the same as a washing machine,
0:09:38 > 0:09:41and he was able to undertake all of this
0:09:41 > 0:09:45whilst he was reporting to medical experts that he was unable to work.
0:09:45 > 0:09:49The plot thickened when further clues were uncovered online.
0:09:49 > 0:09:51We searched social media
0:09:51 > 0:09:54and obtained images which seemed to show
0:09:54 > 0:09:57that the claimant was able to undertake tasks
0:09:57 > 0:10:00such as carrying his child,
0:10:00 > 0:10:03and also his mobility seemed far greater
0:10:03 > 0:10:06than he was reporting to his medical experts.
0:10:06 > 0:10:08The insurers had no doubt that the claimer
0:10:08 > 0:10:11had blown his personal injuries out of proportion.
0:10:12 > 0:10:15To save incurring substantial litigation costs,
0:10:15 > 0:10:19and the risks incurred around pursuing this claim further,
0:10:19 > 0:10:23we would make a significantly low offer to the claimant
0:10:23 > 0:10:26to settle his claim, highlighting we had concerns
0:10:26 > 0:10:27over his credibility
0:10:27 > 0:10:31and the fact that we did not believe all of the symptoms presented to
0:10:31 > 0:10:36his medical experts were an accurate picture of his true day-to-day life.
0:10:36 > 0:10:38Realising that he'd been caught out,
0:10:38 > 0:10:40the claimer was willing to negotiate his claim.
0:10:41 > 0:10:46The case actually concluded at a very significantly low figure,
0:10:46 > 0:10:49approximately a few thousand pounds,
0:10:49 > 0:10:52which was against the case reserve of over £500,000.
0:10:52 > 0:10:55So, there were substantial savings made.
0:10:55 > 0:10:58He ultimately accepted our very low offer
0:10:58 > 0:11:01and walked away from the claim at that point in time.
0:11:06 > 0:11:09In January 2012, the City of London police joined the fight
0:11:09 > 0:11:14against insurance fraud by forming an elite squad known as IFED,
0:11:14 > 0:11:17the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department.
0:11:17 > 0:11:20The message I give to people that are considering embarking
0:11:20 > 0:11:23on insurance fraud is just don't do it.
0:11:23 > 0:11:26My team day by day are getting more sophisticated in tracking down
0:11:26 > 0:11:30the people that want to try out this type of crime, so really,
0:11:30 > 0:11:34if you want to get into insurance fraud, I would say don't do it.
0:11:34 > 0:11:36They've made over 550 arrests,
0:11:36 > 0:11:40and have saved millions of pounds in fraudulent insurance claims,
0:11:40 > 0:11:43money which ultimately goes back in our pockets.
0:11:43 > 0:11:46From now on, fraudsters need to watch their backs.
0:11:46 > 0:11:50My team worked tirelessly 24/7 so we know exactly what types
0:11:50 > 0:11:53of scams you're going to embark on, and we will come after you.
0:11:53 > 0:11:55Police, don't move, stay where you are!
0:11:57 > 0:12:00Today, IFED are cracking down on car insurance fraud.
0:12:00 > 0:12:03DS Marcus Allen and his team of officers are on the trail
0:12:03 > 0:12:05of a suspected crash for cash criminal.
0:12:05 > 0:12:07After months of research,
0:12:07 > 0:12:09the suspect is known to move around a lot,
0:12:09 > 0:12:13so the team are hoping to catch him at one of three different addresses.
0:12:13 > 0:12:15But, as he moves flat every few months,
0:12:15 > 0:12:18it could be a frustrating morning for the team.
0:12:18 > 0:12:20They're en route to the first property.
0:12:20 > 0:12:24We're heading off to arrest a male, believed involved with others
0:12:24 > 0:12:29taking out motor vehicle policies and then making claims for
0:12:29 > 0:12:35fictitious accidents where personal injuries have allegedly happened.
0:12:35 > 0:12:38They're only a short distance from the address.
