Episode 7

Download Subtitles

Transcript

0:00:06 > 0:00:09Insurance fraud has reached epidemic levels in the UK.

0:00:09 > 0:00:14It's costing us more than £1.3 billion every year.

0:00:14 > 0:00:17That's almost 3.6 million every day.

0:00:19 > 0:00:24Deliberate crashes, bogus personal injuries, even phantom pets.

0:00:26 > 0:00:29The fraudsters are risking more and more to make a quick killing,

0:00:29 > 0:00:33and every year it's adding around £50 to your insurance bill.

0:00:33 > 0:00:36But insurers are fighting back,

0:00:36 > 0:00:39exposing just under 15 fake claims every hour.

0:00:39 > 0:00:41Armed with covert surveillance systems...

0:00:41 > 0:00:44That's the subject out of the vehicle.

0:00:44 > 0:00:46..sophisticated data analysis techniques...

0:00:48 > 0:00:51..and a number of highly skilled police units...

0:00:51 > 0:00:53Police, don't move, stay where you are!

0:00:53 > 0:00:55..they're catching the criminals red-handed.

0:00:55 > 0:00:56Just don't lie to us.

0:00:58 > 0:01:01All those conmen, scammers and cheats on the fiddle are now

0:01:01 > 0:01:04caught in the act and Claimed and Shamed.

0:01:11 > 0:01:14A lorry driver claiming he can't walk pushes the boat out

0:01:14 > 0:01:16with his false claim.

0:01:17 > 0:01:20What you can actually see in this first period of surveillance

0:01:20 > 0:01:22is Mr Heffer walking quite significant distances,

0:01:22 > 0:01:26but, in addition to that, working on this fishing vessel as well.

0:01:26 > 0:01:29Two men who stage a car crash claim to have never met,

0:01:29 > 0:01:32but turn out to be old prison pals.

0:01:32 > 0:01:34Not only they were in the same prison,

0:01:34 > 0:01:36they were in the same cell block.

0:01:36 > 0:01:38And not only were they in the same cell block,

0:01:38 > 0:01:40but their cells were opposite each other.

0:01:40 > 0:01:43So they would have seen each other every single day.

0:01:43 > 0:01:48And a claimant who tries to board a moving bus is tripped up by CCTV.

0:01:48 > 0:01:51What we actually see when we're looking at the footage is

0:01:51 > 0:01:56a gentleman sprinting like a gazelle to try and get on the bus.

0:01:56 > 0:01:59He lunges majestically at the last minute.

0:02:04 > 0:02:08Every year, an estimated 4.1 million working days are lost

0:02:08 > 0:02:10due to workplace injuries.

0:02:10 > 0:02:13Whether it's a minor mishap or a life-threatening accident,

0:02:13 > 0:02:17the goal for most of us is to get better and get back to work.

0:02:17 > 0:02:19Now, if your employer is to blame for your accident,

0:02:19 > 0:02:22you have the right to seek fair compensation.

0:02:22 > 0:02:26However, this right is being exploited by fraudsters

0:02:26 > 0:02:30who fake or exaggerate injuries in a bid for early retirement.

0:02:33 > 0:02:36It's Rob Smith-Wright's job to suss out the real claims

0:02:36 > 0:02:37from the rogue ones.

0:02:38 > 0:02:42Back in 2009, he was handed what appeared to be an everyday claim.

0:02:44 > 0:02:47Mr Heffer was an employee at one of our policyholders.

0:02:47 > 0:02:50He claimed that when he was climbing into the cab of

0:02:50 > 0:02:54a heavy goods vehicle, the tread plate that he was stepping onto

0:02:54 > 0:02:57gave way, and he fell down to the floor,

0:02:57 > 0:02:59injuring his back and left leg.

0:03:00 > 0:03:03Although Mr Heffer's injuries were significant,

0:03:03 > 0:03:05he was expected to make a full recovery.

0:03:06 > 0:03:07After investigation,

0:03:07 > 0:03:11the footplate that caused the accident was found to be faulty.

0:03:11 > 0:03:15His employer admitted liability and awaited the claim.

0:03:15 > 0:03:19But when it came in, there was something of a shock.

0:03:19 > 0:03:23For an injury of this kind, sort of a simple back injury,

0:03:23 > 0:03:25and injury to a left leg,

0:03:25 > 0:03:30you would've expected some kind of compensation to the value of

0:03:30 > 0:03:33around about £3,000-£5,000,

0:03:33 > 0:03:36so when Mr Heffer served his schedule of damages,

0:03:36 > 0:03:39it was served to the value of £400,000,

0:03:39 > 0:03:42which would have been clearly things like lost earnings,

0:03:42 > 0:03:45future lost earnings, care, future care and also provisions

0:03:45 > 0:03:47that would allow him to lead a normal life.

