GB - Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Thumber

Judgment

MR JUSTICE BEAN: On 25 April 2011, Mr Balraj Singh Thumber issued a claim in the Liverpool County Court alleging that on 21 January of that year he had been driving his car along Pleck Road Walsall when he was involved in a collision with a Mr Viktor Sivak. He alleged that he suffered whiplash injuries and a medical report in familiar form was annexed to the particulars of claim.

The particulars of special damage alleged that Mr Thumber’s Audi car had a pre-accident value of £6,474 and was a write-off. It included a claim for car hire in the astonishing figure of £20,131.20 to-date and ongoing at £229.50 per day. It will be observed that the £20,000 figure is more than three times the pre-accident value of Mr Thumber’s car and the claim had been issued barely three months from the alleged accident.

Mr Sivak, the defendant on the pleadings, took no part in the claim. His insurers, Liverpool Victoria, took the view that the claim was fraudulent. They applied to be joined to the claim as second defendants and served an amended defence alleging fraud; more of that later. On 27 September 2012, Mr Thumber signed a witness statement verifying the truth of his claim with a statement of truth. Of the vehicle which had driven into him he said: “I now know this vehicle to be a BMW 3 Series, registered number: W174 RCA, driven by Mr Victor Sivak.” By the time of the witness statement, the hire charges claimed had risen to the eye watering sum of £130,488; that is about 20 times the pre-accident value of the car.

The trial was listed for hearing and came on before Mr Recorder Campbell at the Walsall County Court on 1 May 2013. Counsel for Mr Thumber applied for an adjournment arguing that Mr Sivak, most unfortunately, had not attended the hearing, perhaps he had not had proper notice, and the trial ought to be adjourned. The Recorder quite rightly refused the application. Mr Thumber then discontinued his claim and was ordered to pay costs on an indemnity basis to the insurers. A clearer implicit admission that the claim was bogus would be hard to find. On 7 June 2013, Liverpool Victoria applied for leave to institute committal proceedings. On 25 September 2013, Stuart-Smith J granted permission on the papers. Before and after Stuart-Smith’s decision there were difficulties with service. The claimants obtained an order for substituted service. They allege Mr Thumber was evading service. Subsequently, a new order for substituted service had to be obtained an

Judgment

Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company Ltd v Thumber

Areas of Law