Admiral has used telematics data to successfully defend
fraudulent claims worth over £10,000.
In a statement the insurer said its policyholder had collided the
rear of a private ambulance at low speed. Private Ambulance
Services Limited submitted a claim for repairs, hire costs and
recovery charges amounting to almost £8,000.
The ambulance driver, Chantelle Boland, also claimed for personal
injury. She alleged she her ability to work had been impacted by
muscular back pain over a period of five months.
However, the policyholder’s car contained a telematics box. It
showed that at the time of impact he was travelling at just
1.25mph. The insurer said repairs were estimated at just £350. In
addition, the policyholder took photos to detail the minimal
Admiral said ‘forensic expert engineering evidence’ proved the
impact could not possibly have caused the damage suggested.
Private Ambulance Service ceased their claim for repair and hire
costs. The insurer said that Miss Boland’s claim proceeded to trial.
In a statement the insurer said: “It became clear that she had only
sought medical attention two weeks after the incident, and after
she had instructed solicitors to pursue her claim for injury. There
was also no evidence that it had impacted on her ability to work
fully despite the fact that the second claimant was her employer.”
The judge dismissed Miss Boland’s claim. The insurer described it
as a seminal moment for claims, and said it would send a “clear
message” to anyone thinking of claiming falsely.
“We are delighted with the outcome of this case,” said Lorna
Connelly, Admiral’s head of claims. “The presence of telematics
data and the court’s acceptance of such data proves to be a
seminal moment for Admiral in being able to add a greater
weight and verve to our defence of innocent policyholders.”
Private Ambulance Services is based in Basildon, Essex. The latest
report from the Quality Care Commission, the health and social
care regulator, from August last year described having found
“many safety concerns regarding infection control and hygiene;
equipment and medicines management.”
The report went on: “There were also poor governance and
leadership arrangements owing to a lack of registered manager;
fit and proper persons checks not being carried out… and a poor
culture among some operations managers.”
The report added that these issues had been subsequently
This is not the first occassion that telematics have vindicated an
accused policyholder and prevented fraudulent claims. In July of
2016, a judge ruled in favour of a policyholder blamed for a late
night collision with another vehicle. The third party had claimed
that the InsuretheBox customer had been driving with a burst
tyre and came towards them at high speed, but telematics –
along with the defendant’s witness statement – demonstrated
“overwhelming evidence” that the crash had occurred earlier in
the day and the other driver was at fault.
In a separate incident last year, a motorist escaped a driving
conviction and £100 fine when his telematics box proved he had
been in an entirely different city on the day that a cloned car was
caught speeding in Lincoln.
As of June 2016, Insurethebox had uncovered fraudulent cases
worth £500,000 and used the data collected from the black
boxes to disprove 31 fraudulent claims involving seven accidents
over five months.