0:03:49 > 0:03:52That's a whopping ten times more than expected and suggested that

0:03:52 > 0:03:56Mr Heffer's injuries were far more serious than first thought.

0:03:58 > 0:04:01So, when Mr Heffer was being interviewed by the pain specialist,

0:04:01 > 0:04:04he described that he was severely restricted in all

0:04:04 > 0:04:08forms of mobility, he was unable to walk significant distances.

0:04:08 > 0:04:11At this point he was also claiming that he was using walking sticks.

0:04:11 > 0:04:12He wasn't able to drive.

0:04:12 > 0:04:17He had severe pain in his left leg radiating down from his back.

0:04:17 > 0:04:20He also described that actually, medication relief that

0:04:20 > 0:04:22he was given for the pain was having no effect.

0:04:24 > 0:04:27It sounded like Mr Heffer had suffered debilitating injuries

0:04:27 > 0:04:30as well as losing his livelihood,

0:04:30 > 0:04:33which had severely impacted on his quality of life.

0:04:35 > 0:04:37But, given the nature of the accident,

0:04:37 > 0:04:39something just wasn't adding up.

0:04:39 > 0:04:41During the course of our investigations with

0:04:41 > 0:04:42Mr Heffer's solicitors,

0:04:42 > 0:04:45we were being told that Mr Heffer was suffering severe

0:04:45 > 0:04:49restrictions and limitations as a result of the injuries,

0:04:49 > 0:04:52which weren't really in-keeping with the circumstances that

0:04:52 > 0:04:54were described to us.

0:04:55 > 0:04:57We decided at that point that further investigations

0:04:57 > 0:04:59would be needed because of those general red flags.

0:05:01 > 0:05:05After taking a closer look at the case, a crucial decision was

0:05:05 > 0:05:08made which Rob and his team hoped would address their doubts.

0:05:09 > 0:05:12We undertook some general desktop profiling, which was starting

0:05:12 > 0:05:17to reveal some inconsistencies in the account, certainly.

0:05:17 > 0:05:21We decided at that point that a period of surveillance would help

0:05:21 > 0:05:25us identify any inconsistencies that Mr Heffer may have been telling us.

0:05:26 > 0:05:29It would be a period of surveillance that would last for over

0:05:29 > 0:05:33three years, testing the commitment and patience of Rob's team.

0:05:34 > 0:05:37The truth would slowly but most definitely reveal itself.

0:05:39 > 0:05:42What you can actually see in this first period of surveillance

0:05:42 > 0:05:45is Mr Heffer walking quite significant distances,

0:05:45 > 0:05:48but in addition to that, working on this fishing vessel as well.

0:05:50 > 0:05:52So, while claiming he could barely walk,

0:05:52 > 0:05:55his sea legs appear to be just fine.

0:05:55 > 0:05:58The second period of surveillance that we undertook here, again,

0:05:58 > 0:06:01in direct contradiction to what he was telling the medical experts,

0:06:01 > 0:06:03you can see that Mr Heffer has undertaken quite

0:06:03 > 0:06:05a significant walk, around about 20 minutes,

0:06:05 > 0:06:09to his local post office, where he's telling the medical expert

0:06:09 > 0:06:11he's unable to walk any kind of significant distances.

0:06:12 > 0:06:17Yep, previously he couldn't manage 100 yards because of the pain.

0:06:17 > 0:06:20Now he was going miles to post his mail.

0:06:20 > 0:06:22Generally speaking, you would have expected the surveillance

0:06:22 > 0:06:26to show someone who was having problems with his mobility,

0:06:26 > 0:06:29but the surveillance footage seems to indicate that there is

0:06:29 > 0:06:32no problems at all and he is in fact walking quite freely.

0:06:33 > 0:06:36Free as a bird and apparently without a care in the world.

0:06:37 > 0:06:40My initial reaction on seeing this is one of surprise,

0:06:40 > 0:06:44considering the level of disability and restriction that we were

0:06:44 > 0:06:46being told that Mr Heffer was suffering.

0:06:47 > 0:06:51With Heffer's energetic exploits and maritime mischief captured on

0:06:51 > 0:06:54camera, the damning evidence was disclosed to his solicitor.

0:06:56 > 0:06:59It was very clear at this point that we had discovered

0:06:59 > 0:07:00an insurance fraud.

0:07:00 > 0:07:05Very shortly afterwards, Mr Heffer's solicitor came off record

0:07:05 > 0:07:07for him, leaving him as a litigant in person.

