Casualty Expertise Overview
Click each title to learn more
A unique perspective on the Casualty sector
Nobody understands the casualty sector like we do. In an increasingly challenging market, where budgets are being squeezed, where value for money is a paramount concern, and where social inflation is driving claims ever higher, we know that our casualty clients need reliable advice they can act on to succeed and grow.
We provide a complete range of advisory services including advising on policy wording issues, product development, funding options and recoveries. We have dedicated corporate, commercial and regulatory insurance teams working across the globe who advise clients at every stage of their development, and work closely with our employment, real estate and tax colleagues, offering you the broadest range of legal services underpinned by genuine sector expertise.
As we continue to develop technological solutions to support our clients in identifying trends and forecasting potential risks, we are committed to continuing to provide comprehensive coverage and defence capabilities across every insurance and reinsurance line. For contentious claims, our leading dispute resolution practice covers litigation and all forms of alternative dispute resolution, as well as acting for insurers in contentious regulatory proceedings.
Our teams aren’t just legal experts; they are specialists. We understand every aspect of this sector, and combine this expertise with tailored client management services that work with you to identify potential risks and opportunities and navigate them successfully. And our preeminent UK coverage means we don’t just understand the complexities and challenges in the casualty industry – we are able to provide on-the-ground advice wherever you are.
Glasgow
Aberdeen
Edinburgh
Manchester
Birmingham
London
Guildford
Southampton
Bristol
Liverpool
Dublin
Belfast
Click on each city to find out more
Glasgow The support of a major law firm with local knowledge in Glasgow. With offices in all Scotland's major cities Clyde & Co offer the support and management of a substantial law firm with local knowledge. 4th Floor, 1 George Square Glasgow G2 1DY UK Tel: +44 141 353 2121
Aberdeen Providing market leading legal expertise to clients in Aberdeen. With offices in all Scotland's major cities Clyde & Co offer the support and management of a substantial law firm with local knowledge. Clyde & Co LLP The Capitol, Orega Suite 101, 431 Union Street Aberdeen AB11 6DA GB Tel: +44 (0)1224 624 924
Edinburgh The support of a major law firm with local knowledge in Edinburgh. Clyde & Co's Edinburgh office focuses mainly on the insurance sector. Our services include dispute resolution, professional liability, healthcare and employment. Clyde & Co LLP Albany House 58 Albany St Edinburgh EH1 3QR GB Tel: +44 (0) 131 557 1545
Manchester Employing more than 1,000 staff, Manchester is our second largest office globally and the largest presence of any law firm in Manchester. Situated in the heart of the business district, our state-of-the-art New Bailey office is a key part of our market-leading UK insurance practice. Our award-winning team has extensive experience in all areas of domestic and international work. 2 New Bailey Square, Stanley Street Salford M3 5GS UK Tel: +44 161 236 2002
Birmingham Market-leading knowledge across the insurance sector. Ideally situated in the vibrant and bustling business district, our Birmingham office plays a central role in Clyde & Co’s UK-wide network of offices, providing support to clients in a number of areas. 63 Temple Row Birmingham B2 5LS UK Tel: +44 121 643 8777
London London is our global headquarters and plays a central role in our network. For almost 90 years, we have provided a full legal offering to clients in London based on our knowledge across aviation, marine, trade & commodities, energy, infrastructure and insurance. We aim to be the most complete provider of legal services to businesses engaged in these core sectors. St Botolph Building 138 Houndsditch London EC3A 7AR GB Tel: +44 (0) 20 7876 5000
Guildford Local support in Guildford from a leading international firm. Clyde & Co's Guildford office has served clients since 1969, being the first office established after our London expansion. It offers high-quality international support as well as local advice for regional clients. Clyde & Co LLP 3 London Square, Cross Lanes Guildford, Surrey GU1 1UJ GB Tel: +44 (0) 20 7876 5000
Southampton The support of a major law firm with local knowledge in Southampton. Located at Charlotte Place, our Southampton office provides expert advice to the insurance sector on catastrophic injury, large loss, employers’ and public liability claims, clinical negligence, personal injury, property damage, recovery, and disease claims 2 Charlotte Place Southampton SO14 0TB UK Tel: +44 23 8023 6464
Bristol Market-leading knowledge across insurance, infrastructure and healthcare in Bristol. Clyde & Co opened its Bristol office in 2018 to support clients in the insurance and infrastructure sectors across the South West. We focus on contentious legal advice and provide on-the-ground support for professional and financial disputes. 2 The Distillery Avon Street Bristol BS2 OGR Tel: +44 (0) 117 313 5600
Liverpool The support of a major law firm with local knowledge in Liverpool. With a history dating back to the 1800s our Liverpool office offers all types of claims support made against public authorities, insurers and major insureds. Castle Chambers 43 Castle Street Liverpool L2 9SU UK Tel: +44 151 236 2002
Dublin Our Dublin office provides market-leading advice to a broad range of Irish, UK and international insurance, reinsurance, broker and commercial clients. We are a global law firm providing a complete legal service within its core sectors of insurance, transport, energy (onshore and offshore), infrastructure, aviation, trade and commodities. Clyde & Co (Ireland) LLP St Stephens Green House, Earlsfort Terrace Dublin DO2 PH42 IE Tel: +353 1 246 4900
Belfast The support of a major law firm with local knowledge in Belfast. Our Belfast office provides insurance services, including advice on cover, indemnity, and claims defence. We handle motor and property cases, as well as employers’ and public liability, RTA, credit hire, fraudulent claims, and professional indemnity. Clyde & Co (NI) LLP 24 Ormeau Avenue, Centre Point Belfast BT2 8HS UK Tel: +44 28 9032 7388
Supporting your business across the UK and Ireland Our UK and Ireland teams provide the comprehensive support you need and expect. With offices in key commercial hubs across the region, backed by a global network, we can provide advice on local, national and international, cross-border matters. Across our integrated regional network, we use our knowledge, experience and commercial acumen to steer clients through diverse challenges and opportunities.
Abuse & Neglect
Our Support
Catastrophic Injury
Claims Management
Costs
Occupational Disease
Employer's & Public Liability
Fraud
Motor
Navigation
Navigation Menu
SHE & Regulatory
Property
Clyde & Co Newton
Contents
A unique perspective on the Casualty Sector
Supporting your business across the UK and Ireland
Catastrophic Injury & Large Loss
Disease
Employers & Public Liability
Property Damage & Recovery
Click each tile to learn more
Complex claims against schools Acting for high profile independent schools when they each faced a series of criminal trials followed by civil claims. Each had complex historic insurance positions, and we worked with them and where relevant insurers to find ways to resolve the claims quickly and compassionately having regard to the impact of the abuse and the criminal trials on the claimants but also the ongoing impact on the schools, their current pupils and staff.
Case Studies
2.
We have a victim-focused approach to the management of these sensitive claims. We are mindful of not only the reputation of our client and the impact that these claims have on the people working in the organisations at the time the claims are brought, (many of whom are greatly distressed/upset by the allegations made), but the challenges faced by victims bringing claims of this nature.
1.
Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) At the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), we represented faith clients in the Religious Organisations investigation - clients were from many faiths from both orthodox and liberal Judaism through to the Salvation Army. In all situations we explained the requirement of engagement with IICSA, sought to understand the key areas of concern for the organisation and then ensured the provision of requested information and hearing attendance in an efficient and focused way.
We are recognised leaders in representing clients who are responding to the disclosure of abuse. The abuse may be sexual, physical, emotional or neglect and may be many years ago or in the recent past.
We have a hard-earned reputation for excellence and expertise in this area, together with a proven approach of dealing with matters with sensitivity, empathy and integrity. We work alongside clients to advise in connection with: Initial response to the disclosure Investigations and inquiries Compensation Market Engagement Safeguarding
Paula Jefferson Partner Abuse & Neglect
Lead Partner
Back
Expertise in Large Loss Claims We are specialists in large loss claims, and that specialist large loss knowledge is further broken down through our Subject Matter Groups, including indemnity, cross-border, clinical negligence, criminal defence, highways, animals, public authorities and fundamental dishonesty. Whether instructed on the day of the catastrophic event or at litigation, our aim is to provide a straightforward, pragmatic approach. We will develop a strategy with you to achieve the earliest outcome and lowest indemnity spend, from determining a liability position as quickly as possible to identifying if there are claims to defend.
Our catastrophic injury and large loss practice group (CLLPG) is the largest in the industry with more than 250 lead lawyers handling around 550 new large loss instructions each month.
Complex High-Value Case A complex, high-value case settled within 20 months of the accident at JSM for £12.5m. Both parties focused on early resolution, with the defendant obtaining only key expert evidence, keeping costs contained and settlement realistic. The claimant, a successful bank charity executive and accomplished athlete, was one of only two people globally to benefit from a ReWalk exoskeleton. While typically contested, his case justified its inclusion in the settlement, securing recovery for the device.
