A Collection is a selection of features, articles, comments and opinions on any given theme or topic. It allows you to stay up‑to‑date with what interests you most.
Login here to access your saved articles and followed authors.
We have sent you an email so you can reset your password.
Sorry, we had a problem.
Tags related to this article
Published 5 October 2022
We acted for Axa in a personal injury claim in which substantial benefits had been accrued as a result, said the claimant and the DWP, of the injuries the claimant allegedly sustained in a road accident which occurred in 2017. The claimant was in receipt of Universal Credit and Personal Independence Payments (PIP).
We were concerned from the outset about whether the claimant had suffered any accident-related injuries in the first place and the extent of any true accident related injury. Our concerns were supported by the expert medical evidence and intelligence we obtained.
It became clear that the claimant had failed to declare a significant pre accident physical and psychological history. We put Part 35 questions to the claimant’s medical experts after having provided them with the claimant’s full medical records. When presented with these, the claimant’s orthopaedic expert stated that the history given by the claimant was “not a reliable account”. In addition, her injuries were inconsistent with the entries in the records and the nature of the accident.
We further obtained and disclosed the claimant’s own extensive social media postings over multiple platforms which came to more than 40 hours of footage. This had not been disclosed by the claimant and included evidence that, post-accident, she had promoted her various businesses and continued to work. There was no evidence of any of the restrictions from which the claimant had told the medical experts and the DWP she was suffering.
We requested a review of the CRU certificate on the basis that the benefits awarded to the claimant were not paid as a result of accident related injury and that there was serious concern over the credibility of the claimant having regard to the social medial evidence.
Upon carrying out the review, the CRU revoked the entire certificate and reduced recoverable benefits from £38,189.27 to nil.
This case is a reminder of the power of the CRU review and appeals system. Certificates of Recoverable Benefits should be challenged in appropriate circumstances. There are three ways of doing this:
1) A Certificate of Recoverable Benefits (the CRB) can be reviewed at any time during a case by any of the parties involved. The case does not have to be settled or the recoverable benefits paid to the CRU before a review can take place. The grounds for a review are:
2) The amount of recoverable benefits set out in the CRB can also be the subject of a Mandatory Reconsideration which is a final chance for the CRU to re-consider the CRB before the formal appeal stage. The CRU will consider all the evidence and decide if the CRB should be:
3) The final step, the appeal, can be taken after the Mandatory reconsideration stage should you still consider the CRB is wrong. An appeal cannot be lodged until the claim has been settled and the amount of recoverable benefits has been paid to the CRU. The compensator or the injured person can make an appeal on the following grounds:
The CRU will respond with a written decision.
Our Complex Injury Team deals with cases like this on a regular basis. For more information or advice, please contact one of our experts.
+44 (0) 121 698 5382
Malory Zafra Sierra
Stefan Desbordes, Chris Baranowski
Campbell Dye, Macarena Cambara
Toby Vallance, Annabel Walker
Duncan Strachan, Elliot Black, Emma Lidström
Miguel Angel de la Fuente, Eduardo Sánchez Laurent
Mathew Rutter, Laura Berry
Sean McGahan, Niall McCullough
Sarah Crowther, Charlotte Shakespeare
Cerys Lloyd, Stephanie Welsher, David Fardy
Héctor Rojas Rosario