0:07:07 > 0:07:10I think, at that point, if your solicitor's no longer

0:07:10 > 0:07:14wanting to act for you, you have to say the game was very much up.

0:07:16 > 0:07:17The game may have been up for Heffer,

0:07:17 > 0:07:20but Rob and his investigative team were just getting started.

0:07:22 > 0:07:25We were very pleased that Mr Heffer had decided

0:07:25 > 0:07:27to discontinue his claim.

0:07:27 > 0:07:28However, again,

0:07:28 > 0:07:31we wanted to look at other ways in which we could send

0:07:31 > 0:07:34a very strong deterrent message to someone who was prepared to

0:07:34 > 0:07:38grossly exaggerate what looked like a genuine injury.

0:07:39 > 0:07:42Given the statements that Mr Heffer had made to the court,

0:07:42 > 0:07:44and these would have been statements of truth that

0:07:44 > 0:07:47he would have signed and he had directly lied in those, we decided

0:07:47 > 0:07:50that the best course of action was to take a Contempt of Court route.

0:07:52 > 0:07:54And it wouldn't be long before Heffer found himself in

0:07:54 > 0:07:59a dry dock, having to explain his open water adventures.

0:07:59 > 0:08:03So, Mr Heffer was summoned to appear at Exeter Crown Court

0:08:03 > 0:08:05in December 2015.

0:08:05 > 0:08:07He claimed that the surveillance evidence was only really

0:08:07 > 0:08:10showing him on good days, because he'd been taking painkilling

0:08:10 > 0:08:13medication, but if we referred back to what

0:08:13 > 0:08:16he actually told the pain specialist, he suggested that

0:08:16 > 0:08:20the medication was having no effect on reducing his level of pain.

0:08:21 > 0:08:25It had been a very lengthy process to bring Heffer to justice.

0:08:26 > 0:08:31But when the case finally reached court, it was watertight.

0:08:31 > 0:08:35The judge found him in contempt of court and described him as

0:08:35 > 0:08:40abusing the civil procedure rules as a means to obtain financial

0:08:40 > 0:08:43compensation above and beyond what he was entitled to,

0:08:43 > 0:08:46so, effectively, calling him greedy.

0:08:46 > 0:08:50And he was sentenced to three months imprisonment.

0:08:52 > 0:08:54After a six-year investigation,

0:08:54 > 0:08:57it was the result that Rob and his team had hoped for.

0:08:58 > 0:09:01And for those who think what's the worst that can happen if

0:09:01 > 0:09:03a claim is false or exaggerated?

0:09:03 > 0:09:07There are claimants, including people like Mr Heffer,

0:09:07 > 0:09:11that would think that simply walking away from the claim

0:09:11 > 0:09:13is a risk that they are willing to take.

0:09:13 > 0:09:17However, what they don't realise is that there are penalties

0:09:17 > 0:09:20that can occur, including, as in this situation,

0:09:20 > 0:09:23losing your liberty as a result of your direct greed.

0:09:30 > 0:09:33A passenger's claim goes belly-up after trying to catch

0:09:33 > 0:09:34a moving bus.

0:09:34 > 0:09:38But the amazing thing from this footage is how fast this man

0:09:38 > 0:09:39can actually run in flip-flops.

0:09:45 > 0:09:46Now... PHONE RINGS

0:09:46 > 0:09:47Oop! Just a minute.

0:09:47 > 0:09:49Hello?

0:09:49 > 0:09:51Yeah, hi.

0:09:51 > 0:09:53No, I was riding my bike with no hands,

0:09:53 > 0:09:55I was 11 years old at the time.

0:09:55 > 0:09:58OK, thanks. See ya.

0:09:58 > 0:10:01Now, if you've ever had an accident, the odds are you've received

0:10:01 > 0:10:04an annoying call from a claims management company.

0:10:04 > 0:10:07They'll tell you you're entitled to a nice little pay-out,

0:10:07 > 0:10:11no win, no fee, so zero risk to you, whether you're injured or not.

0:10:11 > 0:10:13What they don't tell you is that they'll take

0:10:13 > 0:10:16a fat percentage of any successful claim.

0:10:16 > 0:10:18But if your claim is found to be false,

0:10:18 > 0:10:20then you are solely responsible.

0:10:20 > 0:10:24And while they'll walk away, you could be in serious trouble.

0:10:27 > 0:10:30Solicitor Ronan McCann has defended hundreds of cases

0:10:30 > 0:10:33brought by claims management companies.

0:10:33 > 0:10:38Many of these companies who farm claims are not all interested

0:10:38 > 0:10:40in any individual.

0:10:40 > 0:10:42They are solely interested in the profits

0:10:42 > 0:10:45that they can make from your claim.