0:12:38 > 0:12:42'Turn left in 300 yards and then you will reach your destination.'
0:12:46 > 0:12:50They arrive at the first address, and are parked around the corner
0:12:50 > 0:12:53so as not to tip the suspected criminal off.
0:12:53 > 0:12:56IFED often rely on the element of surprise,
0:12:56 > 0:12:58hoping to catch the offender on the hop.
0:12:58 > 0:13:02But they have to move swiftly so as not to alert the alleged fraudster.
0:13:05 > 0:13:08Their intel has brought them to a multiple occupancy property.
0:13:08 > 0:13:12These significantly increase IFED's work as it means the team
0:13:12 > 0:13:15has to knock on every door within the house, and check all
0:13:15 > 0:13:19the innocent residents to ensure their suspect is not among them.
0:13:19 > 0:13:22Good morning. I'm from the City of London Police.
0:13:22 > 0:13:26These officers are with me. We're here today to look for a...
0:13:26 > 0:13:28What is your name?
0:13:28 > 0:13:32It looks as if IFED are too late and the suspect has moved on.
0:13:32 > 0:13:35But Marcus and the officers want to make certain.
0:13:35 > 0:13:38OK, may we come in and confirm who you are and who lives here?
0:13:38 > 0:13:41Like we say, we are from the City of London Police.
0:13:41 > 0:13:43We are all police officers.
0:13:43 > 0:13:46We're investigating an offence where this address has been named.
0:13:46 > 0:13:49Do you have any identification, please?
0:13:49 > 0:13:53On entering the house, the officers attempt to verify the identities
0:13:53 > 0:13:57of those present, including anyone who seems completely innocent.
0:13:57 > 0:14:00Have you got a driving licence, or anything with your name on it?
0:14:00 > 0:14:05- Driving licence or passport.- So we can see you are who you say you are.
0:14:10 > 0:14:12Thank you.
0:14:13 > 0:14:15OK, yeah, fine.
0:14:15 > 0:14:20From the officers' inquiries, the identification checks out.
0:14:20 > 0:14:24I'm satisfied that the persons here aren't connected,
0:14:24 > 0:14:27and that the male we are looking for has actually moved
0:14:27 > 0:14:30out of the address, so we're going to finish off taking details,
0:14:30 > 0:14:31reassure them,
0:14:31 > 0:14:34let them know that there's no police involvement with them,
0:14:34 > 0:14:38and then move on to the next address and look for the suspect there.
0:14:42 > 0:14:44IFED waste no time in getting to the next property,
0:14:44 > 0:14:47hoping to be hot on the heels of their suspect.
0:14:54 > 0:14:58Within minutes of Marcus arriving, the occupants open the door.
0:15:00 > 0:15:05Good morning. We are from the City of London Police.
0:15:05 > 0:15:08We believe that this address has been used to facilitate some
0:15:08 > 0:15:11car insurance fraud. OK?
0:15:11 > 0:15:14We're looking for... Does he live here?
0:15:17 > 0:15:20But, once inside, it's the same scenario,
0:15:20 > 0:15:23which means more searches and ID checks
0:15:23 > 0:15:24but no suspect.
0:15:27 > 0:15:29Good morning, sorry to disturb you.
0:15:29 > 0:15:32We're from the City of London Police. We're looking for...
0:15:33 > 0:15:35Is that you? OK.
0:15:35 > 0:15:37As we're here in the process,
0:15:37 > 0:15:41have you got some identification, please, for you and the lady?
0:15:41 > 0:15:44The officers check the ID of the people at the property,
0:15:44 > 0:15:46but it's another dead end.
0:15:46 > 0:15:49None of our suspects live here.
0:15:49 > 0:15:53It's a multi-occupied address, so we will just verify everyone
0:15:53 > 0:15:55here, their identities, and do checks on them.
0:15:55 > 0:15:59If that's all satisfactory, we will now move on to the third address.
