Six Million Dollar Man Has His Claim Denied, Loses 150K Interim Payment

This latest fraud case report from Keoghs and Hastings Direct is very good news, apart from the lack of prison sentence. The level of greed here was off the scale. He also provides ammunition for those who see motorcyclists as reckless and/or chancers after a road collision.

So many bikers – and your IE editor is one of them – have been injured in typical “sorry mate, didn’t see you’ junction accidents where a car driver has pulled out of a side road. The results can be a broken wrist, concussion and bruising if you are lucky. Obviously the worst outcome is a fatality. For every biker that’s experienced that moment of panic when a car nudges out this guy needs a suspended sentence, not just being ordered to pay back the interim amount.

So many bikers in the past have had life changing injuries and received a few grand compensation. Thankfully those days are gone and there is a much more fair – albeit slow – system of PI compensation now. That fairness should not be undermined by those who exaggerate injuries, lie and attempt to treat a road accident as a potential lottery win.

Worth noting that this case took over four years to resolve and cost over 800K in law firm costs, plus VAT. The repayment of the £150,000 interim payment made was to offset some of the £1.2m costs racked up in this long-running case. Fact is, every expensive claim like this ultimately results in extra costs for insurers that have to be reflected in higher premiums for every law abiding biker too. That is unjust, so an attachment order to Matthew Shaw’s future earnings (he was aged 26 at the time of the accident in 2018) should be made so that more of the 800K in legal bills he racked up can be reclaimed.

Here’s the word;

Keoghs and Hastings Direct have won the UK’s largest ever fundamental dishonesty case, saving the insurance provider a staggering £6.6m.

The case of Shaw v Wilde involved a four-and-a-half-year investigation following a motorcycle accident where Mr Shaw injured all four of his limbs. Following an interim payment of £150k by Hastings Direct, the claimant sought £6.6m, including the cost of high-end luxury cars and business class trips abroad.

Yet investigations by Keoghs discovered evidence that Mr Shaw had not only exaggerated his claims but had actually taken part in a number of extreme sports including BASE jumping, climbing and had also been certified fit for a tandem skydive by his GP.

Originally instructed in August 2019, Keoghs surveillance agents quickly recorded Mr Shaw walking 900 metres unaided, whilst carrying his young son in a baby carrier, despite Mr Shaw claiming he was only able to walk 200 metres with a stick.

Over the months and years which followed Hastings Direct and Keoghs worked collaboratively to uncover a truthful picture of Mr Shaw’s life, and the genuine value of his claim. This involved significant periods of surveillance, deep web searches, numerous applications for disclosure of documents, and detailed cross-referencing to look for further discrepancies.

MORE STUNTS THAN THE FALL GUY

The result of detailed enquiries revealed Mr Shaw had been certified by his GP as fit for a tandem skydive, had undertaken a BASE jump in Italy, as well as having participated in indoor and outdoor climbing in the UK. Records revealed Mr Shaw had managed to ascend Mount Snowdon with a friend using an electric mountain bike.

However, Mr Shaw maintained he had poor mobility and persisted in his claims for a substantial care package, an expensive Land Rover or Mercedes to transport his mobility scooter, bungalow accommodation in an affluent area, and business class travel for trips abroad.

The court found Mr Shaw had been dishonest to such an extent it had polluted his entire case, even the valid parts of it. Consequently, his claim was dismissed, and he was ordered to pay the costs incurred by Hastings Direct, while at the same time refunding the £150,000 he had received at the outset. Complex arguments surrounded the costs orders which were made by the court.

At the time of judgment this is the largest case to date to be dismissed for dishonesty, both in terms of the £6.6m sought, and the court’s valuation of the genuine claim at £1.2m.