Episode 7 Claimed and Shamed

Insurance fraud in the UK has hit epidemic levels.

It's costing us more than £1.3 billion every year.

That's almost £3.6 million every day.

Deliberate crashes, bogus personal injuries, even phantom pets.

The fraudsters are risking more and more to make a quick killing,

and every year it's adding around £50 to your insurance bill.

But insurers are fighting back,

exposing just under 15 fake claims every hour.

Armed with covert surveillance systems...

That's the subject out the vehicle.

..sophisticated data analysis techniques...

Police!

..and a number of highly skilled police units...

Police, stand back! Stay where you are!

..they're catching the criminals red-handed.

Just don't lie to us.

All those con men, scammers and cheats on the fiddle

are now caught in the act and claimed and shamed.

A large-scale bogus injury scam is scuppered,

as the claimants fail to clock the CCTV cameras...

I think it's probably fair to assume that most or all of these

60 claimants thought that this would be a fairly easy ride

and that they would get some compensation reasonably quickly.

..social media is the undoing of a bride-to-be's claim

for a lost engagement ring...

..and a con artist is caught in the act when he tries to repeat

a previous claim.

The passer-by that witnessed the accident actually stopped

at the scene and informed us that he'd been involved

in a very similar accident at the same location

with the same third party only three months before.

Now, with the volume of traffic on the roads constantly on the up,

more and more of us are leaving our cars at home and turning

to public transport to get around.

But as convenient as it is sitting back and leaving

the stress of navigating the city streets to someone else,

taking to the roads always presents a risk,

even when there is a trained professional behind the wheel.

For many of us who live or work in built-up cities,

buses are the preferred mode of transport

and can often save us valuable time.

But just like any other vehicles, buses are susceptible to accidents,

and with up to 75 passengers on board at any one time,

that can generate a lot of personal injury claims.

With a fleet of over 6,000 buses,

First Group are no stranger to multiple claims,

but they recently dealt with one batch that turned out to be

the result of foul play.

One of our buses was involved in a very minor collision.

Our bus was travelling in slow-moving traffic

when the vehicle in front had to brake for amber traffic lights.

Unfortunately, our bus was a little too close and collided

with the rear of the Ford Fiesta.

The bus was full of football supporters on their way

to a Leeds United match, and the car contained an elderly couple.

Thankfully, the bus was travelling at less than 10mph

when the collision happened.

The incident itself was relatively minor.

There was scuffing to our bus and minor damage to the Ford Fiesta.

So, we dealt with the repairs to the Ford Fiesta

and that was the end of it.

Or so they thought.

Within days, we started receiving injury claims.

The first one or two, obviously suspicious,

because it was a very minor accident.

However, they kept coming and, within a few weeks,

we had over 40 claims.

On one day alone, we received 25 claims,

much to the dismay of the file handler on the case,

and then within six months we had 60 claims, which was absolutely absurd.

So, a minor rear-end shunt that had left an elderly couple in a tiny car

completely unscathed had resulted in a staggering number of claims

from the football supporters,

amounting to £500,000

in injury compensation and legal costs.

And nearly every one of them was claiming the same thing.

We were not surprised to find that most of the claimants that were

pursuing the claims were claiming that they had soft tissue injuries,

but some of the claims that they were presenting to us

were completely absurd.

We had nightmares, flashbacks, we had fear of travel,

we had severe psychological trauma,

and probably the worst was the severe panic attacks

that one claimant allegedly suffered on a daily basis.

The list of injuries and ailments was simply astonishing.

So, First Group immediately launched a full investigation,

and it wasn't long before they discovered an alarming trend

with the claims.

One of the things we did find rather surprising is we had 60 claimants,

and 55 were represented by the same solicitor, which is highly unusual.

With a multiple claim,

you'd expect to see the individuals represented by

various different solicitors.

Suspecting they'd been the target of a large-scale attempt at fraud,

First Group stepped up their investigation

and turned to the CCTV footage recorded on the bus

at the time of the accident.

As expected, it clearly shows the bus following the Fiesta,

the Fiesta coming to a sharp halt at the traffic lights,

the bus not quite stopping in time

and gently nudging the Fiesta.

However, it's when you switch to the cameras inside the bus

that things start to look suspicious.

So, looking at the CCTV footage,

you can clearly see that this accident is very minor.

You can see that there's hardly any movement to any of the passengers.

