PDA

View Full Version : Victim Victimized



Michael Harris
08-23-2003, 10:36 PM
A victim should be protected from the criminal and the criminal’s lawyer. This one bothers me. It is not in the US, but there are probably cases just like this here.

Private Eye Snoops on Drink-Drive Crash Victim Over Her Claim For Compensation.

A Devon woman badly hurt in a crash with a drink-driver has discovered that she has been spied on by a private eye working for the insurers due to pay her compensation.

Stella Harrison, 36, still walks with the aid of crutches almost two years after being cut from the wreckage of the horrific car smash.

The drink-driver responsible for the collision was jailed and his insurance company accepted liability.

However, in a bizarre development, Mrs Harrison was sent a file which had been compiled on her and her two daughters, Traci, 15, and Leah, 12, by a firm of private investigators.

It included a detailed map of her Colaton Raleigh home, a psychological report on her and details of her benefits.

The document was posted to her - apparently by a burglar - following a raid on the premises of investigation firm Kirk International.

Mrs Harrison said she and her family were frightened by the realisation that someone had been investigating her.

She said: "Not only was I horrified to discover there was a private investigator watching my house, but I have found out the file was stolen and I have no idea who has seen it. I worry that my daughters are at risk.

"Anyone could be trying to use the information in that file."

Mrs Harrison was left with broken wrists and a fractured collarbone following the accident caused by the drink-driver in October 2001. One of her legs was fractured in six places and has not knitted together again despite several operations at the Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital.

Leah suffered a broken leg.

The private investigator was hired after an Exeter-based solicitor acting for Mrs Harrison put in a compensation claim for more than £100,000.

Mrs Harrison's solicitor, Laurence Vick, of law firm Michelmores, accused the insurance firm of "secret snooping" in a desperate attempt to dig up dirt where none existed.

He said: "My only conclusion is that Fortis chose to instigate this unwarranted investigation because they were faced with a considerable claim. What they have done has gone against the spirit of openness and co-operation with which I have been making Stella's claim.

"She is a fine member of the community who, before the accident, had achieved an incredible amount for a working single mother in her position. I understand that occasionally insurance companies may investigate claims when there is reasonable grounds for suspicion that the claim is bogus or symptoms have been exaggerated. But that is absolutely not the case in this instance.

"Stella has received serious injury and trauma as a result of this accident, which has put her career on hold permanently and affected her whole family. I am shocked and astonished at the conduct of this insurance company."

The private eye's file revealed that Fortis Insurance had commissioned Hampshire company Kirk International to carry out a surveillance operation on Mrs Harrison to discover whether her health claims were genuine.

The file, which is now in Mrs Harrison's hands, showed that an undercover investigator, posing as a member of the public responding to a car advert, approached Mrs Harrison's home on May 14 while she was away on holiday. The man quizzed a builder who was working on Mrs Harrison's home, asking questions about her personal life and what car she drove.

This initial probe was designed as a forerunner to a two-day investigation in which Mrs Harrison's movements outside her home would be logged and video-taped by a Kirk employee.

However, the burglary at Kirk International on June 17, interrupted the investigation. The firm said 30 files were stolen.

Mrs Harrison received the file which had been compiled on her and her family through the post last week.

The accident victim, who as a result of her injuries had to give up a place on an Exeter University course and was no longer able to continue caring for her foster daughter, said she did not feel secure in her own home and would never again trust an insurance company.

She said: "In pursuing a totally legitimate compensation claim, I have find myself the subject of an invasive investigation.

"Had it not been for the leak of these documents, I understand I would have been the subject of full video surveillance."

She said: "I just want closure on the whole nightmare, so I can begin to work on moving forward and regaining my family life.

"Not only am I still coming to terms with my physical injuries, I feel I am on trial."

Tony Bradshaw, of Kirk International, said the company had tightened security since the break-in.

He defended his company's conduct during the investigation of Mrs Harrison.

He said: "Normal practice was observed at all times when conducting the investigation which was suspended when we realised the file was missing."

Mr Bradshaw said that at no time would Mrs Harrison or her children have been harmed or troubled by the inquiry.

He said he did not know what could have motivated anyone to steal Mrs Harrison's file from the company office and send it to her.

Hampshire police confirmed that 30 files were stolen from a private investigation firm.

Mrs Harrison has been asked to return her file to police so it can be tested for fingerprints in an attempt to identify the burglar.

Fortis Insurance refused to comment on the case.

South Devon magistrates sentenced Gordon Benzie to five months in jail at a hearing in February last year after he admitted to being three-and-a-half times the drink-drive limit when he collided with Mrs Harrison's car.

Benzie, formerly of Stoneyford, Colaton Raleigh, was on the wrong side of the road when his Renault Laguna smashed into Mrs Harrison's Ford Escort.

She had been driving home along the B3128 near East Budleigh with her three children after a Hallowe'en party.

Colleen L Hayes -
08-24-2003, 04:32 AM
Hi Michael,

Where do you find these. That doesn't surprise me a bit. From very personal experience I know how ruthless the insurance companies are.

Another good article, thank you.

Michael Harris
08-24-2003, 09:01 AM
Colleen,

I ran across this in a search I ran last night for interesting investigative stories.