0:15:59 > 0:16:01With such a transient suspect,
0:16:01 > 0:16:04the team have their work cut out trying to track him down.
0:16:04 > 0:16:07Marcus's day is not exactly going as planned.
0:16:07 > 0:16:11The day's operation is being renamed Wild Geese.
0:16:11 > 0:16:15Whilst it's frustrating that not all raids go to plan, the IFED team
0:16:15 > 0:16:18is able to gather information about the suspect's movement,
0:16:18 > 0:16:21and they can now eliminate the other location from their search.
0:16:21 > 0:16:22Sadly for Marcus and the team,
0:16:22 > 0:16:26conducting a mini tour of the area is just part of the job.
0:16:26 > 0:16:29But they have another property to check out.
0:16:29 > 0:16:33Within minutes, Marcus and the team arrive at their final address.
0:16:46 > 0:16:47Anything? No?
0:16:52 > 0:16:55Well, if it is, they are not going to answer the door, are they?
0:16:55 > 0:16:56I'll just have a look.
0:16:58 > 0:17:02No-one has answered the door, and they can't tell if anyone is in.
0:17:02 > 0:17:06But something about the property doesn't seem right to the officers.
0:17:08 > 0:17:10They've got an intercom with a camera on the door,
0:17:10 > 0:17:15- which isn't really fitting with the area or the premises, is it?- No.
0:17:15 > 0:17:17The property appears unoccupied.
0:17:17 > 0:17:21However, somebody has gone to great lengths to make it very secure.
0:17:21 > 0:17:25There's a camera intercom on the door.
0:17:25 > 0:17:28The lock is quite a sizable, expensive lock,
0:17:28 > 0:17:31and at the back, there's foil lining on the windows,
0:17:31 > 0:17:35so we're quite keen to get inside and find out what is going on.
0:17:35 > 0:17:39Time is running out, but entering by force is seen as a last resort.
0:17:39 > 0:17:42With the help of officers back at base,
0:17:42 > 0:17:44Marcus attempts to track down the house owner.
0:17:44 > 0:17:48One of the officers has contacted the landlord, is speaking to him now
0:17:48 > 0:17:51to see if he will let us in to check there's no suspects in the flat.
0:17:51 > 0:17:55The property owner is on their way to assist the officers.
0:17:55 > 0:17:58But, just as the team are preparing to enter the residence,
0:17:58 > 0:18:00they get a call from a colleague.
0:18:00 > 0:18:03The outcome is this premises, we have found out that it was
0:18:03 > 0:18:06a brothel with prostitutes working here.
0:18:06 > 0:18:10Hence the security measures that they've taken.
0:18:10 > 0:18:13We've now confirmed with the landlady that it is empty,
0:18:13 > 0:18:16and we've spoken to the local police who've confirmed
0:18:16 > 0:18:18that they've taken action and it's now empty
0:18:18 > 0:18:20and there's no criminality going on there.
0:18:20 > 0:18:24Unfortunately, it's been an uneventful day for Marcus
0:18:24 > 0:18:27and his team, who'll return to the office empty-handed.
0:18:27 > 0:18:29They may not have found the suspected criminal today,
0:18:29 > 0:18:32but will continue with their investigation and won't rest until
0:18:32 > 0:18:36they bring this and any suspected crash for cash criminals to justice.
0:18:42 > 0:18:45Accidents happen all the time in the home,
0:18:45 > 0:18:49from spillages on carpets to accidents with a hot iron,
0:18:49 > 0:18:53which is why accidental damage is one of the most common reasons
0:18:53 > 0:18:56for making a claim on home contents insurance.
0:18:56 > 0:18:59With advances in science and forensics,
0:18:59 > 0:19:03insurers can determine the truth behind some of these claims.
0:19:03 > 0:19:06Dr Andrew Moncrief works for one of the leading forensic science
0:19:06 > 0:19:08organisations in the country.