Certainly, none of the passengers were thrown down the bus.

Bizarrely, you can see individuals patting each other on the backs.

You can see them laughing.

This certainly doesn't look like a bus full

of 60 seriously injured people.

It was clear the collision was extremely minor,

and there was no way the bus passengers could have sustained

the injuries they were claiming for.

All 60 claims were repudiated.

The case was closed and investigators thought

it was all over.

But some of the football supporters were in the mood

for some extra time,

and were determined to pursue their claims with the bus company.

Four of the claimants decided they wanted their day in court,

so they issued county court proceedings,

which we were more than happy with.

We've dealt with numerous claims like this and we were confident

of a successful outcome.

So, we instructed our fraud experts and also one of our top barristers

to represent us in court.

First Group turned to Horwich Farrelly,

a legal firm specialising in insurance claims,

to help defend the case.

And it was soon clear to them that the football supporters

didn't have a leg to stand on.

All four of the claimants who proceeded to trial

performed poorly in the witness box.

The inconsistencies in their evidence were fairly easily

exposed by cross-examination.

During the CCTV recording,

one of the claimants can be seen clutching his neck

as the bus hits the car. Yet, when presenting his claim,

it seems he forgot to get his facts straight.

This particular claimant's case was that he didn't feel any pain

or symptoms until the following day.

On that basis, unsurprisingly,

he was asked why he was clutching his neck

immediately after the accident,

and his response to the judge was to check if he was OK.

The judge just found that to be bizarre and implausible.

When viewing the CCTV after the collision,

it also looked like some of the supporters already had thoughts

of compensation in the forefront of their minds.

The footage shows all of the passengers disembarking the bus.

And whilst doing so, it can be seen

that five or six are taking pictures on their cellphones

of the bus driver, the front of the bus and the rear of the Ford Fiesta.

The fact that so many people were taking photographs

certainly gives the viewer the notion

that many of these passengers were immediately alive

to the prospect of compensation claims.

The judge had no hesitation in showing the claimants the red card.

All four claims were dismissed.

Two of the claimants were found to be fundamentally dishonest.

They were ordered to pay legal costs of just over £7,000

and just under £5,000 respectively.

It was a superb result for Horwich Farrelly and First Group,

and a harsh lesson for the football fans who thought they could

cheat their way to an easy win.

I think it's probably fair to assume that most or all of these

60 claimants thought that this would be a fairly easy ride

and that they would get some compensation reasonably quickly.

I don't think any of them realised the efforts that First Group

and ourselves would go to in defending these claims.

And for anyone else who thinks bus companies are an easy touch

when it comes to compensation, Julie has a few words of advice.

For anyone thinking of pursuing a fraudulent claim

against our company, don't do it. If we catch you - and we will -

we will push for the toughest penalties,

and this could have serious financial implications

or even custodial sentences.

In America, it's the end of the road for the doctor

behind one of the largest fake prescription scams in US history.

Nowadays, social media has become a huge part of our lives.

In fact, around 32 million of us -

that's half the population of the UK -

have an online account.

Some are more secure than others,

but many allow your basic details to be seen by anyone.

Which is all well and good, so long as you don't have anything to hide.

Social media is being used more and more

when it comes to verifying claims.

Often people are caught out when posts on their online account

don't back up what they have told the insurers.

i-Cog are a claims management company that deal with cases

on behalf of insurers,

and recently dealt with a case regarding

a missing piece of jewellery.

The claim that we received from the insurers was for a ring

that had been lost while the policyholder was swimming

at the beach with a friend.

The claim was potentially worth £1,362.

The first thing they did was to call the claimant

to go through the facts.

So, this wasn't your average ring.

Designed by her partner, and with a truly distinctive look,

it's no wonder the claimant was upset after she had lost it.

Fair enough. Many people wait years for a proposal,

so to then lose your engagement ring

might make you feel lost without it.

So, picking up any old replacement sounded plausible enough...

..but there was a problem.

We do get claims like this quite often for rings that are lost.

However, the insurer had raised some concerns about this claim.

The insurer, as standard, did some background checking,

including some social media checks.

They found a post of an engagement ring

on the insured's Instagram account.

Nothing surprising there.

After all, what bride-to-be wouldn't want to show off their new

bling to friends and family?

The post was posted after the date of loss.

Ah. Surely there was a rational explanation?

We find it incredibly unusual that a ring could appear

on a social media site after the date that it was lost.

