'Crash for cash' scam man jailed

[Moose423956]

Linky

What I don't understand is, how did he find so many crap drivers to go into the back of him? It's always the fault of the person who hits the back of the other car. Unless he reversed into them I suppose.

[TimberWolf]

Someone or other on the radio this evening was saying this kind of fraud is rife, adding something like £44 to every car insurance policy.

[AtW]

Why it took so long to correlate single man involved in 93 crashes over just 3 years?

select ClaimantID,count(*) as ClaimsCount
into #Suspects
from Claims
group by ClaimantID
having count(*)>3

HTH

[Alf W]

People were paying him to cause an accident in their car after which he would give their name and then they would claim for whiplash etc.

The big mistake he made was to mostly use the same roundabout and nearby office workers got suspicious when they saw the same man repeatedly get rammed up the arse in a number of different cars.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Linky

What I don't understand is, how did he find so many crap drivers to go into the back of him? It's always the fault of the person who hits the back of the other car. Unless he reversed into them I suppose.

Apparently he disconnected the brake lights, and chose his victims carefully to ensure they were less likely to suspect anything of that type.

[VectraMan]

People were paying him to cause an accident in their car after which he would give their name and then they would claim for whiplash etc.

So although he was an accessory, he wasn't the one committing insurance fraud.

And if you wanted to rip off your insurance company, why pay someone to crash your car for you? I think I could manage it by myself. Plan B?

[threaded]

Linky

What I don't understand is, how did he find so many crap drivers to go into the back of him? It's always the fault of the person who hits the back of the other car. Unless he reversed into them I suppose.

When you drive a proper car like what I do, you get this so often, avoiding such collisions becomes second nature. One of my plan Bs does a roaring trade in constantly videoing cameras built into cars, so that people who like nice cars can protect their NCB. If you can show they slammed on the brakes for no good reason, then it is not your fault. But you have to argue it. Originally my camera set up was designed for Central TV for a linked Police show on car crime, about 20 years ago, but so many people wrote in wanting the same set up... and now, what with massive SD cards, it's quite a dreamy, tiny, low powered set up, you don't need to worry about flattening the car battery. Anyways, you're not supposed to advertise on here and I digress.

This is the MO: Chummy'd drive onto a roundabout, sucker would follow him. Then he'd slam on the brakes, sucker would rear end. Chummy then gives the details of the guy who's paid him to stage the accident.

So you see, it is not crap drivers, victim could've been anyone, just wrong time, wrong place.

How he got caught: he'd do it at the same time of day, which just so happened to be on the tea/fag break of a local company that looked onto the roundabout. The peeps in the office were running a book on what colour car he'd have today. Someone, who was feeling left out of the fun, reported it to TPTB, and the rest is history.

[centurian]

If you can show they slammed on the brakes for no good reason, then it is not your fault. But you have to argue it.

I thought that if you go into the back of someone, it is always your fault.

The argument being that either you were travelling too close, too fast, or not paying sufficient attention. The person in front has the right to brake suddenly and drivers should always allow for this.

Unless you can prove that the person braked to deliberately cause a crash, I don't think you have much of a chance.

[AtW]

I thought that if you go into the back of someone, it is always your fault.

It is always ASSUMED due to usual lack of better evidence.

[threaded]

I thought that if you go into the back of someone, it is always your fault.

The argument being that either you were travelling too close, too fast, or not paying sufficient attention. The person in front has the right to brake suddenly and drivers should always allow for this.

Unless you can prove that the person braked to deliberately cause a crash, I don't think you have much of a chance.

If they braked for a licensed animal, i.e. a dog, a cow, etc., then it is your fault if you rear end them. If they brake for a cat, or a squirrel, etc. then it is their fault.

If a horse is involved, oh boy, everyone's in trouble, even the person who laid the tarmac.

The English legal system is such fun.