0:19:08 > 0:19:11For any incident, if something falls over, bends,
0:19:11 > 0:19:15breaks, blows up or is damaged,
0:19:15 > 0:19:19it'll be damaged in a way that follows various physical laws.
0:19:19 > 0:19:23And those laws are often predictable, often easy to study.
0:19:23 > 0:19:26If we come across something which seems to suggest that those
0:19:26 > 0:19:30laws have not been followed, then it implies human intervention.
0:19:30 > 0:19:34In his time, Andrew has helped investigators with many
0:19:34 > 0:19:36accidental claims on home insurance,
0:19:36 > 0:19:38from spills of nail varnish on sofas
0:19:38 > 0:19:40to bleach and glue on carpets.
0:19:40 > 0:19:43But one spillage crops up more often than others.
0:19:43 > 0:19:45Paint spills are an interesting claim for us,
0:19:45 > 0:19:49an interesting type of claim for us to investigate.
0:19:49 > 0:19:52When you drop a tin of paint, it will spray itself round the room
0:19:52 > 0:19:55and over the furniture in some quite unpredictable ways.
0:19:55 > 0:19:59When we're faced with a paint spill, either on site or via photographs,
0:19:59 > 0:20:03then once again we will be looking at those patterns,
0:20:03 > 0:20:06which should follow fairly predictable physical laws,
0:20:06 > 0:20:09and we'll be looking to see whether or not the pattern
0:20:09 > 0:20:12is consistent with what the claimant is saying happened.
0:20:12 > 0:20:16There are quite a number of fairly clear indicators with paint spills
0:20:16 > 0:20:19that they have actually been done deliberately by a human hand,
0:20:19 > 0:20:20rather than accidentally.
0:20:20 > 0:20:23However, the use of Andrew's forensic skills by insurers
0:20:23 > 0:20:26for household accidents does not stop there.
0:20:26 > 0:20:29With an incident such as a claim for a damaged computer
0:20:29 > 0:20:33or a damaged television, we'll look at things like stability.
0:20:33 > 0:20:37Is it possible for the thing to have fallen off from where it was?
0:20:37 > 0:20:39We'll then look at the surface it's landing on,
0:20:39 > 0:20:41the height it's falling,
0:20:41 > 0:20:45and we'll try to tie that in with test results from other items
0:20:45 > 0:20:49to see what sort of damage we expect from the impact
0:20:49 > 0:20:50that has been described to us.
0:20:50 > 0:20:54We will also, of course, look at the number of impacts, because most
0:20:54 > 0:20:57things, if they are falling accidentally, only do it once.
0:20:57 > 0:21:01We'll see whether the damage to the television is consistent
0:21:01 > 0:21:04with the manner in which it is supposed to have fallen.
0:21:04 > 0:21:08And don't be fooled into thinking that a small claim won't be given
0:21:08 > 0:21:12the same attention by an insurer as a claim for thousands.
0:21:12 > 0:21:16It's actually quite difficult to simulate an accident perfectly.
0:21:16 > 0:21:20The more complicated the accident, the more difficult it becomes.
0:21:20 > 0:21:24If we dig deeper and deeper and deeper into the incident,
0:21:24 > 0:21:28then there will nearly always be something to indicate
0:21:28 > 0:21:31that the claim has been created deliberately.
0:21:31 > 0:21:32But it is interesting
0:21:32 > 0:21:36because the amount of money that an insurer is willing to spend
0:21:36 > 0:21:40is sometimes considerably more than the actual value of the claim.
0:21:40 > 0:21:44If they find that they really do want to make a point,
0:21:44 > 0:21:47then we are sometimes funded really rather well
0:21:47 > 0:21:51to carry on looking deeper and deeper into a particular incident.
0:21:51 > 0:21:54Not only do people sometimes exaggerate their claims,
0:21:54 > 0:21:56but they also duplicate them.