In which case, time to confront the claimant.

She immediately told us that

she didn't use Instagram very often.

She was unsure of what I was referring to.

And it wasn't until we went through the post that she put on there,

word for word, that she then came up with an account

of why she put that there.

So, the woman was claiming that the picture she had posted

of the beautiful and unique ring was, in fact,

the cheap and cheerful replacement she'd picked up on the high street.

Unsurprisingly, for both i-Cog and the woman's insurers,

it just didn't make sense.

Never mind pathetic.

I'd say it sounds rather suspicious.

This did not seem like a plausible account at all.

Very strange that you would put a photo of a ring up

and tell people that it is an engagement ring if it wasn't.

As if the explanation wasn't dubious enough,

as cheap and cheerful replacement rings go,

this one really looked the part.

Little did the claimant realise

i-Cog had done their homework.

Not only did they know where her original engagement ring

had come from, but crucially they also knew

exactly what it looked like.

Her husband-to-be must have been kicking himself

when he discovered she had found a ring

in a high-street costume jewellery shop that was identical

to the one he had designed and paid a small fortune for.

In my experience with jewellery claims,

it is unlikely that she would have been able to find

a piece of costume jewellery from a store just on the high street

that would have been similar enough in design

for the one that she says is her engagement ring.

But the woman was adamant the ring on her social media account

really was the cheap replacement she'd rushed out and bought.

So, all she needed was the receipt,

or a letter from the shop where she'd bought the cheap replacement,

and her claim would be settled.

So, a couple of days later the insured sent us an e-mail.

In that, she confirmed that she couldn't find a receipt

or purchase order for the substitute ring,

and as such she would like to withdraw the claim.

The fact that the woman had given up so quickly

on a claim worth over £1,300 spoke volumes.

So, the claim could have been easily validated.

We asked for proof of purchase for the ring.

She was unable to provide this,

which seems unusual because she had bought it from

a big name on the high street,

and they are usually, in my experience, very helpful,

especially when it is only a couple of weeks before.

It also seems very unusual that she would walk away from a claim

for such a sentimental and valuable item.

It appeared she thought her insurance company

wouldn't check up on her.

But like many would-be fraudsters before her,

the post on her online account had been her undoing.

We would always do checking on social media.

We have various sites that we check.

People tend to live their lives through social media now,

so it really is a good insight for the insurers to do those checks,

because unfortunately some people will live their life

through their posts, and sometimes this can catch them out.

Being involved in a car accident is never a pleasant experience,

but if you've been involved in an accident that wasn't your fault,

then sometimes you need to be able to prove it.

CCTV or dashcam footage can provide irrefutable evidence,

but unfortunately they are a luxury not many of us have access to.

Instead, we are reliant on eyewitness evidence

to help determine exactly what happened

and where the blame should lie.

When insurance companies receive claims,

the details are always validated before any money is paid.

This usually involves taking statements from the drivers

and any witnesses,

looking at the damage to the cars and, where necessary,

examining medical reports relating to any injuries.

AXA's Tom Wilson knows all too well

that some cases are easier to validate than others,

and that a single piece of evidence can be the crucial difference

between establishing whether a claim is genuine or fraudulent.

So, a customer reported to us that he'd been involved in a collision

with a Mr Khan. Mr Khan was rounding a bend

and our customer went into the rear of him...

..causing damage to both vehicles.

The value of our customer's vehicle damage was about £4,500.

And the value of Mr Khan's vehicle damage,

as a result of this vehicle becoming a total loss,

was £8,500.

With a total value of £13,000,

this was significantly more than a gentle rear-end shunt,

so the claim was thoroughly investigated.

Initially, the circumstances would appear genuine.

However, from the outset our customer made it clear

that he believed that the BMW had slammed his brakes on

for no apparent reason, which caused our customer to go into

the rear of the vehicle.

He believed he was the victim of a crash for cash

and that Mr Khan had induced this accident.

Crash for cash is when someone deliberately causes a collision

so they can cash in on the other party's insurance policy.

This is a practice often favoured by serial fraudsters or criminal gangs,

who induce accidents with innocent road users in order to profit

from fraudulent insurance claims.

With just one claim potentially worth thousands of pounds,

crash for cash is a big problem that costs the insurance industry

around £340 million a year.

In this case, AXA's policyholder needed proof that he really had

been the victim of a crash for cash scam,

and as luck would have it, he had exactly that.