Successful Resolution of Severe Injury Claim A claimant suffered an above-knee amputation and a severe crush injury after being pinned against a wall by a car at a Jaguar dealership. We collaborated with her firm to support rehabilitation and home adaptations. The case settled at JSM for £5.3m gross, with costs agreed at £150,000, avoiding a potential £10m+ claim. We also represented the insured in the regulatory investigation, securing an outcome with no charges or fines despite the severity of the incident.
We handle the full range of liability cases, and claims that encompass all types of injury. Our lawyers are trained and supervised to make the best use of rehabilitation options, case managers, shared experts and other strategies designed to control the cost and life cycle of a claim. For most catastrophic injury claims we are instructed from "day one" to work with the client in driving the claim forward collaboratively with the claimant and the claimant legal team.
Mike Dobson Partner CILL
Click on each icon to learn more
Stay up to date with Clyde & Co's Casualty Digest Introducing Casualty Digest, our quarterly roundup newsletter that covers key topics shaping various sectors, from legal updates to emerging trends and challenges. With expert analysis and the latest developments, this update is designed to keep you informed and up-to-date. Click here to subscribe and ensure you never miss an issue!
Discover the latest blogs and insights from across our specialised Casualty team.
The latest webinars and podcasts from our expert Clyde & Co teams.
Featured expert reports and timely coverage of the latest legal updates.
Learn about our upcoming events and explore those we have recently hosted.
Client quote - Legal 500
Client Focused Approach Our lawyer-led and client-focused approach provides you with immediate and consistent interactions your firm contact, and engagement of your preferred claims handling firm in the background as required, resulting in: A market leading rate of claims denials, as high as 4% for many of our corporate clients. Reducing average claims costs for clients by 19% compared to their previous handlers when appointing Clyde & Co. Minimising litigation, achieving a rate below 10% on average across all lines. Achieving savings of more than £10 million per annum for our clients, against claims made. Through our end-to-end, lawyer-led solution, we deliver an innovative and cost-effective pre-litigation and litigation service. We provide you with one team to handle all your claims, with a single point of contact within the firm.
Handling 1000s of claims a year in UK and Ireland, we understand the importance of having a lawyer involved in the claims from the outset.
The lawyers at Clyde & Co put an enormous amount of effort into the work that they do but never seem to lose focus on the main issue; getting the best result for the client.
Comprehensive, Lawyer-Led Claims Management & Support This team is supported by a consolidated management information portal, and an integrated case management system with secure remote access to key case information. We have a proven track record of end-to-end pre-litigation and litigation claims services for clients maximising defensibility and costs with over £200m of claims managed under the lawyer-led solution per annum.
David Caswell Partner Claims Mangement
We cover the breadth of disputes, from arguments on portal dropouts and FRCs to multi-million-pound costs claims, including a niche specialism with significant successes in securing non-party orders against claimant's solicitors. We work with our commercial colleagues to secure security for costs.
National Expertise and Local Knowledge Our costs lawyers are based nationally (in each jurisdiction) and, as such, we have the geographical reach to attend in-person hearings wherever they are listed, and provide you with the local market and court knowledge. The majority of cost hearings are undertaken in-house and, including cost and case management conferences, the team attends several hundred hearings a year. We have experiences with cases at appellate level including recent success in the Court of Appeal. Experienced Advocacy & Strategic Collaboration We also manage with costs recoveries, preparing bills of costs often for sums in excess of £1m, with drafting of replies and advocacy at assessment. Where we use external counsel in certain areas of strategic litigation, we have the knowledge of who is best in class and who can provide you with best value as we have worked very closely with them for many years in close collaboration. Examples include 4 New Square and Kings Chambers, who are both generally recognised as the leading sets of costs counsel.
A group litigation order was brought on behalf of hundreds of former workers at various sites who allege exposure to harmful emissions leading to conditions such as bladder cancer, skin cancer, COPD, and chronic bronchitis. Our team acted for the defendant in this matter. In March 2022, the High Court agreed on a scheme for the disposal of the litigation. The scheme aims to swiftly and amicably resolve qualifying claims, providing significant cost savings to the defendant. Our team was pivotal in drafting and agreeing on the scheme, as well as vetting and processing qualifying claims within the scheme. Ongoing efforts include assessing the claimant's common and individual costs. In 2023, we successfully settled the claimant's common costs for a high seven-figure sum, resulting in savings of over £5 million.
Case Study
Paul Wainwright Partner Costs
Successful Resolution of Group Litigation for Former Workers
Click to read more
Take a look at our recent Case Studies
We successfully defended a university, formerly an RSA insured, in a live mesothelioma trial, achieving full cost recovery. This marked the peak of a strategic defence for the university, which faced a surge of EL and PL asbestos claims following a press release from a leading claimant firm in Scotland actively seeking claimants and witnesses. Not a single claim was paid, and costs were recovered in all litigated cases.
Successful Mesothelioma Trial Defense
Occupational Disease & Legacy Claims
Legacy In the UK legacy market, we have been involved in many significant legal developments in relation to asbestos-related disease. We have also advised in relation to occupational cancers and other complex or novel diseases, as well as providing litigation and claims outsourcing solutions for large volumes of NIHL and HAVS claims. We also operate an Insurance Tracing Service to mitigate the impact of missing historic EL cover, and offer technology-driven liability tools to assist in the assessment of NIHL and Mesothelioma claims. Our disease lawyers work with insurers and other clients to provide thought
We act for 13 of the top 15 UK insurers, SME's, brokers, public sector and corporate clients.
Primary In the primary market we advise on short tail claims relating to occupational stress, asthma, dermatitis, musculo-skeletal problems, carbon monoxide poisoning and legionella infection, including managing the commercial, reputational and floodgates risks which frequently accompany such claims. We have increasingly been handling a new wave of respiratory claims relating to housing disrepair, and assessing similar risks arising from the current increase in cavity wall insulation claims.
Legacy Claims
leadership, KYO-driven outcomes and develop strategic approaches and solutions. We maintain an active risk radar to identify emerging risks and develop responses our clients can act on. And our suite of market-leading technical handling guides is viewed by our clients as essential material.
Primary Claims
Proving causation, especially in "multi-agent" and "low exposure" claims The key issue in two recent cases was whether the “Fairchild exception” could be extended to new situations. In Kerr v Two Scottish Local Authorities, Mrs. Kerr’s death from abdominal mesothelioma was linked to her occupational exposure to asbestos. However, the court found that the “Fairchild exception,” which applies when a single cause of disease is unclear, did not apply here. The case involved multiple potential causes, including the rarity of abdominal mesothelioma linked to chrysotile asbestos. Even if the exception were extended, the court found that the risk from Mrs. Kerr’s exposure was so minimal that it was not material. Therefore, the claim was dismissed. In Edwards v 2 Sisters Food Group, claimants alleged that inadequate workplace safety led to their contracting COVID-19. The court ruled that the “Fairchild exception” could not be extended to this case, as COVID-19 is a virus the public at large is exposed to, and employers can’t control it in the same way they can control exposure to asbestos. The claimants faced an impossible task in proving a direct causal link, and the court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant. Both cases highlight that while the Fairchild exception might evolve, the courts are cautious about expanding it to cover situations with multiple potential causes or public health risks like COVID-19.
Successful defence in work related stress claim Our team aided Bentley Motors in successfully defending a workplace stress claim brought by former engineer Gabor Meggyes, who alleged that a 2018 restructure led to an excessive workload and mental health issues. He relied on several emails as evidence that Bentley was aware of his deteriorating health. However, the court found that early complaints focused on workload, not health, and did not make psychiatric injury foreseeable. Only in March 2020 did he clearly link his health to work, at which point Bentley responded appropriately with GP referral, occupational health support, and a stress risk assessment. The court dismissed the claim, finding no breach of duty. It reaffirmed that under Hatton v Sutherland, liability arises only when harm is foreseeable and an employer fails to act. The Claimant’s medical evidence was seen as overly reliant on his account, while Bentley’s witnesses and expert were found credible. Insurers had the confidence to run this claim despite the documented emails relied upon by the Claimant. The claim was defeated based on sensible and credible witness evidence from the Claimant’s line managers as to their interpretation of these emails and what they perceived the Claimant’s reported concerns to be.
David Tait Partner Disease
Our team is able to navigate the complex and nuanced technical and policy coverage issues arising from the frequently overlapping jurisdiction of the civil courts and Employment Tribunal.
