Wedding crashers: a DWF win in the fight against false and inflated claims - 18 April 2007

Singh and others v Hollins Travel - Four family members, who sued for damages for personal injuries after a collision in a coach taking them to a wedding reception, have withdrawn their claims on the second day of the five day trial. His Honour Judge Richard Holman awarded the Defendant's costs and ordered an interim payment of £25,000 after a wedding video of the reception failed to support their allegations. At the original trial he ordered that other Claimants also pay the Defendant's costs and ordered an interim payment of £85,000.00.

Mahangi Kaur, her daughter Nargis, mother-in-law Balwinder Kaur and nephew Dildar all claimed to have suffered a catalogue of soft tissue injuries including whiplash, shoulder and back strains after the coach bumped into a wall at the Chipping Village Hall in Preston where the wedding reception was held. The four were among 27 people who had originally brought Court proceedings for damages following two separate accidents on the wedding day in July 2004. In total, 73 Claimants had intimated claims for injury following the two accidents.

Of the 26 claims which went to Court, 20 were dismissed at trial in September 2006 when a wedding video disclosed by the Claimants themselves during the trial showed that a large number of them were not even on the first accident coach when the accident took place. The video also showed a large number of them to be enthusiastically dancing at the wedding reception.

Notwithstanding the Court's earlier dismissal of the majority of the claims the four remaining Claimants continued to pursue their claims to trial at Manchester County Court. However, the Defendant continued to pursue its argument that the low impact collision could not have caused such injuries and pointed to a host of irregularities in their evidence.

The adult Claimants told their medical experts that they attended for hospital treatment immediately after the accident and did not attend the wedding reception. However, the video showed Mrs Balwinder Kaur eating and drinking at the wedding reception. The only mention of the accident in her G.P. records came on the 31st August 2004 almost 2 months later although she had visited her G.P. 3 times prior to that date.

The Court was told that Mahangi Kaur had tried to claim compensation for two of her children Guheera, aged 11 and Suraj, 13, by instructing a different firm of solicitors to those who represented her in the litigation. When asked which members of her family were on the accident coach, she did not mention Guheera and Suraj. When she was confronted with correspondence and medical evidence showing that claims had been made by her on behalf of the two children she chose not to answer a direct question as to whether those claims were fraudulent for fear of incriminating herself against prosecution. She however accepted that the solicitors had been instructed by her.

The papers from the original hearing have already been referred to the Department of Public Prosecution and the file is currently with the Economic Crime Unit at Greater Manchester Police.

• Ian Birkinshaw of DWF defended all the claims on behalf of Hollins Travel.
• What was breathtaking about this case was the spectacular deceit of the Claimants. All of them alleged that they were injured. Some even perjured themselves and included children in their deception motivated by their greed/attempts to obtain compensation from the Defendant coach company.
• The wedding video was a damning piece of evidence which clearly gave the game away.
• The Claimants will now have to pay costs of substantial amounts.
• This case and the potential criminal action that may follow should send out a strong message to those who consider pursuing false or inflated claims

For further information email Ian Birkinshaw or telephone 01772 554269