Minor bump becomes major dishonesty as Keoghs and Somerset Bridge Group defeat £140k claim

A minor parked car collision which became a claim for more than £140,000 has been found dishonest at trial, with Keoghs and Somerset Bridge Group defeating the hugely inflated claim.

What began as a relatively inconsequential knock to a parked car’s rear nearside corner swiftly escalated when the claimant switched accident management company to Stocalfe Response Ltd. Suddenly, damage was said to stretch along the entire nearside and across the front, with the vehicle allegedly written off and unroadworthy. Hire charges also ballooned from just over £200 to nearly £1,000 per day. Somerset Bridge queried the figures, suggesting it was a typo. It wasn’t.

Despite making protective payments for the pre‑accident value (PAV), recovery and storage, the hire was refused due to mounting concerns which included issues with the alleged vehicle damage. Litigation followed, with the claim including a whopping £120,927 for credit hire alongside £17,600 for PAV and £3,606 storage and recovery.

Keoghs counter-fraud and intelligence then unravelled a series of inconsistencies involving the alleged damage and repairs, the accident circumstances (including the fact that the claimant’s brother was the actual driver at the time, while the claimant was abroad), and the financial positions of the claimant and his brother.

GBB prepared a report for the court which concluded that:

• There was clearly pre-existing damage that could not have been caused by the incident.
• The damage appeared to be from two other separate incidents.
• Frontal damage had already rendered the car unroadworthy and a total loss before the collision had occurred.
• Additional nearside damage also had nothing to do with the defendant.

Despite the brother’s attempts to insist that the car had been undamaged before the incident in the car park, the claimant’s own forensic engineer confirmed pre-existing damage. The game was up, especially when the brother’s evidence at trial left the judge unimpressed.

Following lengthy cross‑examination by Mr Aaron Pulford of Deans Court Chambers, the court dismissed the entire claim, judging that:

• The alleged accident damage was pre‑existing.
• The car was already a write‑off, making the PAV claim invalid.
• The claimant had no genuine need to hire a replacement vehicle because of the collision.

As a result, the claimant agreed to repay £17,600 previously received for the PAV and Stocalfe Ltd repaying £56,605 in awarded costs.