0:21:56 > 0:22:00Insurer QBE received two claims related to a TV
0:22:00 > 0:22:01that were remarkably similar,
0:22:01 > 0:22:05with a faulty picture hook being at the centre of both claims.
0:22:05 > 0:22:08In the claim that was presented,
0:22:08 > 0:22:13it was alleged that the picture hook from the product was faulty,
0:22:13 > 0:22:18and that it had fallen from the wall and damaged a TV casing.
0:22:18 > 0:22:22When the claimant submitted some photographs to support their claim,
0:22:22 > 0:22:25QBE thought everything seemed to be in order.
0:22:25 > 0:22:28Their claim was submitted for reimbursement of the cost
0:22:28 > 0:22:30of replacing the television.
0:22:30 > 0:22:35QBE settled that case for the sum of £500.
0:22:35 > 0:22:39However, 12 months later, another claim landed on their desk.
0:22:40 > 0:22:46In 2012, QBE received a further claim for a faulty product,
0:22:46 > 0:22:48which was a picture frame.
0:22:48 > 0:22:51The picture frame hook was said to have been faulty,
0:22:51 > 0:22:56and this fell onto some personal property, damaging a TV,
0:22:56 > 0:22:58and a television unit as well.
0:22:58 > 0:23:03Again, the claimer had photographs on hand to help support their claim.
0:23:05 > 0:23:08The second incident that was presented to us
0:23:08 > 0:23:11showed pictures of the television again,
0:23:11 > 0:23:16but also some additional photographs that showed damage to the television
0:23:16 > 0:23:21cabinet, and also the area of where the picture frame had fallen from.
0:23:21 > 0:23:23Unluckily for the claimer,
0:23:23 > 0:23:26the insurer thought these photographs looked familiar.
0:23:27 > 0:23:31We immediately noticed on both instances,
0:23:31 > 0:23:36the photographs that were supplied as proof of the damage caused
0:23:36 > 0:23:38looked remarkably similar.
0:23:38 > 0:23:40Let's just have another look.
0:23:40 > 0:23:42These are the photographs relating to the first claim
0:23:42 > 0:23:44of damage to the TV.
0:23:44 > 0:23:48And these are the photographs relating to the second claim.
0:23:48 > 0:23:51Yes, remarkably similar, I would say.
0:23:51 > 0:23:56Although we could tell visually that the pictures looked the same,
0:23:56 > 0:24:01it still wasn't enough to prove that they exactly were.
0:24:01 > 0:24:04The investigator had a few tricks up their sleeve
0:24:04 > 0:24:08and sent the photographs off for further examination.
0:24:08 > 0:24:11We forensically examined those pictures,
0:24:11 > 0:24:14and we looked at the metadata that sits behind them,
0:24:14 > 0:24:18the metadata being almost a footprint of the image
0:24:18 > 0:24:20taken at a point in time.
0:24:20 > 0:24:23The photographs that were similar, but we suspected,
0:24:23 > 0:24:29did in fact show the same date stamp as the original claim QBE received.
0:24:29 > 0:24:31The claimer had been caught out.
0:24:31 > 0:24:35But the insurer was not happy just to give him a slap on the wrist.
0:24:35 > 0:24:40We felt we had enough evidence there to the criminal standard of proof,
0:24:40 > 0:24:44and that decision was taken then to refer the matter to the police,
0:24:44 > 0:24:48more specifically to the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department.
0:24:48 > 0:24:51The Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department, IFED,
0:24:51 > 0:24:54didn't hesitate in calling the claimer in for an interview,
0:24:54 > 0:24:56where he held his hands up.
0:24:56 > 0:24:59He explained that the pictures that he had submitted in the second case
0:24:59 > 0:25:02were indeed from the first incident.
0:25:02 > 0:25:06That was a case that had been made by a previous partner of his
0:25:06 > 0:25:09for the faulty picture that had fallen.
0:25:09 > 0:25:13The claimer had the old photographs still on his camera.