The real key piece of information was a passer-by that witnessed

the accident actually stopped at the scene and informed us that

he'd been involved in a very similar accident at the same location

with the same third party only three months before.

That clearly gives us cause for concern.

They say lightning never strikes twice in the same place,

but the eyewitness was alleging that, just a matter of weeks before,

a near-identical crash had happened in the same way

on exactly the same stretch of road.

Coupled with the fact that our customer alleged that this guy

had slammed his brakes on for no reason,

it just builds a bigger picture about the credibility of this person

and actually the validity of the accident circumstances itself.

The police had attended the scene of the accident and also noticed

something rather suspicious.

The third-party vehicle, the BMW, was recovered by a recovery truck,

but when the recovery truck turned up, it was full of people already.

So, the driver of the BMW caught a lift with a vehicle that was waiting

a little way down the road. And it was suspected that that vehicle

had been waiting there all along.

It would suggest that the incident was planned,

that it was premeditated,

and that he was waiting there because he knew the accident

was going to take place at this location.

With the policyholder's suspicions,

the witness statement and information from the police

all pointing towards a fraudulent claim,

the insurance company was in no doubt of what to do next.

We informed the insurer of Mr Khan that we believed it to be

a deliberate action and believed it to be an induced accident,

and we weren't going to be paying his claim,

so we rejected his claim on that basis.

Legal action was taken against Mr Khan,

and the case proceeded to court.

So, Mr Khan was required to attend a hearing,

where he was found guilty of conspiracy to defraud

and fraud by misrepresentation,

and he was sentenced to 20 months behind bars.

The sentence handed down in this particular case

was a strong sentence, and to receive a custodial sentence,

primarily, for Mr Khan, is a great result.

It sends the message of a deterrent to would-be fraudsters

that if you do try and you get caught, and we will catch you,

that you could end up with a prison sentence.

With another fraudster caught and punished for his actions,

it was a great result for AXA,

and showed just how important it is in cases like these

for witnesses to come forward.

In respect of our investigation, the witness being there

was absolutely key to being able to prove that this was a fraud.

Had he not been present,

it would effectively be our customer's word against the word

of the third party, so it would make it very difficult for us

to prove that it was an induced accident.

Still to come:

a motorist's attempt to exaggerate his claim backfires

when he makes a basic mistake.

He categorically denied that he'd suffered any injury when asked.

As we've seen in many cases on this programme,

fraudsters will go to extreme lengths to get their hands

on a pay-out, from deliberately causing an accident

to claiming for medical treatment they never even received.

But if you think we've got it bad in the UK,

the depths some fraudsters go to across the pond

is simply astonishing.

In America, the largest type of insurance fraud by far

is scams against health care insurers.

The exact size of the problem is unknown,

but it is likely to be tens of billions of dollars a year.

Out of all the people we trust,

doctors are usually high on the list.

But sadly, as many of these cases have proved,

not all medical experts are running practices

that are entirely above board.

In Miami, Florida, Fernando Mendez-Villamil

qualified as a doctor in 1998

and set up his own psychiatric practice,

treating patients for conditions such as ADHD, schizophrenia,

depression and narcolepsy.

But just four years later,

he began defrauding the government health care providers in a scam

that would last for the next 14 years

and cost the US government millions of dollars.

His plan involved staffing his office with low-paid workers

who would carry out the tasks he gave them without question.

His scheme was simple.

People who wanted to get disability benefits

but who didn't actually have a mental health problem

would pay him around 1,500.

In exchange, he would give them a false diagnosis,

along with fake medical records and prescriptions,

so they could apply for the benefits.

These people would then attend a disability determination interview,

where they would be questioned about their alleged mental illness.

Mendez-Villamil would prepare them for these interviews,

telling them how to respond,

so it looked like they were genuinely suffering

from severe mental health issues.

He would then submit false claims to the government

health insurance programmes, Medicare and Medicaid,

for appointments that never took place,

and prescriptions that weren't actually necessary.

While all this was going on,

he continued to treat legitimate patients at his practice.

But he even preyed on these innocent victims too,

by giving over-the-top diagnoses

and prescribing excessive amounts of medication.

By 2004, he had earned the title of the most prolific

drug provider in Florida,

issuing some 62,000 prescriptions a year,

costing 12.2 million.

That's over 1,000 prescriptions a week.