Stay updated with Clyde & Co's latest blogs! Welcome to Clyde & Co's Expert-Led Blog Hub. Stay up-to-date with insightful commentary on key issues and articles addressing emerging challenges. Receive valuable updates from our team, delivered straight to your inbox. Select your preferences below to get updates daily, weekly, or monthly! Click here to subscribe and ensure you never miss an issue!
Explore our online hub of content covering case updates, legislative changes and much more!
Explore content covering eleven key subject areas including: Abuse & Neglect, Catastrophic Injury and Insurance.
Subscribe for daily, weekly or monthly updates.
Gain direct access to timely content created by our expert teams.
We act for the broadest range of clients in this market, including global, UK, and specialist insurers, Lloyd's and London Market underwriters, brokers, FTSE-100, FTSE-250, and multinational corporations and many public sector organisations including local authorities and blue light. Our specialised expertise Our expertise across injury types is further enhanced with dedicated subject matter groups in areas critical to the development and understanding of large loss claims; brain injury, spinal injury, amputation, chronic pain as well as issues relevant to claims and the wider market; care provision, deputyship, and actuarial influence. Our cross-border capability and long-standing experience in these most significant claims have allowed us to compile various databases addressing, for example, life expectancy, vulnerable claimants and wider injury modelling. Expert Defence We are very alive to propensity for fraud in PL claims and adept at analysing the veracity of claimants and defending such claims to trial, as well as beyond into criminal prosecutions. We have an invaluable resource in our national intelligence team to whom any case can be referred, and the full ambit of searches can be made against any individual and organisation. As a result, many claims are successfully defended where the claimant's credibility is in doubt.
With over 300 experienced EL/PL lawyers handling over 15,000 claims per annum, we are the leading claims litigation firm in the UK.
example, life expectancy, vulnerable claimants and wider injury modelling. Expert Defence We are very alive to propensity for fraud in PL claims and adept at analysing the veracity of claimants and defending such claims to trial, as well as beyond into criminal prosecutions. We have an invaluable resource in our national intelligence team to whom any case can be referred, and the full ambit of searches can be made against any individual and organisation. As a result, many claims are successfully defended where the claimant's credibility is in doubt.
Successful Defence Against Back Injury Claim We defended a claim from a Skills Practitioner at a College who alleged back injury from moving cement wheelbarrows. He claimed the College failed to provide manual handling training, risk assessments, and suitable equipment. Our investigation revealed the claimant had 28 years of experience as a self-employed bricklayer, was responsible for risk assessments, had received manual handling training, and regularly lifted wheelbarrows. We denied liability, arguing he was fully trained and an expert in his field. Following a robust defence and exchange of evidence, the claimant discontinued his claim.
Successfully Defending a Claim Involving Injury on Church Grounds We defended a claim where a member of the public fractured his jaw after misjudging a chain in a churchyard. Our defence argued that the chain was a clear warning, and no similar incidents had occurred. The church was not required to provide access through the car park, as there were alternative routes. The court ruled that the chain was obvious and posed no hazard. The claim was dismissed, and the claimant was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs. This case highlights our expertise in successfully defending against unjustified injury claims.
3.
Successful Defence Against Electric Shock Injury Claim We defended a claim from a cleaner at a well-known school who alleged an electric shock from a vacuum cleaner caused her to fall and injure her lower back. Liability was denied after post-accident inspection found no fault with the vacuum. The claimant's medical records raised doubts over causation, which were confirmed by her expert during cross-examination. Despite a low settlement offer, we rejected it based on the strong liability evidence and proceeded to trial. At the hearing, the claimant’s inconsistent testimony and admission of only receiving a static shock led to the claim being dismissed.
David Caswell Partner EL/PL
Successful Resolution of Operation Maui Claim This was an Operation Maui claim suspected of being staged was pursued due to dishonest representations about the Claimant's accident history, income, vehicle insurance, and repairs. Two trials were adjourned, and both pre-litigation claims were statute-barred. After hearing the evidence, the judge advised the Claimant on the consequences of dishonesty, leading to a discontinuance in exchange for £3,000 in costs. This resulted in savings of £46,566.
Acting in a vehicle insurance case A well-known vehicle insurer referred a claim that appeared grossly exaggerated, particularly regarding the claimant's loss of earnings and future loss. Surveillance revealed the claimant working as a delivery driver for his father-in-law’s butcher shop, contradicting his claims. Medical evidence from psychological and pain management experts supported the claimant’s CRPS injury claim, but both orthopaedic experts agreed the ongoing symptoms were likely non-organic. Initially, we disclosed 50% of the surveillance footage with Part 18 questions at witness exchange. After the claimant and his father-in-law denied the truth of his employment, we revealed earlier surveillance showing their false statements.
We have links with the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the Serious Fraud Office, The Metropolitan & City of London Fraud Squads and police forces throughout the country. In addition we played an active role in advising the government during the Insurance Fraud Taskforce investigations resulting in the subsequent IFT Recommendations to tackle Insurance Fraud at the highest level. We work with a number of the UK's leading insurers, investigating suspicious claims and helping to develop fraud policies that meet their business objectives. Our expertise covers a broad range of insurance fraud, including animal, casualty, motor and fleet, travel, household and property, and commercial. A tailored approach From identification and investigation, through to civil and criminal prosecution, our fraud risk management service provides a tailored approach to managing fraud exposure, helping to protect brand, maintain policyholder relationships and minimise costs. We hold extensive cross-border data on fraud and our Fraud Sentry intelligence system screens claims to identify instances of fraud early in the process. We believe we are unique in the fraud litigation arena due to our comprehensive breadth and depth of expertise across all product lines covering the UK and Ireland.
Throughout the UK, our fraud expertise is called on at the highest level. We work closely with HM Revenue & Customs, government departments, the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED), we are affiliate members of the Insurance Fraud Bureau and members of the Association of British Insurers as well as sitting on a number of Fraud Special Interest Groups within the insurance industry to include FOIL and IFIG Insurance Fraud Investigators Group.
At Clyde & Co, we don't just defend fraudulent claims. We help to eradicate them. Our specialist fraud team receives more than 5,000 fraud instructions every year, including policyholder fraud, bogus claims, exaggerated injury, staged accidents and complex large-scale fraud cases.
Sarah Hill Partner Fraud
Manchester Located in the heart of Manchester's business district, our New Bailey offices serve as a central hub for clients, stakeholders, and industry professionals. With dynamic communal spaces, our teams regularly host a range of events covering various topics, including webinars, seminars, roundtables, training sessions, and conferences. Explore our recent events, including: Unravelling the Hidden Truths of Spinal Cord Injury & Pain Upper Limb Study Afternoon in partnership with Unite Professionals Examining Tinnitus & Psychoatric Claims from a Fraud Perspective
London Our headquarters, located in the heart of London, is where we regularly host a diverse range of events, bringing together industry professionals, clients, and stakeholders for discussions, knowledge sharing, and networking. Whether it's a seminar, roundtable, or conference, our London base fosters collaboration and thought leadership across various sectors. Explore our recent events, including: Clyde & Co Legacy Claims Conference Amputation Issues & Outcomes in partnership with Unite Professionals
Our Events Hub To enhance the service we offer our clients, we host and participate in events that keep us at the forefront of developments in our core areas of interest. The Clyde & Co team regularly hosts insightful events for industry professionals, clients, and stakeholders. These events provide a platform for knowledge sharing, networking, and exploring key legal trends. Whether through conferences, seminars, or roundtable discussions, Clyde & Co's events foster meaningful dialogue and collaboration within the legal and business communities.
Clyde & Co is the largest provider of professional services in the UK insurance sector, serving over 35 insurers across the UK and Ireland, including Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland. We have long-standing partnerships with all of the top 20 ranked insurers by combined GWP. Industry Leadership Our leadership in motor claims is consistently recognised by the leading legal directories, where we have been ranked top for defendant bodily injury work for over a decade. With a team of more than 400 specialist motor lawyers handling over 30,000 motor claims annually and combined reserves exceeding £700 million, we have firmly established ourselves as industry leaders. Our prominence in motor claims enables us to collaborate closely with both the motor and broader insurance sectors. We develop tailored strategies to reduce claims frequency, control indemnity spend and support our clients in achieving their business objectives.
For over 35 insurers, we are the largest provider of professional services in the UK insurance sector, including Scotland, Northern Ireland, and the Republic of Ireland.
Insurers, underwriters, and large commercial fleet operators rely on our expertise to implement proactive, robust strategies aligned with their claims philosophies. Our comprehensive motor legal services extend beyond defendant claims, covering: Road transport Regulatory advice Policy coverage Credit hire Counter-fraud investigations Recovery of insured and uninsured losses Defence of road traffic accident (RTA) prosecutions across all UK jurisdictions We also leverage cutting-edge Management Information (MI) and business intelligence technology to provide insightful analysis, identify emerging market trends, and ensure our clients stay ahead of the competition.