0:10:45 > 0:10:47They will try all sorts of tactics

0:10:47 > 0:10:49to convince you to pursue

0:10:49 > 0:10:51a claim for compensation,

0:10:51 > 0:10:52irrespective of whether

0:10:52 > 0:10:54you are injured or not.

0:10:54 > 0:10:59You must refuse under all circumstances to cooperate

0:10:59 > 0:11:01with these dishonest companies.

0:11:02 > 0:11:04The approach to persuading individuals into making

0:11:04 > 0:11:08a claim can often be aggressive and persistent cold-calling.

0:11:08 > 0:11:13If you succumb, the consequences can be severe.

0:11:13 > 0:11:16The ramifications for pursuing a claim

0:11:16 > 0:11:20when you are not genuinely injured are stark.

0:11:20 > 0:11:22In the end, you may well go to prison.

0:11:23 > 0:11:25There may be costs orders against you,

0:11:25 > 0:11:28or you may indeed have your home taken away.

0:11:28 > 0:11:32If any individual is invited to make a claim,

0:11:32 > 0:11:35they should stop and ask themselves a very simple question...

0:11:35 > 0:11:37were they injured?

0:11:38 > 0:11:41Tom Gardiner is head of fraud for Aviva.

0:11:41 > 0:11:45He deals with these types of claims on a daily basis.

0:11:45 > 0:11:48But one case wasn't all that it appeared to be.

0:11:49 > 0:11:54The accident that occurred was a relatively minor low-speed shunt,

0:11:54 > 0:11:57at a roundabout, between a small Ford Fiesta

0:11:57 > 0:12:00and a double-decker party bus.

0:12:00 > 0:12:04So, a collision between a compact car and a whacking great bus.

0:12:04 > 0:12:08The traffic accident equivalent of David and Goliath.

0:12:08 > 0:12:10We inspected both of the vehicles.

0:12:10 > 0:12:13There was minor damage to the bumper of the Fiesta

0:12:13 > 0:12:16and only £70 worth of repairs to the bus.

0:12:16 > 0:12:19On the face of it, this was a straightforward low-speed impact,

0:12:19 > 0:12:21less than 10mph.

0:12:23 > 0:12:27But it would have been impossible to predict what was to happen next.

0:12:27 > 0:12:30What naturally aroused suspicion was that,

0:12:30 > 0:12:34as the result of a very minor shunt, there was an epidemic of

0:12:34 > 0:12:38whiplash injuries on the bus, resulting in 46 claims.

0:12:40 > 0:12:4370 quid's worth of damage to the bus,

0:12:43 > 0:12:47but the personal injury claims would amount to quite a bit more.

0:12:47 > 0:12:50Whiplash injuries would typically have a value of

0:12:50 > 0:12:52£1,500 to £3,000.

0:12:52 > 0:12:56And with costs, each claim might be worth £5,000.

0:12:56 > 0:13:01Clearly, 46 such claims is a significant amount of money.

0:13:01 > 0:13:04And in this case, potentially a quarter of a million pounds.

0:13:04 > 0:13:07It was just entirely disproportionate to what was

0:13:07 > 0:13:11a low-speed impact and £70 worth of damage to the bus.

0:13:11 > 0:13:14A staggering claim total.

0:13:14 > 0:13:18So, what exactly was fuelling this tidal wave of compensation claims?

0:13:18 > 0:13:21In this case, of the 46 claims that were brought,

0:13:21 > 0:13:25two firms of solicitors represented 44 of the claimants,

0:13:25 > 0:13:28which clearly doesn't hold up to any scrutiny.

0:13:29 > 0:13:32With that many claims and alleged injuries,

0:13:32 > 0:13:35surely the party bus would have diverted to the nearest A&E?

0:13:38 > 0:13:41None of the 46 people sought medical attention at the time.

0:13:41 > 0:13:44They were on a party bus, and continued their evening.

0:13:44 > 0:13:48I'd be surprised if, following a significant collision,

0:13:48 > 0:13:50resulting in whiplash injuries,

0:13:50 > 0:13:5446 were able to continue partying.

0:13:54 > 0:13:57With the overwhelming evidence that this group of revellers had been

0:13:57 > 0:14:01cajoled into a bunch of cheeky chancers, the party had to end.

0:14:01 > 0:14:05Of the 46 claims that were made, approximately half of them

0:14:05 > 0:14:08disappeared and went away very quickly.

0:14:08 > 0:14:1123 of them were litigated.

0:14:11 > 0:14:14They started court action, but I'm pleased to say we successfully

0:14:14 > 0:14:18defended those, and they were discontinued or struck out.

0:14:18 > 0:14:21The robust approach to these suspect claims saved Aviva over

0:14:21 > 0:14:23a quarter of a million pounds.

