A customer of Ageas Insurance faced legal repercussions following a fraudulent claim involving a reported home burglary, where items valued at £7,500, alongside cash, were allegedly stolen.
The claim, which also reported damage to appliances and a computer, took a twist when it was discovered that one of the items listed as stolen, an Aspinal of London holdall, had been sold on a popular auction site prior to the date of the reported burglary.
South Wales Police's investigation into the burglary uncovered discrepancies in the customer's account, revealing that some of the items claimed as stolen were actually found within the claimant's residence.
Furthermore, evidence was found indicating that certain items, including a washing machine, had been sold by the claimant before the burglary was reported. The investigation also uncovered a fraudulent attempt to claim government financial assistance for the supposedly stolen appliances.
The claimant subsequently admitted to charges of conspiracy to defraud Ageas Insurance, perverting the course of justice by making a false burglary claim, and fraud by false representation in relation to the duplicate claim for white goods.
The court has sentenced the customer to 18 months in prison, suspended for 21 months, alongside 15 days of rehabilitation activity. Additionally, the customer was also placed under a six-month curfew.
In the aftermath of the trial, Katie Davies, the head of underwriting services and fraud at Ageas UK, remarked on the broader implications of insurance fraud.
“Insurance fraud may seem like a victimless crime but fictitious claims like this one push up the cost of insurance for all our honest customers,” Davies said. “Although he has accepted responsibility for his attempted fraud, his actions have had serious consequences for him and has left him with a criminal record.”
Davies reassured policyholders of Ageas's commitment to combating fraud, stating the company's dedication to detecting, disrupting, and prosecuting fraudulent activities to protect its genuine customers.
Elsewhere in the legal landscape, HF and insurer Hastings Direct have also recently triumphed in a case involving a fraudulent non-tariff injury claim that mandated the claimant’s legal representative to either justify their non-payment of costs or to contribute towards them.
What are your thoughts on this story? Please feel free to share your comments below.