Approximately 40 of our dedicated lawyers manage all hire claim types and values, supported by an additional 60 credit hire-trained lawyers when needed. We focus on minimising indemnity spend while maintaining and evolving strategies. Our lawyers typically handle 70 DA Credit Hire claims each, with capacity to scale quickly using proven ‘surge plan’ strategies.
Credit Hire
Mark Hemsted Partner Motor
Early Settlement in Disputed Collision Claim The Defendant’s driver, has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on and in response to these became stationary when the collision occurred. We were instructed and adopted a pragmatic approach and considered that causation was likely to attach. An early Part 36 offer was made in the sum of £75,000 on 28 June 2021 and was accepted the same day. The Claimant’s initial allegations were that she was driving her vehicle along Commonwealth Drive when the Defendant’s insured pulled out from a parked position into the Claimant’s vehicle.
Disputed Causation and Quantum in RTA Claim The Defendant’s driver has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on. This claim arises as a result of a road traffic accident that occurred when the insured pulled out of his driveway and collided with the rear of a stationary vehicle. The claimant was the passenger in the stationary vehicle. As a result of the accident the 71 year old claimant suffered a painful neck. She deteriorated over the next couple of weeks and ended up requiring a wheelchair. She was later diagnosed as having damaged 2 discs in her neck for which she underwent surgery. Liability was admitted but causation and quantum remained in dispute. The concern was due to the claimant’s delayed onset of symptoms. The claimant had not served medical evidence.
Organisations and individuals face increasing scrutiny after workplace incidents, often leading to police investigations, regulatory action, and criminal prosecutions for health and safety breaches. Such incidents can result in significant fines, reputational damage, custodial sentences, and, in fatal cases, coroner’s inquests.
At all times we combine our natural expertise and efficiency with an empathy which is required to help customers in the most stressful situations. When things go wrong, your customers can have access to a sharp, approachable and dependable team at any time, day or night and will feel supported through difficult circumstances.
Our national health and safety team regularly acts in high profile HSE/Criminal/ RTA investigations, prosecutions, inquests and inquiries. Recent examples include being instructed by the well-known Trust following the death of a visitor to a beach in Cornwall and being instructed by a large and well-known tour operator concerning a double fatality in a parasailing accident.
Supporting You Through Regulatory Investigations & Prosecutions With dedicated regulatory SHE experts across the UK and Ireland, we provide swift, practical advice and representation, leveraging our local knowledge of police, inspectors, coroners, and courts. Our experienced regulatory team offers comprehensive legal support across all sectors for criminal and regulatory investigations, prosecutions, and inquests.
Our free 24/7 emergency helpline and UK-wide presence mean we can attend incident sites within hours. With team members holding higher rights of audience, we reduce counsel costs and deliver value to clients. Additionally, we offer crisis response services covering technical, commercial, and media advice. We understand that the true cost of an incident extends beyond fines and legal fees. Reputational damage can undo years of effort in building relationships with customers, employees, and suppliers. Our goal is to help you manage these risks effectively, mitigating both financial and reputational impact. Learn more here >
24/7 Emergency Response
Our services include: Coordinating with police, regulators, and coroners during investigations Advising on legal privilege and enforcement notices Handling SHE fees for interventions Attending interviews under caution Drafting representations to regulatory bodies Supporting employees providing statements to authorities. We also represent companies, individuals, and witnesses at hearings, trials, and inquests. In the past two years, we have: Represented over 500 companies in criminal investigations and prosecutions, including corporate manslaughter and fatal accident cases Defended over 50 directors, employees, and drivers against serious charges such as gross negligence manslaughter and death by dangerous driving.
Chris Morrison Partner Regulatory & SHE
Property Damage and Recovery
We have a well-established and respected team that has vast experience advising some of the UK’s largest insurers and specialist Lloyd’s underwriters on all types of damage claims. This includes policy coverage, multi- million-pound fire spread claims, subsidence, infrastructure damage claims, flood damage, and building defect claims through to engineering and Party Wall Act disputes. Expertise in Complex Damage Claims We have particular specialisms in policy coverage involving fraudulent property damage claims relating to arson, theft and malicious damage, and have considerable experience of managing bulk low-value property damage and liability claims recovery schemes.
Our property damage dispute resolution practice is one of the biggest names in the property sector.
Specialist Insurance Legal Services Our dedicated insurance lawyers provide advice, liability defence and coverage expertise, which includes policy drafting, interpretation and advice on the scope of cover and breach of policy terms and conditions. We understand the issues that affect property developers, property owners, as well as residential and commercial landlords.
Successful Defence Against Electric Shock Injury Claim: We defended a claim from a cleaner at a well-known school who alleged an electric shock from a vacuum cleaner caused her to fall and injure her lower back. Liability was denied after post-accident inspection found no fault with the vacuum. The claimant's medical records raised doubts over causation, which were confirmed by her expert during cross-examination. Despite a low settlement offer, we rejected it based on the strong liability evidence and proceeded to trial. At the hearing, the claimant’s inconsistent testimony and admission of only receiving a static shock led to the claim being dismissed.
Fire Loss Investigation and Claim Repudiation: First party claims with a major insurer arising from two serious fires at caravan retailers within a few weeks of each other. The insured were two separate limited companies, but the individuals behind them were from the same family. Both fires arose in highly suspicious circumstances, but where it was not possible to allege arson by the insured. However, given other avenues of enquiry to pursue we co-ordinated the investigation of both claims to arrive at a position whereby it was possible to avoid one policy for non-disclosure of moral hazard and to repudiate the claim under the other policy for fraudulent exaggeration of the value of one caravan. The investigation of the latter including enquires of the original US manufacturer with reference to the chassis number which revealed a different make and model to that being claimed. Overall savings the insurer approximately £1.3 million.
“Very grateful for what you have done for me. Would not had done it without your help. Many thanks, Heather”
Peter Unsworth Partner Property Damage
Clyde & Co Newton Claims innovation offering
In the insurance sector, there has been huge acceleration towards digital channels and automation, particularly in claims management. Innovation is at the heart of how we run our business, and how we deliver to our clients. This has led us to create a transformative new platform combining our market leading legal intelligence with artificial intelligence and process automation, to deliver an improved service and lowest overall indemnity spend to our insurer clients and a better claims experience for policyholders. Thanks to machine learning, our platform’s intelligence is always evolving - adapting in real time as claimant and third party solicitor behaviour evolves. The expert input of our lawyers, forensic accountants and fraud specialists, constantly informs and upgrades its intelligence. This delivers ever improving outcomes for our clients. Clyde & Co Newton is fully flexible to meet your needs. All implementations are entirely bespoke, built around our clients’ claims handling philosophies and operational processes.
Click to learn more here
Visit our Clyde & Co Newton Hub here
Request a demo
Delivering lower indemnity spend and cost savings through better claims outcomes.
Giving you greater control of the claims process and upskilling claims handling teams in the process.
Quick and easy to implement alongside your existing claims systems.
Built around your specific requirements and processes.
Helping you deliver a better claims experience for your policyholders.
Enabling you to reduce your reliance on legal panels - only using lawyers when you really need to.
Leveraging the UK casualty market's largest claims dataset to give you the most accurate guidance on settlement approach.
Want to learn more? Explore our Casualty expertise page here
Successful Resolution of Operation Maui Claim
Acting in a vehicle insurance case
Introduction
A well-known vehicle insurer referred a claim that appeared grossly exaggerated, particularly regarding the claimant's loss of earnings and future loss. Surveillance revealed the claimant working as a delivery driver for his father-in-law’s butcher shop, contradicting his claims. Medical evidence from psychological and pain management experts supported the claimant’s CRPS injury claim, but both orthopaedic experts agreed the ongoing symptoms were likely non-organic. Initially, we disclosed 50% of the surveillance footage with Part 18 questions at witness exchange. After the claimant and his father-in-law denied the truth of his employment, we revealed earlier surveillance showing their false statements.
This was an Operation Maui claim suspected of being staged was pursued due to dishonest representations about the Claimant's accident history, income, vehicle insurance, and repairs. Two trials were adjourned, and both pre-litigation claims were statute-barred. After hearing the evidence, the judge advised the Claimant on the consequences of dishonesty, leading to a discontinuance in exchange for £3,000 in costs. This resulted in savings of £46,566.
Click to go back
Click on each case study for more
Our expertise
Our UK and Ireland teams provide the comprehensive support you need and expect. With offices in key commercial hubs across the region, backed by a global network, we can provide advice on local, national and international, cross-border matters. Across our integrated regional network, we use our knowledge, experience and commercial acumen to steer clients through diverse challenges and opportunities.