0:25:13 > 0:25:15Now he had a new girlfriend,
0:25:15 > 0:25:17he thought he'd use these pictures to his advantage.
0:25:17 > 0:25:21The claimer had made his girlfriend phone QBE
0:25:21 > 0:25:24because he didn't feel he was able to portray himself well
0:25:24 > 0:25:28on the telephone, and thus continue the claim that he had made.
0:25:28 > 0:25:30The first claim was indeed genuine,
0:25:30 > 0:25:33but, as the claimant had admitted that the second claim
0:25:33 > 0:25:37was fraudulent, he was given a police caution.
0:25:37 > 0:25:39He thought it was an easy way to make a claim.
0:25:39 > 0:25:42Unfortunately, we were able to quickly identify that the
0:25:42 > 0:25:45second case from that claimant was indeed a fraud.
0:25:51 > 0:25:54If we lose a piece of jewellery, regardless of the value,
0:25:54 > 0:25:55it can be upsetting,
0:25:55 > 0:25:59even more so if it is of sentimental value or a family heirloom,
0:25:59 > 0:26:00which is priceless,
0:26:00 > 0:26:04whether it's your wedding ring or your grandfather's watch,
0:26:04 > 0:26:06so imagine what our next claimant felt
0:26:06 > 0:26:08when he lost a very special family memento.
0:26:08 > 0:26:12In this case, our policyholder, a gentleman,
0:26:12 > 0:26:14was out on the town with some of his friends
0:26:14 > 0:26:16when he lost a bracelet.
0:26:16 > 0:26:21The bracelet was not only worth £3,000,
0:26:21 > 0:26:23but it was a family heirloom
0:26:23 > 0:26:26which had been passed down from generation to generation.
0:26:26 > 0:26:30A claim was made for the insured value of £3,000
0:26:30 > 0:26:33within a month of the policy being taken out.
0:26:33 > 0:26:38We began to become suspicious because this very valuable item
0:26:38 > 0:26:41had not actually been reported as lost to the police,
0:26:41 > 0:26:44which you would normally expect it to have been.
0:26:44 > 0:26:46The insurer discovered that the claimant
0:26:46 > 0:26:49had lied about his whereabouts that night.
0:26:49 > 0:26:53The other thing we discovered was that the gentleman concerned
0:26:53 > 0:26:57was actually not out on the town on this night, and was at home.
0:26:58 > 0:27:02But, it seemed that social media was to be the claimer's downfall.
0:27:03 > 0:27:07We made some inquiries, and in fact they were quite startling,
0:27:07 > 0:27:08what we found out.
0:27:08 > 0:27:13This bracelet had in fact been lost on a previous occasion
0:27:13 > 0:27:17at some specific premises, and not, as alleged, on this night out.
0:27:17 > 0:27:20Either he had lost two bracelets,
0:27:20 > 0:27:23or the bracelet that was lost on this occasion
0:27:23 > 0:27:25actually did not exist.
0:27:25 > 0:27:29It turned out that the bracelet had been lost a few months earlier
0:27:29 > 0:27:33in a gym. Now it was time for RSA to confront the claimant.
0:27:33 > 0:27:39We challenged our policyholder and they asked to withdraw the claim.
0:27:39 > 0:27:42But the insurer wasn't having any of it.
0:27:42 > 0:27:46We were so incensed that this policy had clearly been taken out
0:27:46 > 0:27:50with the specific intention of making a claim
0:27:50 > 0:27:55that we reported the case to IFED, who took action against him.
0:27:55 > 0:27:59The Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department, IFED,
0:27:59 > 0:28:01continued with the investigation.
0:28:01 > 0:28:04The claimant was then arrested and received a police caution.
0:28:04 > 0:28:08He might have thought that this was worth the risk but ultimately,
0:28:08 > 0:28:11he has ended up with a criminal record,
0:28:11 > 0:28:15and he will of course also be on the Insurance Fraud Register
0:28:15 > 0:28:19and will find it very difficult to get insurance cover in the future.