But his epic attempt at fraud didn't go unnoticed.

Three years later, Medicaid received a complaint

from a private investigator called Ken Kramer.

Kramer had noticed that Mendez-Villamil

was prescribing a huge and totally disproportionate amount

of anti-psychotic drugs to children.

The information was passed on to the US Senate,

who made the prescription records available to the public.

By that time, he had an astounding 96,000 mental health patients

on his books.

When questioned, Mendez-Villamil

insisted that the number of prescriptions he was issuing

was normal for this volume of patients.

But the authorities thought otherwise.

Medicaid terminated him as a health care provider,

meaning he could no longer claim any money from them.

But that didn't stop this fraudster.

He continued to submit claims to Medicare,

who cover those aged over 65

and young people with disabilities.

Some of his patients were as young as three,

and were being prescribed huge amounts of medication

for no apparent reason.

The notes on their medical reports also frequently

contradicted each other, a clear sign that something wasn't right.

Not only was Mendez-Villamil

helping thousands of people to fraudulently

receive disability benefit,

but he was also claiming money from health care providers

that he wasn't owed. And on top of that,

he was flooding the streets of Florida with drugs

that should never have been prescribed.

He needed to be stopped.

In 2013, Mendez-Villamil

was struck off Medicare's list of providers.

He received a 15,000 fine from the Florida Board of Medicine

and was asked to reimburse the state more than 22,000 in costs.

Unfazed by this attempt to put a stop to his illegal scam,

he came up with yet another plan.

This time, he targeted immigrants who wanted to become US citizens.

In exchange for a 1,000 cash fee,

he would diagnose them with a false mental illness so they wouldn't have

to adhere to all of the country's strict immigration rules.

But he had gone too far, and the law had caught up with him.

In January 2016,

he was accused of running one of the largest fake prescription schemes

in US history, and was immediately arrested.

His home and valuable possessions were seized,

including a rather unusual collection of paintings

estimated to be worth around 500,000.

He later pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit

health care fraud, to make false statements in immigration matters

and to defrauding the US government.

Overall, his scam had cost the Citizenship and Immigration Services

over 800,000,

the United States disability system more than 20 million

and health care providers Medicare and Medicaid over 29 million.

Mendez-Villamil was sentenced to 12 years and seven months in prison,

and ordered to pay back costs of over 50 million.

Although justice had finally been served,

this was a man who had abused his position

to an unimaginable degree.

It will also take some time to identify the thousands of patients

he has given false diagnoses to,

who are still out there defrauding the US government.

Temptation. It can come in various forms, but for many of us

the promise of free money is something that is

very hard to turn down. Now, if you own a phone,

then the chances are that at some point you've received a call

telling you that there is a pot of cash with your name on it

waiting for you to collect as compensation

for the accident you were involved in...

..sometimes even if you haven't been in an accident.

Well, this next case highlights the potential pitfalls of pursuing

a claim that you simply aren't entitled to.

BLM are a legal firm who represent a number of insurance companies.

One of their partners, Naomi Grant, dealt with a case

from a particularly persistent claimant who was determined

to get what he thought he was owed.

The insurers in this case were initially just presented with

a straightforward claim for vehicle damage

arising out of a road traffic accident.

Both parties were travelling in opposite directions

along a fairly narrow country road, and in the process,

they came into collision with one another.

The initial incident wasn't suspicious in any way.

At first presentation, this was just a claim for vehicle damage.

So, an unfortunate coming together of two cars,

but thankfully no-one was injured,

and it was a straightforward claim to process.

As a routine part of dealing with the vehicle damage claim,

the claimant made a telephone call to the insurance company

about two months after the initial accident.

So, with the exception of the ill feeling between the two parties,

this was a simple matter of repairing the vehicles

and closing the case...

..or so the insurance company thought.

Eight months after the initial accident,

the insurance company received a claim notification form

from a firm of solicitors appointed on behalf of the claimant,

and at that point the claimant alleged

that he'd suffered personal injury.

Although eight months might sound like a long time,

with many genuine claims this is actually quite a regular occurrence.

It's not uncommon for people to present claims quite some time

after the accident.

The law in England and Wales is that a person has three years

from the date of an accident before they have to actually

issue court proceedings to bring their claim.

So, technically the claimant in this matter did nothing wrong.

"Technically" being the key word there,

because it was at this point that things began to unravel.