With offices throughout the UK and in Ireland, we can provide you with advice wherever you do business
**page design edits to be made - DARE briefed on map redesign
Successful Resolution of Operation Maui Claim: This was an Operation Maui claim suspected of being staged was pursued due to dishonest representations about the Claimant's accident history, income, vehicle insurance, and repairs. Two trials were adjourned, and both pre-litigation claims were statute-barred. After hearing the evidence, the judge advised the Claimant on the consequences of dishonesty, leading to a discontinuance in exchange for £3,000 in costs. This resulted in savings of £46,566.
Acting in a vehicle insurance case: A well-known vehicle insurer referred a claim that appeared grossly exaggerated, particularly regarding the claimant's loss of earnings and future loss. Surveillance revealed the claimant working as a delivery driver for his father-in-law’s butcher shop, contradicting his claims. Medical evidence from psychological and pain management experts supported the claimant’s CRPS injury claim, but both orthopaedic experts agreed the ongoing symptoms were likely non-organic. Initially, we disclosed 50% of the surveillance footage with Part 18 questions at witness exchange. After the claimant and his father-in-law denied the truth of his employment, we revealed earlier surveillance showing their false statements.
**edits to be made
Disputed Causation and Quantum in RTA Claim: The Defendant’s driver has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on. This claim arises as a result of a road traffic accident that occurred when the insured pulled out of his driveway and collided with the rear of a stationary vehicle. The claimant was the passenger in the stationary vehicle. As a result of the accident the 71 year old claimant suffered a painful neck. She deteriorated over the next couple of weeks and ended up requiring a wheelchair. She was later diagnosed as having damaged 2 discs in her neck for which she underwent surgery. Liability was admitted but causation and quantum remained in dispute. The concern was due to the claimant’s delayed onset of symptoms. The claimant had not served medical evidence.
Early Settlement in Disputed Collision Claim: The Defendant’s driver, has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on and in response to these became stationary when the collision occurred. We were instructed and adopted a pragmatic approach and considered that causation was likely to attach. An early Part 36 offer was made in the sum of £75,000 on 28 June 2021 and was accepted the same day. The Claimant’s initial allegations were that she was driving her vehicle along Commonwealth Drive when the Defendant’s insured pulled out from a parked position into the Claimant’s vehicle.
Innovation is at the heart of how we run our business, and how we deliver to our clients. This has led us to create a transformative new platform combining our market leading legal intelligence with artificial intelligence and process automation, to deliver an improved service and lowest overall indemnity spend to our insurer clients and a better claims experience for policyholders.
In the insurance sector, there has been huge acceleration towards digital channels and automation, particularly in claims management.
Claimant suffered a traumatic above knee amputation of one limb and a severe crush injury to her other limb when she was pinned against a wall by a car being demonstrated to her and her husband whilst visiting a Jaguar car dealership owned and run by the defendant insured. We worked with the claimant's firm to facilitate rehabilitation and adaptation of their homes as well as making appropriate transport available. As a result, the case was resolved at a JSM (1 year and 2 weeks after the incident) for the sum of £5.3m Gross with the firms costs also agreed at £150,000. The claim had a potential exceeding £10m. We also represented the insured in connection with the Regulatory investigation and were able to achieve an outcome that meant no charge or fine was brought against them despite the severity of the incident.
We handle the full range of liability cases, and claims that encompass all types of injury. Our lawyers are trained and supervised to make the best use of rehabilitation options, case managers, shared experts and other strategies designed to control the cost and life cycle of a claim. For most catastrophic injury claims we are instructed from "day one" to work with the client in driving the claim forward collaboratively with the claimant and the claimant legal team. We are specialists in large loss claims, and that specialist large loss knowledge is further broken down through our Subject Matter Groups, including indemnity, cross-border, clinical negligence, criminal defence, highways, animals, public authorities and fundamental dishonesty. Whether instructed on the day of the catastrophic event or at litigation, our aim is to provide a straightforward, pragmatic approach. We will develop a strategy with you to achieve the earliest outcome and lowest indemnity spend, from determining a liability position as quickly as possible to identifying if there are claims to defend.
This complex, high-value case settled within a very short time - only 20 months between the accident and JSM. Settlement amount was £12,500,000. The parties were focussed on an early settlement. The defendant obtained only key expert evidence and costs were therefore contained (as well as a realistic settlement reached). The claimant was a successful businessperson in the charity arm of a bank with a history of sporting success. He was one of only two people in the world to have used and benefited from a ReWalk exoskeleton and, whilst these are routinely opposed, the claimant was an ideal candidate. The settlement reached reflected recovery of sums for the exoskeleton.
Mike Dobson
View profile
Claimant suffered a traumatic above knee amputation of one limb and a severe crush injury to her other limb when she was pinned against a wall by a car being demonstrated to her and her husband whilst visiting a Jaguar car dealership owned and run by the defendant insured. We worked with the claimant's firm to facilitate rehabilitation and adaptation of their homes as wll as making appropriate transport available. As a result, the case was resolved at a JSM (1 year and 2 weeks after the incident) for the sum of £5.3m Gross with the firms costs also agreed at £150,000. The claim had a potential exceeding £10m. We also represented the insured in connection with the Regulatory investigation and were able to achieve an outcome that meant no charge or fine was brought against them despite the severity of the incident
This complex, high-value case settled within a very shoirt time - only 20 months between the accident and JSM. Settlement amount was £12,500,000. The parties were focussed on an early settlement. The defendant obtained only key expert evidence and costs were therefore contained (as well as a realistic settlement reached). The claimant was a successful businessperson in the charity arm of a bank with a history of sporting success. He was one of only two people in the world to have used and benefited from a ReWalk exoskeleton and, whilst these are routinely opposed, the claimant was an ideal candidate. The settlement reached reflected recovery of sums for the exoskeleton.
Complex claims against schools: Acting for high profile independent schools when they each faced a series of criminal trials followed by civil claims. Each had complex historic insurance positions, and we worked with them and where relevant insurers to find ways to resolve the claims quickly and compassionately having regard to the impact of the abuse and the criminal trials on the claimants but also the ongoing impact on the schools, their current pupils and staff.
We have a victim-focused approach to the management of these sensitive claims. We are mindful of not only the reputation of our client and the impact that these claims have on the people working in the organisations at the time the claims are brought, (many of whom are greatly distressed/upset by the allegations made), but the challenges faced by victims bringing claims of his nature.
Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA): At the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), we represented faith clients in the Religious Organisations investigation - clients were from many faiths from both orthodox and liberal Judaism through to the Salvation Army. In all situations we explained the requirement of engagement with IICSA, sought to understand the key areas of concern for the organisation and then ensured the provision of requested information and hearing attendance in an efficient and focused way.
Paula Jefferson
Our free 24/7 emergency helpline and UK-wide presence mean we can attend incident sites within hours. With team members holding higher rights of audience, we reduce counsel costs and deliver value to clients. Additionally, we offer crisis response services covering technical, commercial, and media advice. We understand that the true cost of an incident extends beyond fines and legal fees. Reputational damage can undo years of effort in building relationships with customers, employees, and suppliers. Our goal is to help you manage these risks effectively, mitigating both financial and reputational impact.
Through our end-to-end, lawyer-led solution, we deliver an innovative and cost-effective pre-litigation and litigation service. We provide you with one team to handle all your claims, with a single point of contact within the firm. This team is supported by a consolidated management information portal, and an integrated case management system with secure remote access to key case information. We have a proven track record of end-to-end pre-litigation and litigation claims services for clients maximising defensibility and costs with over £200m of claims managed under the lawyer-led solution per annum. Our lawyer-led and client-focused approach provides you with immediate and consistent interactions your firm contact, and engagement of your preferred claims handling firm in the background as required, resulting in: A market leading rate of claims denials, as high as 4% for many of our corporate clients. Reducing average claims costs for clients by 19% compared to their previous handlers when appointing Clyde & Co. Minimising litigation, achieving a rate below 10% on average across all lines. Achieving savings of more than £10 million per annum for our clients, against claims made.
David Caswell
The claimant alleged that he was required to use vibrating tools which caused him to develop vibration white finger and carpal tunnel syndrome. On behalf of the second defendant, we ran a causation defence, namely that the claimant did not frequently work with vibrating tools and that 'transitory' exposure to vibration above the threshold level does not automatically lead to a finding of breach of duty. The Court found the defendant to be in breach of duty. The Court of Appeal ruled that the recorder's conclusions as to breach of duty could not stand and that given the transitory exposure to vibration above the threshold, it was not open to the Judge to find this constituted a breach of duty. Judgment was set aside, and a finding was made for the second defendant.