It is a good thing that the PI firm got burgled. :rolleyes:

Mr Jose Bonavich Jr
08-24-2003, 12:29 PM
Micheal,

Great story but I'm a bit confused.

Due to the amount of fraudulent claims made to insurance companies I actually agree with the hiring of investigative firms to verify the accuracy of the claims.

Of course in this instance, the claiment was obviously injured extensively and deserved a monetary settlement but how would the insurance company know that without 3rd party observation. Doctors are always involved with insurance fraud cases so basing your judgement only on their observations could be extremely costly.

Of course the theft of the investigative files alerted the claiment to the investigation and obviously has caused her a great deal of additional stress. That is unfortunate.

As a "trainee" I may not be seeing the entire picture.

The insurance company doesn't want to pay more than absolutely necessary so they of course would want any dirt they could find but at the same time, it's sounds as if the investigative company wasn't going to discover anything that could be used to derail her case.

Anyway, I guess I don't consider the investigative company at fault for investigating the claiment but I do consider their lack of security a definate fault.

Michael Harris
08-24-2003, 03:01 PM
Originally posted by Leisl D Olson
... Great story but I'm a bit confused.
... Of course in this instance, the claiment was obviously injured extensively and deserved a monetary settlement but how would the insurance company know that without 3rd party observation. Doctors are always involved with insurance fraud cases so basing your judgement only on their observations could be extremely costly....
Leisl,

In this case there was no need to investigate. The insurance company already had committed to pay. The woman had to be cut from the vehicle. Why did the insurance company need to have detailed information on her minor children? Why did they need a psychological report on the woman for obvious physical injuries?

This was a clear case of abuse. That is all the article is about. You read way too much into the article. No one said that insurance companies did not need to check out people who claimed they were disabled.

Many people try to defraud insurance companies, and this insurance company tells the world that insurance companies have way too much money if they can prepare reports on people not involved with the claim.

There is still a market for our services, but this was excessive (and I hope criminal). :cool:

Mr Jose Bonavich Jr
08-24-2003, 03:18 PM
Michael,


You read way too much into the article.

Guilty as charged ;)

As a newbie, I'm sure that will be something I will have to overcome ;) but hopefully I'll get beyond that to be more objective.

Thanks for the clarification.

Michael Harris
08-24-2003, 03:46 PM
Leisl,

We all do it, but some of us have not been caught yet. :) :D :cool:

Actually, it did give the two of us a chance to examine the issue in more detail. Thanks! :cool:

Maurice Hopkins
11-24-2003, 09:51 PM
You are correct from reading this article it does lead you to the conclusion that it was wrong for the insurance company to investigate the subject. Although she was injuried at no fault of her own, they still have to make sure that she is not trying to take them to the bank. The insurance company does have the right to have any claim investigated, just for the reason you stated...most doctors are involved in insurance claim and alot of them are fraud cases.

The investigator was only doing his job, which the insurance company is paying his company for, so he has to follow what his job detail involves. If you work for a company, you will be asked to collect information on the whereabouts of the subject, the car they drive, tag number, daily habbits, how often are they away from home, what type of hobbies they may have, etc. . So do not allow this article to discourage you, it is part of the job. The reason this case went down the way it did is because according to hippa laws you cannot release information on a person without their knowledge or consent, since the files were stolen someone had gained access to her personal information without her consent or knowledge. The investgative company was at fault because they did not do everything in their power to protect vital information from being stolen. To me something smells fishy about this case, why would a person steal files first of all, then send them to the subject?

As I stated before, the accident was no fault of her own, but you will never know when someone is exaggerating their injury. Even though this particular subject has had multiple operations, the insurance companies can never be too sure.

May God bless S. Harrison and I hope that all is well with her, but we as PI's have a job to do also.

Tammy A Nelson
12-11-2003, 01:25 PM
I agree with maurice,
There are so many insurance 00000,and fraudulant cases filed these days an insurance company has to take all legal steps to insure the claim is for real. This is one of the main reasons why insurance rates are so high.Sadly :{ false claims are filed every day in this country and world wide.As far as how many ethics codes were broken in this case,I am not sure since I am still a newbie to all this.In my personal oppinion ..I feel that they had No Right to investigate her children.And the matter of why the file was stolen,and then given to the person they investigated Iam lost on that one.:confused: This was a good article,and a great topic to test all of our pi skills. thanks for sharing.

Karen Kiely
12-13-2003, 03:25 PM
I know of two people who live in Maine who have been investigated well after the court cases were settled.

One was a man who while driving a defective truck for his company, was hit by another truck. Both companies settled with him. The man was severely crippled and could only walk with braces and a walker. I knew him personally, and this injury was completely legitimate. For at least 5 years after the case was settled, he was watched constantly by investigators. (I saw them myself. Talk about incompetant investigators).

The other was a woman (friend) who while a stewardess with a major airline, was injured while on the job. The airline settled with her and she herself spotted investigators taking pictures of her 3 years after the settlement.

Michael this story is a wonderful learning tool and I agree with you. It should never have happened that she was being investigated after the settlement.

Karen kiely

Michael Harris
12-31-2003, 07:56 PM
Karen,

Much of the bad things that happen in life are not simply mistakes - they are the work of evil persons.

If this were not so serious, I would make a jome about how much PI work there is righting the wrongs. :(