Is this fraud ?

[duckwhistle]

Person has expensive bit of kit stolen, insurance pays out full value, vital part of kit was not stolen, then later sold for a fair wad by the insured. Should the wad have been rendered to the insurers?

[TVRnutcase]

Did the Insured make the claim KNOWING the kit was not stolen - if so - then yes - Fraud using a Document.

IF the gear was stolen and recovered - then the gear belongs to the insurance company.

[CanAm]

Yes

[J4CKO]

Insurance is to recompense you when something happens and you lose out, if you gain in this manner, then yes, I would say it is fraud.

[Bigends]

If hes made a false representation (lied) to make a gain for themselves or cause a loss for another then its fraud

[elanfan]

If insurers were aware the vital bit wasn't stolen they should have asked for it as a part of the settlement as has been said it belongs to them. There'd be many instances where the cost of the insurer recovering, storing and eventually selling on that piece just wouldn't be worth their time and effort. Best course would have been to ask insurer whether they could now dispose of the remainder of the item.

[oldbanger]

If it wasn't fraud, then it was a rather large oversight on the part of this person
Unless the person explained that only part of the item was stolen and the insurer decided to pay out in full anyway.


You could always ask the IFB for their opinion
https://www.insurancefraudbureau.org/cheatline/

[duckwhistle]

Thanks guys, I got some abuse for pointing out that the insurers should have at least been informed. This was on a non motor forum where the perp openly boasted on his nice little earner. As a result of my comments the mods decided to ban me. I have most of the details including the insurer. Where to next, forget it, or start a fire?

[duckwhistle]

Elanfan, that was almost word for word what I wrote!!.

[Walt1387]

Burn baby burn!! Banning you from the forum for pointing out the posters criminality justifies you giving the insurance company the whole story, and pointing out where you saw it.

[Mill Wheel]

duckwhistle said:

Thanks guys, I got some abuse for pointing out that the insurers should have at least been informed. This was on a non motor forum where the perp openly boasted on his nice little earner. As a result of my comments the mods decided to ban me. I have most of the details including the insurer. Where to next, forget it, or start a fire?

Your insurance costs include an amount to cover the cost of this sort of fraud... it's up to you, but your insurance won't go down if you dob this fraudster in!

[KevinCamaroSS]

Mill Wheel said:

Your insurance costs include an amount to cover the cost of this sort of fraud... it's up to you, but your insurance won't go down if you dob this fraudster in!

Maybe not individually, but, if all fraudulent claims were stopped the overall cost for everybody would go down.

[Grunt Futtock]

duckwhistle said:

Thanks guys, I got some abuse for pointing out that the insurers should have at least been informed. This was on a non motor forum where the perp openly boasted on his nice little earner. As a result of my comments the mods decided to ban me. I have most of the details including the insurer. Where to next, forget it, or start a fire?

Go on then, what kit was it and what was the missing part that was sold on?

[esxste]

So from what I gather it's a little like this:

Bob insures his car.

Bob takes engine out of car.

Car is stolen (somehow).

Bob claims for stolen car and insurance company pays out full value of car. Bob then sells engine; it still being a valuable item, even if useless to Bob without the car.


Is it fraud? I think so if the insurance company paid out full value of the car, instead of value of car minus engine.

[Terminator X]

duckwhistle said:

Thanks guys, I got some abuse for pointing out that the insurers should have at least been informed. This was on a non motor forum where the perp openly boasted on his nice little earner. As a result of my comments the mods decided to ban me. I have most of the details including the insurer. Where to next, forget it, or start a fire?

Really? Why get involved if the person is an internet stranger?

TX.

[duckwhistle]

esxste has it about right value wise, TX is right too. Best let sleeping dogs lie. However an old compliance and enforcement dog of my acquaintance has opened an eye and may just have a sniff around for old time's sake. Folk this blatant often have a bit of history.

[Tom_C76]

Mill Wheel said:

Your insurance costs include an amount to cover the cost of this sort of fraud... it's up to you, but your insurance won't go down if you dob this fraudster in!

Your taxes include an amount to cover benefit fraud too. I take it you'd consider it none of your business if someone was boasting about claiming when they had no right?

[AyBee]

Tom_C76 said:

Mill Wheel said:

Your insurance costs include an amount to cover the cost of this sort of fraud... it's up to you, but your insurance won't go down if you dob this fraudster in!

Your taxes include an amount to cover benefit fraud too. I take it you'd consider it none of your business if someone was boasting about claiming when they had no right?

Quite!

[Zetec-S]

If you get a good deal on a 2nd hand car, and shortly afterwards it's stolen or written off. Insurance payout is more than you originally paid, is that fraud?

[economicpygmy]

Zetec-S said:

If you get a good deal on a 2nd hand car, and shortly afterwards it's stolen or written off. Insurance payout is more than you originally paid, is that fraud?

No becuase the amount will be the market value i.e. what it costs to put you back in the position becuase the loss.