Legacy In the UK legacy market, we have been involved in many significant legal developments in relation to asbestos-related disease. We have also advised in relation to occupational cancers and other complex or novel diseases, as well as providing litigation and claims outsourcing solutions for large volumes of NIHL and HAVS claims. We also operate an Insurance Tracing Service to mitigate the impact of missing historic EL cover, and offer technology-driven liability tools to assist in the assessment of NIHL and Mesothelioma claims. Our disease lawyers work with insurers and other clients to provide thought leadership, KYO-driven outcomes and develop strategic approaches and solutions. We maintain an active risk radar to identify emerging risks and develop responses our clients can act on. And our suite of market-leading technical handling guides is viewed by our clients as essential material.
We successfully acted in this leading limitation case in disease claims. A claimant, aged 81, sought provisional damages against three defendants for alleged asbestos related pleural thickening and asbestosis. On behalf of the defendants, we pleaded limitation and sought a preliminary hearing on the issue of limitation alone. The claimant at the hearing conceded he had knowledge of a significant asbestos related condition from September 2008. The court ruled that it would be inequitable and unfair to allow the action to proceed and accordingly the claimant's application to display the effects of sections 11 and 14 of the Limitation Act 1980 was dismissed.
Primary In the primary market we advise on short tail claims relating to occupational stress, asthma, dermatitis, musculo-skeletal problems, carbon monoxide poisoning and legionella infection, including managing the commercial, reputational and floodgates risks which frequently accompany such claims. We have increasingly been handling a new wave of respiratory claims relating to housing disrepair, and assessing similar risks arising from the current increase in cavity wall insulation claims. We handle specialist risks such as chronic pain, abuse/bullying and harassment matters. Our team is able to navigate the complex and nuanced technical and policy coverage issues arising form the frequently overlapping jurisdiction of the civil courts and Employment Tribunal. Our specialist COVID-19 team provides advice on claims defensibility and quantum strategy, as well as handling claims, relating to COVID-19 infection, including claims for Long COVID, and has created a guide specifically for handling these claims.
Having received hundreds of Letters of Claim for Noise claims without proper audiometry or medical evidence we developed and ran a strategy to alter the behaviours of claimant solicitors by seeking judicial intervention. We issued proceedings against a single firm of solicitors on 10 cases where the Letters of Claim were sent with no audiogram or medical report. The strategy was aimed at encouraging claimant firms to save both sides' time and costs by only issuing those cases which were likely to proceed, and which had supportive audiometric evidence. As a result of this market strategy, it was established that the Disease Protocol is not engaged until a compliant audiogram is served, all future noise claims will be presented in a format adapted from the Civil Justice Committee Working Party proposal and audiometry would be carried on all NIHL cases in accordance with the Protocol adapted from the BSA guidelines.
David Tait
Our approximately 40 dedicated lawyers manage hire claims of all types and values, meaning we can effectively deliver qualiy handling across a volume offering. We also have access to a pool of a further 60 credit hire trained lawyers should the volume require them. Our focus is on proactively delivering the lowest indemnity spend whilst maintaining, monitoring and evolving agreed strategies. As such, we ensure lawyers have an ptimum case load of around 70 DA CreditHire claims at any one time. Howeve, we have experience in adding capacity as and when required to meet any surges and have proven "surge plan" strategies.
Our Credit Hire Practice Group handles claims for many of the UK and Ireland's largest motor insurers.
Scotland Our credit hire team has a deep understanding of litigation in Scotland. Our triage, case management, predictive analytics and KYO, together with timely, proportionate, strategic advice allows us to achieve consistent, cost effective, early outcomes which control your indemnity spend.
Northern Ireland Our NI team is comprised of leaders in their field and are influential in lobbying in respect of the future of credit hire claims. We are well positioned to receive early information about proposed changes in procedure or judiciual attitude. Member of the team sit on FOIL groups, including the CRP and Protocols Sector Focus Team. We also sit on the Credit Hire Sector Focus Team driving strategies in this area.
This was a complex case involving a huge claim (circa £150k) for DAMS credit hire rental charges. The matter was handled by our specialist credit hire fraud sub-team. A defence was settled making a formal pleading of fundamental dishonesty. Using our agreed credit hire fraud tactics, we proceeded to disclosure and secured favourable court directions for release of financial documetation. The claimant struggled to comply and eventually provided disclosure that proved they were hiding accounts and using aliases. We maintained a robust defence refusing to make or accept any offers of settlement. The claimant approached Clyde & Co in the run up trial with a drop hands offer. After consideration by the insurer of the claimant's realisable assets, this offer was accepted.
The hire was a primary concern pleaded in excess of £100k. Our specialist fraud team obtained copious amounts of linking/ adverse credibility evidence, along with ANPR evidence showing that poicyholder's vehicle was being driven on the road within 12 days of the alleged collision occurring. Upon our instruction counsel drafted a Defence pleasing fraud/ fundamental dishonesty. We knew from the outset that the claimant had no assets against which to pursue recovey. Therefore, rather than push he matter to trial for a finding of FD, the insurer to the strateguc decision to make an offer to the claimant to discontinue her claim on a drop hands basis. The Claimant subsequently filed her Notice of Discontinuance, discontinuing the whole of her claim, saving our client £175,452.53 in total.
Credit Hire - TBC
Our approximately 40 dedicated lawyers manage hire claims of all types and values, meaning we can effectively deliver quality handling across a volume offering. We also have access to a pool of a further 60 credit hire trained lawyers should the volume require them. Our focus is on proactively delivering the lowest indemnity spend whilst maintaining, monitoring and evolving agreed strategies. As such, we ensure lawyers have an optimum case load of around 70 DA Credit Hire claims at any one time. However, we have experience in adding capacity as and when required to meet any surges and have proven "surge plan" strategies.
Northern Ireland Our NI team is comprised of leaders in their field and are influential in lobbying in respect of the future of credit hire claims. We are well positioned to receive early information about proposed changes in procedure or judicial attitude. Members of the team sit on FOIL groups, including the CRP and Protocols Sector Focus Team. We also sit on the Credit Hire Sector Focus Team driving strategies in this area.
This was a complex case involving a huge claim (circa £150k) for DAMS credit hire rental charges. The matter was handled by our specialist credit hire fraud sub-team. A defence was settled making a formal pleading of fundamental dishonesty. Using our agreed credit hire fraud tactics, we proceeded to disclosure and secured favourable court directions for release of financial documentation. The claimant struggled to comply and eventually provided disclosure that proved they were hiding accounts and u ing aliases. We maintained a robust defence refusing to make or accept any offers of settlement. The claimant approached Clyde & Co in the run up trial with a drop hands offer. After consideration by the insurer of the claimant's realisable assets, this offer was accepted.
The hire was a primary concern pleaded in excess of £100k. Our specialist fraud team obtained copious amounts of linking/ adverse credibility evidence, along with ANPR evidence showing that policyholder's vehicle was being driven on the road within 12 days of the alleged collision occurring. Upon our instruction counsel drafted a Defence pleading fraud/ fundamental dishonesty. We knew from the outset that the claimant had no assets against which to pursue recovery. Therefore, rather than push the matter to trial for a finding of FD, the insurer to the strategic decision to make an offer to the claimant to discontinue her claim on a drop hands basis. The Claimant subsequently filed her Notice of Discontinuance, discontinuing the whole of her claim, saving our client £175,452.53 in total.
Mel Mooney
Access Essential Insights
Stay ahead with our regular updates, providing expert analysis on case law, legislation, and emerging trends. Get timely insights on new risks and developments, sent straight to your inbox. Subscribe here.
We act for the broadest range of clients in this market, including global, UK, and specialist insurers, Lloyd's and London Market underwriters, brokers, FTSE-100, FTSE-250, and multinational corporations and many public sector organisations including local authorities and blue light. Our expertise across injury types is further enhanced with dedicated subject matter groups in areas critical to the development and understanding of large loss claims; brain injury, spinal injury, amputation, chronic pain as well as issues relevant to claims and the wider market; care provision, deputyship, and actuarial influence. Our cross-border capability and long-standing experience in these
The claimant was a Skills Practitioner for a Brick Laying course at a College. He alleged he injured his back whilst moving 20/30 wheelbarrows of cement. He claimed the college had failed to provide him with manual handling training, failed to carry out a suitable and sufficient risk assessment, and had failed to reduce the risk of manual handling or provide suitable work equipment. Investigation showed he had been a self-employed brick layer for 28 years, was responsible for completing the risk assessments with regards to the task in question, had attended a manual handling course whilst working for the insured and had lifted wheelbarrows of cement on countless occasions. Liability was denied on the basis he was fully trained and an 'expert' in his field. A robust defence was put forward and following exchange of evidence, the claimant discontinued his claim.
most significant claims have allowed us to compile various databases addressing, for example, life expectancy, vulnerable claimants and wider injury modelling. We are very alive to propensity for fraud in PL claims and adept at analysing the veracity of claimants and defending such claims to trial, as well as beyond into criminal prosecutions. We have an invaluable resource in our national intelligence team to whom any case can be referred, and the full ambit of searches can be made against any individual and organisation. As a result, many claims are successfully defended where the claimant's credibility is in doubt.