0:14:25 > 0:14:26But for insurers,

0:14:26 > 0:14:28the ultimate goal is to bring an end

0:14:28 > 0:14:31to this compensation culture.

0:14:31 > 0:14:34We will defend fraudulent claims even where it's not economic

0:14:34 > 0:14:36to defend them.

0:14:36 > 0:14:39And in this case, even faced with 23 litigated claims

0:14:39 > 0:14:43and the threat of trial, we continued to defend those.

0:14:43 > 0:14:46And, in the end, the lack of substance came through,

0:14:46 > 0:14:49and none of the claims successfully made it to trial,

0:14:49 > 0:14:51and we defended all of them.

0:14:51 > 0:14:54There's an important role for claimant solicitors to play

0:14:54 > 0:14:57to make sure that their door isn't open to fraud,

0:14:57 > 0:15:01and they're not advancing what are clearly spurious claims.

0:15:07 > 0:15:08Hey, life is busy, isn't it?

0:15:08 > 0:15:10Whether you're rushing to work, running for a train

0:15:10 > 0:15:13or trying to hop on a bus, most of us spend

0:15:13 > 0:15:16a lot of time just trying to get from A to B without incident.

0:15:16 > 0:15:20Unfortunately, our haste can occasionally lead to mishaps,

0:15:20 > 0:15:24whether you trip on a step or clonk your head on a revolving door.

0:15:24 > 0:15:26Most of us hold our hands up and say,

0:15:26 > 0:15:29"All right, I should have been looking where I was going."

0:15:29 > 0:15:33But there are some who see this type of accident as an opportunity

0:15:33 > 0:15:36to exploit and defraud without conscience.

0:15:39 > 0:15:42Lee Ingram of First Group sees his fair share

0:15:42 > 0:15:43of personal injury cases.

0:15:46 > 0:15:50Just like one customer who attempted to catch a bus a few years ago.

0:15:51 > 0:15:54This gentleman's alleging that, as he's tried to get on the bus,

0:15:54 > 0:15:56the driver's closed the doors on him.

0:15:56 > 0:15:59He's also then saying that they've tried to drive off

0:15:59 > 0:16:01while he's still boarding the bus.

0:16:01 > 0:16:04This would be a terrifying situation.

0:16:04 > 0:16:06You're going to be wondering whether you're going to be dragged

0:16:06 > 0:16:09along the road and subsequently dragged under the wheels of the bus.

0:16:09 > 0:16:12The claimant had a relatively lucky escape,

0:16:12 > 0:16:16coming away with significant but not life-threatening injuries.

0:16:16 > 0:16:19The injuries that were alleged by the claimant were quite

0:16:19 > 0:16:22a severe laceration to the leg.

0:16:22 > 0:16:24We could be looking at potential cosmetic surgery,

0:16:24 > 0:16:28plastic surgery, you could be looking at secondary infections,

0:16:28 > 0:16:32may well result in time off work, depending on what he does.

0:16:32 > 0:16:37It's about a £20,000 claim. A nasty cut can produce a big bill.

0:16:39 > 0:16:41But there was something wobbly about the claimant's story

0:16:41 > 0:16:43which Lee just wasn't buying.

0:16:43 > 0:16:47The suspicious thing about this claim is that we don't get

0:16:47 > 0:16:50that many cases where drivers shut the doors on people,

0:16:50 > 0:16:54and it was almost alleged that this was done deliberately.

0:16:54 > 0:16:55I don't think that was the case.

0:16:55 > 0:16:58Most of these incidents occur because people are rushing to get

0:16:58 > 0:17:02on buses, and that's what we suspect actually happened in this case.

0:17:03 > 0:17:06With the claimant making such severe allegations,

0:17:06 > 0:17:09Lee had to get to the bottom of this case quickly

0:17:09 > 0:17:12and find out if he did indeed have a leg to stand on.

0:17:12 > 0:17:15As soon as we received this claim from the gentleman,

0:17:15 > 0:17:18obviously we're going to look and see what our driver has said,

0:17:18 > 0:17:19so we've gone back to the driver,

0:17:19 > 0:17:22taken a full statement of their version of events,

0:17:22 > 0:17:25and we've also gone to look at the on-board CCTV from the bus

0:17:25 > 0:17:28to see if that does corroborate what this claimant is saying.

0:17:28 > 0:17:31One of them has got it slightly wrong.

0:17:31 > 0:17:33But which one?

0:17:33 > 0:17:34Let's have a look.

0:17:35 > 0:17:38What we actually see when we're looking at the footage

0:17:38 > 0:17:43is a gentleman sprinting like a gazelle to try and get on the bus.

