Telematics Data Disproves Fraudulent Claim

An insurance company has proven the value of having telematics installed in your vehicle by using it to disprove a fraudulent claim; saving itself over £50,000 in the process.

Insurance firm, Insure The Box used telematics data to identify a staged car accident that supposedly happened in May 2014 involving a claimant who was travelling home with two passengers, alleging that while he slowed to turn right at a junction, his car was hit from behind by another vehicle, driven by the Insure The Box policyholder.

The claimant presented a claim totalling over £26,000 for personal injury,, vehicle damage, physiotherapy, replacement vehicle hire and storage costs for his damaged vehicle. Each of his passengers also submitted their own claims for personal injury.

However, telematics data from the device fitted in the Insure The Box policyholder’s vehicle contradicted his and the claimant’s account of the incident, resulting in a full investigation of the claim.  According to Insure The Box, the telematics data showed that the policyholder’s vehicle was subjected to another collision in a car park which is a few metres away from the location of the fake accident.

A forensic expert’s report also showed that the damage to the policyholder’s vehicle was completely inconsistent with that sustained by the claimant’s car. Further inconsistencies were also found between the claimant’s reported injuries and hospital documents following the staged accident.

Due to the strength of evidence presented against him, the claimant chose to discontinue his claim before his scheduled court trial and was instead ordered to pay legal costs. All further claims from the passengers and policyholder were also dropped.

“Telematics data is just one piece of the jigsaw when we are conducting claims investigations but it is a very powerful piece that puts us at a distinct advantage over the rest of the industry,” said Adrian Steele of Insure The Box. “In this case, the veracity of the data enabled us to create a strong defence which would have left the claimant and his legal team with little confidence about the outcome if the case was tried before a judge,” he added.