The claimant was employed by a very well-known school as a cleaner. She alleged that she received an electric shock when cleaning the stairs with a vacuum cleaner, which caused her to fall and sustain injury to her lower back. Liability was denied on the basis that the post-accident inspection of the vacuum found no fault with it. The claimant tried to allege that she developed cauda equine syndrome as a result of the accident, but a thorough review of the medical records led to serious questions over causation, a fact accepted by the claimant's medical expert when questioned on the point. The claimant put forward a low offer to settle her claim, but in light of the liability evidence we had obtained, the offer was rejected, and we proceeded to trial. At the hearing, the claimant gave evidence that she had only received a static shock when using the vacuum cleaner and provided inconsistent evidence throughout. The decision to stand firm and to deny liability was proven to the right one, as the judge dismissed the claim on the basis the claimant had not shown there was any fault with the vacuum cleaner and had only received a static shock.
We dealt with a claims involving a member of the public who was returning home after attending the village "bale push", taking his usual route through the church yard, when he misjudged the height of a chain as he attempted to step over it, catching his foot and pitching forward, landing on his face and fracturing his jaw. Investigations were carried out and a robust approach was taken, with the claim being defended on the basis the claimant had failed to heed to the presence of the chain as a warning sign not to enter the premises. No similar accidents had occurred, and the church was not required to leave room for pedestrian access to their premises via their car park given that there was alternative pedestrian access. We maintained a robust stance through to trial, where the judge found that the chain was obvious to any reasonable visitor, it was not a hazard, and the Trustees of the Church owed the claimant no duty to keep him safe from an obvious obstacle. The claim was dismissed, and the claimant was ordered to pay the defendant's costs.
We act for the broadest range of clients in this market, including global, UK, and specialist insurers, Lloyd's and London Market underwriters, brokers, FTSE-100, FTSE-250, and multinational corporations and many public sector organisations including local authorities and blue light. Our expertise across injury types is further enhanced with dedicated subject matter groups in areas critical to the development and understanding of large loss claims; brain injury, spinal injury, amputation, chronic pain as well as issues relevant to claims and the wider market; care provision, deputyship, and actuarial influence. Our cross-border capability and long-standing experience in these most significant claims have
allowed us to compile various databases addressing, for example, life expectancy, vulnerable claimants and wider injury modelling. We are very alive to propensity for fraud in PL claims and adept at analysing the veracity of claimants and defending such claims to trial, as well as beyond into criminal prosecutions. We have an invaluable resource in our national intelligence team to whom any case can be referred, and the full ambit of searches can be made against any individual and organisation. As a result, many claims are successfully defended where the claimant's credibility is in doubt.
Our costs lawyers are based nationally (in each jurisdiction) and, as such, we have the geographical reach to attend in-person hearings wherever they are listed, and provide you with the local market and court knowledge. The majority of cost hearings are undertaken in-house and, including cost and case management conferences, the team attends several hundred hearings a year. We have experiences with cases at appellate level including recent success in the Court of Appeal. We also manage with costs recoveries, preparing bills of costs often for sums in excess of £1m, with drafting of replies and advocacy at assessment. Where we use external counsel in certain areas of strategic litigation, we have the knowledge of who is best in class and who can provide you with best value as we have worked very closely with them for many years in close collaboration. Examples include 4 New Square and Kings Chambers, who are both generally recognised as the leading sets of costs counsel.
We successfully defended a university, then an RSA insured, in a live mesothelioma trial, where full costs were recovered. This was the pinnacle of a successful defence strategy for the University, that was inundated with EL and PL asbestos claims following a press release by one of the main claimant firms in Scotland, who were farming for claimants and witnesses. Not one of these claims was paid, and costs were recovered in all the litigated claims.
Paul Wainwright
This was an Operation Maui claim which was referred as a suspected staged/ contrived accident. There was no specific evidence that the claim was staged/ contrived but the claim was run to trial due to dishonest representations about the Claimant's accident history, his income, the insurance of his vehicle and the repairs to his vehicle. Two trials were adjourned and during the course of litigation both of the pre-lit Claimants' claims were statute barred without them issuing. After hearing the evidence of the Claimant and his witness at the Trial on 8 October 2020, the judge asked the Claimant's counsel to advise the Claimant about the implications of being found fundamentally dishonest. The Claimant asked for a drop hands. We agreed that the Claimant could discontinue in exchange for him paying £3,000.00 of our costs which he did. We recorded savings of £46,566.00
This claim was for a well-known vehicle insurance company and was referred on the basis that the claim appeared to be grossly exaggerated. The claimant brought a significant claim for loss of earnings/ future loss. This was in stark contrast to the surveillance carried out which appeared to show him to be working in some capacity as a delivery driver for his father-in-law's butcher. As regarding the medical evidence position, the Claimant was supported by psychological and pain management evidence, who maintained that his injuries were CRPS related. The orthopaedic experts (defendant and claimant) broadly agreed that the cause of any ongoing symptoms would be non-organic in nature. We disclosed 50% of the surveillance evidence (from December 2019 onward) initially with Part 18 questions at witness exchange, and once the Claimant (and his father-in-law) had specifically denied understatement of truth that he had been working in the butcher's prior to December 2019, we then disclosed the earlier surveillance from October 2017/ July 2018 showing that they had lied.
We work with a number of the UK's leading insurers, investigating suspicious claims and helping to develop fraud policies that meet their business objectives. Our expertise covers a broad range of insurance fraud, including animal, casualty, motor and fleet, travel, household and property, and commercial. From identification and investigation, through to civil and criminal prosecution, our fraud risk management service provides a tailored approach to managing fraud exposure, helping to protect brand, maintain policyholder relationships and minimise costs. We hold extensive cross-border data on fraud and our Fraud Sentry intelligence system screens claims to identify instances of fraud early in the process. We believe we are unique in the fraud litigation arena due to our comprehensive breadth and depth of expertise across all product lines covering the UK and Ireland.
Throughout the UK, our fraud expertise is called on at the highest level. We work closely with HM Revenue & Customs, government departments, the Insurance Fraud Enforcement Department (IFED), we are affiliate members of the Insurance Fraud Bureau and members of the Association of British Insurers as well as sitting on a number of Fraud Special Interest Groups within the insurance industry to include FOIL and IFIG Insurance Fraud Investigators Group. We have links with the Serious Organised Crime Agency, the Serious Fraud Office, The Metropolitan & City of London Fraud Squads and police forces throughout the country. In addition we played an active role in advising the government during the Insurance Fraud Taskforce investigations resulting in the subsequent IFT Recommendations to tackle Insurance Fraud at the highest level.
That earlier surveillance (in addition to being during a time period he denied working at the butcher's) showed him performing manual handling and delivery work. The former was significant in relation to his reported physical restrictions and the latter to his alleged inability to work as a taxi driver. Upon service of the latter, more decisive, aspect of the surveillance, an Amended Defence was filed and the evidence referred to the experts. The Claimant experts barely shifted position and so once we put Part 35 questions highlighting the discrepancies in full detail, the Claimant requested a "drop hands". The third-party driver offered a drop hands and discontinued in the face of a robust application for financial disclosure. We recorded total savings of £676,266.54.
Sarah Hill
Part 2
The Defendant’s driver has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on. This claim arises as a result of a road traffic accident that occurred when the insured pulled out of his driveway and collided with the rear of a stationary vehicle. The claimant was the passenger in the stationary vehicle. As a result of the accident the 71 year old claimant suffered a painful neck. She deteriorated over the next couple of weeks and ended up requiring a wheelchair. She was later diagnosed as having damaged 2 discs in her neck for which she underwent surgery. Liability was admitted but causation and quantum remained in dispute. The concern was due to the claimant’s delayed onset of symptoms. The claimant had not served medical evidence.
[]
Acting for over 35 insurers, we are by far the largest professional service provider in this sector in the UK to include Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland and have long standing contracts with all of the top 20 ranked insurers (by combined GWP). Clyde & Co’s position as a leader in motor claims is recognised in the leading legal directories where we have been consistently top ranked for defendant bodily injury work over the last ten years. Clyde & Co has over 400 specialist motor lawyers handling over 30,000 motor claims each year, with combined reserves of over £700 million. We are able to use our position as leaders in motor claims to work with the motor and wider insurance market in developing strategies to reduce claims, indemnity spend and to support our clients in achieving their own objectives.