The claimant had indicated that he had suffered personal injury,

but he didn't present any other evidence to go with that,

so the claim then had to be reopened and looked at again,

which caused the insurance company to go back through their call log

to locate the call when he categorically denied

that he'd suffered any injury when asked.

That immediately aroused their suspicions.

The insurance company therefore disclosed a copy

of that call recording to the solicitors,

who appeared to go away and discontinue the claim,

so again the file was closed down.

It looked as though this chap had tried to submit a cheeky claim

in the hope of some easy money,

but his underhanded attempt had been scuppered by his own voice

on the original call recording,

where he'd said he was completely unscathed by the car accident.

With evidence as conclusive as that,

most people would leave it there.

But it soon transpired this fella wasn't most people.

The bigger surprise was that some 18 months after the accident,

he re-presented his claim through a second firm of solicitors,

again maintaining that he had been injured.

The call recording was again immediately disclosed,

but the claimant insisted that he'd suffered an injury,

and this time went on to get a medical examination

and a medical report to detail all of his alleged injuries.

Either this was someone who firmly believed in the phrase

"third time lucky" or he was being given some very poor advice.

But at least this time he had some documents to back up his claim.

The medical report stated that he'd suffered a neck injury,

which he said he had suffered from for five months.

He also claimed that he had been affected in his domestic duties,

so he was unable to clean, cook or shop.

He couldn't carry out any leisure activities,

he was unable to play football,

and he claimed he was unable to sleep properly.

So, from no injuries at all to a list of ailments that added up

to a pretty hefty claim for compensation.

So, all in all, the claim was valued in the region of £8,000.

Now, given this man categorically said he was uninjured,

it will come as no surprise that the insurance company

had no intention of paying this claim.

So, they instructed BLM to defend it all the way,

which they duly did.

We were able to prepare a robust defence,

referring to the phone call,

which really set out all the facts.

And that defence quite categorically stated that this was

a fraudulent claim in the eyes of the insurance company.

Sounds like a pretty one-sided fight,

but with the prospect of a pay-out on the line,

this guy wasn't one to give in easily.

The claimant in this matter actually continued with his claim

for quite a long time,

despite having been presented with all the evidence,

which was quite irrefutable, early on.

In a further twist to the tale,

two months before the matter was due to be listed for trial,

the claimant then made the sensible decision to discontinue his claim.

But if he thought that was the end of the matter,

then he was in for a very nasty surprise indeed.

In common with many people,

the claimant in this instance really thought that

by discontinuing his claim he could just run away from everything

and drop his claim and that would be an end to the matter.

Unfortunately for him, that wasn't to be the case.

The insurance company in this matter had spent a considerable amount

of time, effort and resource in having to defend not only his claim

but to pursue the claim against him,

and in the judgment that was recognised by the judge,

who actually awarded the insurance company a sum

towards their own investigation costs.

The claimant was also ordered to pay a sum of money by way of damages,

to punish him for what he'd done in bringing the claims.

And he was ordered to pay a considerable amount

in respect of costs.

So, in total, for what he thought he could walk away from,

he ended up with a judgment of over £15,000.

The catalyst for many personal injury claims brought

a long time after accidents are phone calls from companies

telling people they're entitled to compensation.

At best, these calls are irritating,

but at worst, they can be a gateway to a whole host of problems.

I think there's quite a huge,

growing problem at the moment with cold calling

and people being approached and pressurised into bringing claims,

even where they haven't been injured.

They are assured that this money is there for the taking, it is there,

there is a cheque with their name on it,

all they have to do is fill in a couple of forms and it is theirs.

It's not that straightforward.

You do still have to prove your claim.

You've got to prove your injury.

As this case demonstrates,

it's important to remember that it's the claimant who will ultimately

be held accountable for dishonest or opportunistic claims,

which can result in huge cost orders and even prison sentences.

The advice to anybody who is receiving these phone calls

is really be honest, be truthful.

Not all of the companies that phone you offering sums of money,

offering compensation, have your best interests at heart.

So, at the end of the day, be honest when you're presenting a claim.

Whether it's exaggerating real injuries,

totally making up a story for a dodgy claim

or masterminding insurance fraud on an industrial scale,

the law is coming down hard on the people who think

they can make a quick buck with their insurance scams and cons.

But the fraudsters need to think again,

as more of them than ever before are being caught in the act,

and claimed and shamed.