0:17:43 > 0:17:46He lunges majestically at the last minute.

0:17:46 > 0:17:48Hold on...

0:17:48 > 0:17:51let's just check that one more time.

0:17:51 > 0:17:56His left foot slips underneath the door, his right leg gives way.

0:17:58 > 0:18:01And he falls backwards off of the bus.

0:18:01 > 0:18:04All gazelle-like comparisons end at that point.

0:18:06 > 0:18:07A bit different to a driver

0:18:07 > 0:18:10intentionally closing the doors on him.

0:18:10 > 0:18:13But the amazing thing from this footage is how fast this man

0:18:13 > 0:18:16can actually run in flip-flops.

0:18:16 > 0:18:19With the claimant's dash for personal injury cash kaput,

0:18:19 > 0:18:22it seems his choice of footwear that day was

0:18:22 > 0:18:24a big contributing factor to his fall.

0:18:26 > 0:18:29The CCTV in this instance totally disproves the allegations

0:18:29 > 0:18:31made by the claimant.

0:18:31 > 0:18:35With the truth caught on camera, the claimant was busted.

0:18:35 > 0:18:38Unlike his leg, which he had alleged had been gashed to the extent

0:18:38 > 0:18:40he'd needed plastic surgery.

0:18:43 > 0:18:47Not a drop of blood, not even a tear in his jeans -

0:18:47 > 0:18:50although he might need a new pair of flip-flops.

0:18:50 > 0:18:54This case resulted in a full repudiation of the claim.

0:18:54 > 0:18:57Amazingly, the solicitor subsequently came back to us

0:18:57 > 0:19:00changing their story, saying that the driver should have actually

0:19:00 > 0:19:04seen their claimant, who was at the doors at the time they were closed.

0:19:04 > 0:19:07Upon reviewing the CCTV, we can see that when those doors

0:19:07 > 0:19:10were closing, that bus stop was empty.

0:19:10 > 0:19:14None of our drivers are trained to wait for invisible passengers.

0:19:14 > 0:19:17Proof that First Group will examine all claims thoroughly -

0:19:17 > 0:19:19both genuine and false.

0:19:19 > 0:19:23I think from this case it's clear to see that we will use

0:19:23 > 0:19:27all evidence we have at our disposal to refute claims or,

0:19:27 > 0:19:31as in a lot of cases, to uphold claims.

0:19:35 > 0:19:39Thankfully, the chances of having an accident on the road

0:19:39 > 0:19:41are relatively low, so what are the chances

0:19:41 > 0:19:43of crashing into someone you know?

0:19:43 > 0:19:45Pretty slim, you'd imagine.

0:19:45 > 0:19:48Well, when it comes to scammers arranging deliberate crashes

0:19:48 > 0:19:52to try and get a bumper pay-out from insurers, the odds shoot up.

0:19:52 > 0:19:53This type of fraud is often arranged

0:19:53 > 0:19:56between parties that know each other.

0:19:56 > 0:19:59The first thing suspicious insurers will do is look into

0:19:59 > 0:20:02claimants' backgrounds and establish that all-important connection.

0:20:06 > 0:20:09Susan Evans has seen every type of car con in the book.

0:20:11 > 0:20:15In 2012, she was passed a claim that required her well-trained eye.

0:20:17 > 0:20:21This particular accident, our policy holder, Mr Bougoussa,

0:20:21 > 0:20:25was driving his Jaguar when a third-party vehicle, Mr Chammeme,

0:20:25 > 0:20:28pulled out of a side road into his path.

0:20:28 > 0:20:29TYRES SCREECH

0:20:29 > 0:20:30CRASH

0:20:30 > 0:20:32There was quite a heavy impact.

0:20:32 > 0:20:36Mr Bougoussa had a passenger in his vehicle, supposedly,

0:20:36 > 0:20:40and we were told the damage had been occasioned to both vehicles.

0:20:40 > 0:20:43The claim in total was about £16,000,

0:20:43 > 0:20:47not an insignificant amount, but certainly one

0:20:47 > 0:20:50that we would see on a regular basis.

0:20:50 > 0:20:53On the surface, this case appeared to be an everyday claim,

0:20:53 > 0:20:55but both men were overeager to ram home

0:20:55 > 0:20:58particular details of the accident.

0:20:59 > 0:21:03Mr Bougoussa was very specific in his description of the third party

0:21:03 > 0:21:08and was quite adamant that he'd never met him before,

0:21:08 > 0:21:10and the third party, in his description, again,

0:21:10 > 0:21:14was adamant that they've never met and they'd never

0:21:14 > 0:21:17come into contact before or after the accident.