Insurers, underwriters and large commercial fleet operators rely on us for our expertise and our early and robust strategies aligned with their claims philosophies. Our full package of motor legal advice and support extends beyond defendant claims services and covers road transport, regulatory advice, policy coverage, counter-fraud investigations, recovery of insured and uninsured losses and the defence of road traffic accident (RTA) prosecutions across the UK jurisdiction. We also use the latest MI and business intelligence technology to provide analysis and identify new market trends.
The Defendant’s driver, has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on and in response to these became stationary when the collision occurred. We were instructed and adopted a pragmatic approach and considered that causation was likely to attach. An early Part 36 offer was made in the sum of £75,000 on 28 June 2021 and was accepted the same day. The Claimant’s initial allegations were that she was driving her vehicle along Commonwealth Drive when the Defendant’s insured pulled out from a parked position into the Claimant’s vehicle. We put forward a request to discontinue and this was rejected by the Claimant Solicitors as they stated that they intended to rely upon a telephone conversation from an independent witness. Following a review of the telephone call, the independent witness stated that the Claimant’s vehicle was reversing into a parking space slowly, when the Defendant’s vehicle has pulled out and gone straight into the rear of the Claimant’s vehicle. The witness goes onto state that the vehicles were parking parallel. This account directly challenged the Claimant’s initial allegations and we felt that this was a point that can be made in the Defendant’s favour and therefore we were prepared to run the matter to a hearing. Witness exchange occurred, and the Defendant’s evidence was served. The Claimant’s evidence was not received at all and the Claimant Solicitors were chased a week later to confirm their position on the matter. The request to discontinue was also reiterated. Following this request, the Claimant discontinued their claim.
Mark Hemsted
The Defendant’s driver, has advised that the Claimant had driven past her and became stationary, so she began to leave her car parking space and then saw the Claimant’s reverse lights come on and in response to these became stationary when the collision occurred. We were instructed and adopted a pragmatic approach and considered that causation was likely to attach. An early Part 36 offer was made in the sum of £75,000 on 28 June 2021 and was accepted the same day. The Claimant’s initial allegations were that she was driving her vehicle along Commonwealth Drive when the Defendant’s insured pulled out from a parked position into the Claimant’s vehicle. We put forward a request to discontinue and this was rejected by the Claimant Solicitors as they stated that they intended to rely upon a telephone conversation from an independent witness.
Motor - TBC
We hold long-standing partnerships with all of the top 20 ranked insurers by combined GWP. Clyde & Co’s leadership in motor claims is consistently recognised in the leading legal directories, where we have been top ranked for defendant bodily injury work for the past decade. With a team of over 400 specialist motor lawyers handling in excess of 30,000 motor claims annually, and combined reserves exceeding £700 million, we are firmly established as industry leaders. Our prominence in motor claims enables us to collaborate closely with both the motor and broader insurance sectors, developing strategies to reduce claims frequency, control indemnity spend, and support our clients in achieving their business objectives. Insurers, underwriters, and large commercial fleet operators depend on our expertise and our ability to
implement proactive, robust strategies aligned with their claims philosophies. Our comprehensive suite of motor legal services extends well beyond defendant claims, encompassing: Road transport Regulatory advice Policy coverage Credit hire Counter-fraud investigations Recovery of insured and uninsured losses Defence of road traffic accident (RTA) prosecutions across all UK jurisdictions We also leverage cutting-edge Management Information (MI) and business intelligence technology to provide insightful analysis and identify emerging market trends, ensuring our clients stay ahead in the industry.
Continued Following a review of the telephone call, the independent witness stated that the Claimant’s vehicle was reversing into a parking space slowly, when the Defendant’s vehicle has pulled out and gone straight into the rear of the Claimant’s vehicle. The witness goes onto state that the vehicles were parking parallel. This account directly challenged the Claimant’s initial allegations and we felt that this was a point that can be made in the Defendant’s favour and therefore we were prepared to run the matter to a hearing. Witness exchange occurred, and the Defendant’s evidence was served. The Claimant’s evidence was not received at all and the Claimant Solicitors were chased a week later to confirm their position on the matter. The request to discontinue was also reiterated. Following this request, the Claimant discontinued their claim.
Subscribe to our Casualty Digest newletter here
Access key quarterly updates on Casualty related matters and developments. Access here.
First party claim with a major insurer arising from a serious fire at commercial premises. Suspicions arose as to the insured’s involvement when it emerged that floorboards had been recently removed from the first floor which the Fire Brigade advised had aided the spread of fire. It was not possible to allege fraud against the insured, but in-depth investigation revealed grounds with which to avoid the policy for non-disclosure of moral hazard, including false statements/ misrepresentations to previous insurers when obtaining cover. The insured issued proceedings which were robustly defended and he eventually agreed to discontinue on a “drop hands” basis. He then sought to resurrect his claim with a complaint to FOS but following robust submissions, his complaint was rejected. Saving to the insurer in excess of £1 million.
First party claims with a major insurer arising from two serious fires at caravan retailers within a few weeks of each other. The insured were two separate limited companies, but the individuals behind them were from the same family. Both fires arose in highly suspicious circumstances, but where it was not possible to allege arson by the insured. However, given other avenues of enquiry to pursue we co-ordinated the investigation of both claims to arrive at a position whereby it was possible to avoid one policy for non-disclosure of moral hazard and to repudiate the claim under the other policy for fraudulent exaggeration of the value of one caravan. The investigation of the latter including enquires of the original US manufacturer with reference to the chassis number which revealed a different make and model to that being claimed. Overall savings the insurer approximately £1.3 million.
We have a well-established and respected team that has vast experience advising some of the UK’s largest insurers and specialist Lloyd’s underwriters on all types of damage claims. This includes policy coverage, multi- million-pound fire spread claims, subsidence, infrastructure damage claims, flood damage, and building defect claims through to engineering and Party Wall Act disputes. We have particular specialisms in policy coverage involving fraudulent property damage claims relating to arson, theft and malicious damage, and have considerable experience of managing bulk low-value property damage and liability claims recovery schemes.
Our dedicated insurance lawyers provide advice, liability defence and coverage expertise, which includes policy drafting, interpretation and advice on the scope of cover and breach of policy terms and conditions. We understand the issues that affect property developers, property owners, as well as residential and commercial landlords.
Claimant alleged that the insured’s defective drains caused water to penetrate his basement resulting in damage. The insured was a vulnerable customer who had lost her husband not long before the claim was made. The claimant’s solicitor purported to have a binding settlement with the insured in the sum of £25,000, inclusive of costs, which the insured was going to pay with her own funds. Once we became aware of the purported settlement, we challenged it and were able to reduce the settlement to £18,000, costs inclusive. The insured was very pleased with the outcome and that she is now able to draw a line under the matter. She wrote to us, on the left, to thank us for the outcome:
Peter Unsworth
This was an Operation Maui claim which was referred as a suspected staged/ contrived accident. There was no specific evidence that the claim was staged/ contrived but the claim was run to trial due to dishonest representations about the Claimant's accident history, his income, the insurance of his vehicle and the repairs to his vehicle. Two trials were adjourned and during the course of litigation both of the pre-lit Claimants' claims were statute barred without them issuing. After hearing the evidence of the Claimant and his witness at the Trial, the judge asked the Claimant's counsel to advise the Claimant about the implications of being found fundamentally dishonest. The Claimant asked for a drop hands. We agreed that the Claimant could discontinue in exchange for him paying £3,000.00 of our costs which he did. We recorded savings of £46,566.00
Continued That earlier surveillance (in addition to being during a time period he denied working at the butcher's) showed him performing manual handling and delivery work. The former was significant in relation to his reported physical restrictions and the latter to his alleged inability to work as a taxi driver. Upon service of the latter, more decisive, aspect of the surveillance, an Amended Defence was filed and the evidence referred to the experts. The Claimant experts barely shifted position and so once we put Part 35 questions highlighting the discrepancies in full detail, the Claimant requested a "drop hands". The third-party driver offered a drop hands and discontinued in the face of a robust application for financial disclosure. We recorded total savings of £676,266.54.
This claim was for a well-known vehicle insurance company and was referred on the basis that the claim appeared to be grossly exaggerated. The claimant brought a significant claim for loss of earnings/ future loss. This was in stark contrast to the surveillance carried out which appeared to show him to be working in some capacity as a delivery driver for his father-in-law's butcher. As regarding the medical evidence position, the Claimant was supported by psychological and pain management evidence, who maintained that his injuries were CRPS related. The orthopaedic experts (defendant and claimant) broadly agreed that the cause of any ongoing symptoms would be non-organic in nature. We disclosed 50% of the surveillance evidence initially with Part 18 questions at witness exchange, and once the Claimant (and his father-in-law) had specifically denied understatement of truth that he had been working in the butcher's prior to the claim, we then disclosed the earlier surveillance showing that they had lied.