0:21:17 > 0:21:18TYRES SCREECH

0:21:18 > 0:21:21But it would be the condition of their cars that first gave

0:21:21 > 0:21:23real cause for concern.

0:21:23 > 0:21:26Our suspicions were aroused as we sent an engineer out

0:21:26 > 0:21:29to examine the vehicles.

0:21:29 > 0:21:32That showed us that the car had not had just one impact,

0:21:32 > 0:21:34that there'd been multiple impacts,

0:21:34 > 0:21:38and also that he was stationary when the accident had taken place.

0:21:40 > 0:21:42Strong evidence this was no genuine claim.

0:21:42 > 0:21:43TYRES SCREECH

0:21:43 > 0:21:44CRASH

0:21:44 > 0:21:48With this in mind, it was time to visit the scene of the crash.

0:21:48 > 0:21:51We actually sent an investigator out to look at the junction

0:21:51 > 0:21:53where the accident happened.

0:21:53 > 0:21:57It was a very wide, open junction,

0:21:57 > 0:21:59really, really good visibility,

0:21:59 > 0:22:03it was quite difficult to accept that somebody could have

0:22:03 > 0:22:07pulled out into the path of another vehicle in those circumstances.

0:22:07 > 0:22:12Susan suspected that this could be a staged collision and an attempt to

0:22:12 > 0:22:15defraud Admiral, but further proof was needed to establish

0:22:15 > 0:22:17a connection between Bougoussa and Chammeme.

0:22:19 > 0:22:22So we actually looked into the background of all individuals

0:22:22 > 0:22:26supposedly involved in the incident, and we were able to

0:22:26 > 0:22:29establish that not only did they know one another prior to

0:22:29 > 0:22:32the accident, but that they'd actually been in the same prison

0:22:32 > 0:22:34for a considerable length of time.

0:22:34 > 0:22:36CELL DOOR SLAMS

0:22:36 > 0:22:38With the information that the accident wasn't

0:22:38 > 0:22:41the first time these two men had been banged up together,

0:22:41 > 0:22:44it was time to hand over their investigation.

0:22:46 > 0:22:50DC Paula Doyle is an Ifed detective and part of the team

0:22:50 > 0:22:53that took on the case.

0:22:53 > 0:22:54Admiral had already worked out that

0:22:54 > 0:22:57both men had been in prison together,

0:22:57 > 0:22:59and that there were major inconsistencies

0:22:59 > 0:23:01in the circumstances of the accident.

0:23:03 > 0:23:06Ifed detectives analysed the evidence,

0:23:06 > 0:23:09and quickly concluded that there were just too many coincidences

0:23:09 > 0:23:12in Bougoussa and Chammeme's story to be plausible.

0:23:13 > 0:23:17The first thing I actually did was to call the prison to ask them

0:23:17 > 0:23:21how unlikely it would be for these two men

0:23:21 > 0:23:24not to have come into contact with each other within the prison.

0:23:24 > 0:23:27Their answer was that it was pretty unlikely, cos not only

0:23:27 > 0:23:31they were in the same prison, they were in the same cell block.

0:23:31 > 0:23:32And not only were they in the same cell block,

0:23:32 > 0:23:35but their cells were opposite each other.

0:23:35 > 0:23:38So they would have seen each other every single day.

0:23:38 > 0:23:41So these two used to be neighbours in the nick.

0:23:41 > 0:23:44Now they appeared to be crash buddies on the outside,

0:23:44 > 0:23:47but they still couldn't get their stories straight.

0:23:47 > 0:23:49An additional personal injury claim went in from

0:23:49 > 0:23:51a guy called Abdul Rahid.

0:23:51 > 0:23:52When he was interviewed,

0:23:52 > 0:23:54Mr Bougoussa couldn't even remember

0:23:54 > 0:23:56what he was called, he called him "Dino",

0:23:56 > 0:23:59and in fact, further to that,

0:23:59 > 0:24:03Mr Chammeme described him as a 6ft tall black male,

0:24:03 > 0:24:06whereas in interview, Mr Bougoussa described him as an Asian male.

0:24:08 > 0:24:12With this third passenger having all the credibility of Bigfoot,

0:24:12 > 0:24:17Paula analysed the engineer's accident report in forensic detail.

0:24:17 > 0:24:21Mr Bougoussa's car, which was meant to have been travelling at 30mph,

0:24:21 > 0:24:23had damage consistent with it

0:24:23 > 0:24:26being still at the time and not travelling.

0:24:26 > 0:24:29The damage on his car was actually overlapping,

0:24:29 > 0:24:34which would mean it had been hit more than once by Mr Chammeme's car.

0:24:34 > 0:24:37The damage also indicated that Mr Chammeme's car didn't have

0:24:37 > 0:24:39its registration plate on at the time.

0:24:39 > 0:24:43Which is unusual, because normally when you are out driving,

0:24:43 > 0:24:46you would have your number plate attached to your car.

0:24:46 > 0:24:48And when asked to explain the discrepancies,

0:24:48 > 0:24:51the pair had very different responses.

0:24:51 > 0:24:54Mr Bougoussa simply said, "No comment."

0:24:54 > 0:24:57Mr Chammeme, however, had a story,

0:24:57 > 0:25:01and his story was that when he hit Mr Bougoussa, he'd reversed.

0:25:01 > 0:25:04Which would not account for two impacts,

0:25:04 > 0:25:06so I didn't believe this was true.

0:25:06 > 0:25:09And I asked him, if that was the case, why did you not then

0:25:09 > 0:25:13have your registration plate attached to your car?

0:25:13 > 0:25:18And he pretended not to be able to understand what I'd asked him.

0:25:18 > 0:25:21Playing dumb wouldn't help the fact that the physical evidence

0:25:21 > 0:25:22suggested that Chammeme had

0:25:22 > 0:25:25intentionally and repeatedly driven his car

0:25:25 > 0:25:28into Bougoussa's, to stage the accident damage.

0:25:30 > 0:25:34Both men maintained that the accident was genuine and that

0:25:34 > 0:25:36they didn't know each other.

0:25:36 > 0:25:39So obviously, I then have to go a little bit further to prove

0:25:39 > 0:25:41that they do know each other,

0:25:41 > 0:25:46and that meant a visit to the prison that held Mr Chammeme's file.

0:25:47 > 0:25:50I did find eventually what I was looking for,

0:25:50 > 0:25:55and that was a document that was from Mr Chammeme to the prison

0:25:55 > 0:26:01requesting that he be allowed to send £100 to Mr Bougoussa's wife.

0:26:01 > 0:26:04Despite the overwhelming evidence, the pair were sticking

0:26:04 > 0:26:09to their rather confused stories, and the case proceeded to trial.

0:26:09 > 0:26:13They both pleaded not guilty, but in a little bit of

0:26:13 > 0:26:17a twist to the story, they actually did admit they knew each other.

0:26:17 > 0:26:19Mr Chammeme gave a defence saying,

0:26:19 > 0:26:22"We met in prison, we stayed in touch,

0:26:22 > 0:26:25"and in fact, I was on my way to meet

0:26:25 > 0:26:28"Mr Bougoussa when the accident happened,"

0:26:28 > 0:26:32and the accident was genuine, just an unfortunate coincidence that

0:26:32 > 0:26:35he happened to hit the person he was going to meet that day.

0:26:36 > 0:26:39But Chammeme would soon change his tune.

0:26:39 > 0:26:44I think after making that defence, Mr Chammeme must have realised

0:26:44 > 0:26:46how ludicrous it was

0:26:46 > 0:26:50and promptly changed his mind and pleaded guilty.

0:26:50 > 0:26:55And Bougoussa quickly followed suit, changing his plea to guilty.

0:26:55 > 0:26:59They were given nine-month suspended sentences,

0:26:59 > 0:27:01suspended for two years,

0:27:01 > 0:27:03they were both given a two-year supervision order,

0:27:03 > 0:27:05and additionally, Mr Chammeme was

0:27:05 > 0:27:09ordered to do 120 hours of unpaid work.

0:27:09 > 0:27:12They may have narrowly avoided a custodial sentence,

0:27:12 > 0:27:15but they were held accountable for their attempted fraud.

0:27:15 > 0:27:19We never did find Mr Rahid, or Dino,

0:27:19 > 0:27:23and given that the accident didn't actually happen,

0:27:23 > 0:27:27it's highly unlikely that there was a passenger in the car.

0:27:27 > 0:27:29And he's been just invented

0:27:29 > 0:27:32to make more money out of the insurance company.

0:27:32 > 0:27:34Bougoussa and Chammeme thought they were on to a winner

0:27:34 > 0:27:36staging this accident,

0:27:36 > 0:27:39but their shambolic execution was their undoing.

0:27:39 > 0:27:42I think they thought the claim wouldn't get looked at

0:27:42 > 0:27:43and they wouldn't get found out.

0:27:43 > 0:27:47Unfortunately, it was looked at and they did get found out.

0:27:47 > 0:27:51They underestimated the lengths that Ifed will go to, to prove a case.

0:27:56 > 0:27:59Insurance fraud hits all of us in the pocket,

0:27:59 > 0:28:02but more and more of these scammers and conmen

0:28:02 > 0:28:04are being Claimed and Shamed.