Is the insurer claiming that your collision was staged or caused deliberately? That is a serious allegation with possible consequences for the payout, your insurance cover and registrations. Ask for the specific facts and investigation documents on which the suspicion is based. An unclear damage pattern or a discrepancy between statements does not in itself prove that an accident was pre-arranged.
Nederlands: Lees dit artikel in het Nederlands: Verzekeraar vermoedt een opzettelijke aanrijding
Türkçe: Bu makaleyi Türkçe okuyun: Sigortacı kasıtlı bir çarpışmadan şüpheleniyor
Written by Onur Arslan, attorney at Arslan Advocaten. Do you have questions about your own situation? Get in touch.
What exactly is the suspicion?
With an alleged deliberate collision, several scenarios may be in play: there was supposedly no collision at all, the collision was caused on purpose, the occupants were not actually present, or existing damage was presented as new damage. Each of these allegations requires different evidence.
Ask the insurer to state which scenario it is alleging and which persons are supposedly involved. That prevents you from having to respond to an allegation that keeps shifting. A suspicion of collusion may not rest solely on the fact that the people involved know each other. The specific conduct and how it all fits together must be investigated.
Technical investigation into the damage and the circumstances of the accident
An expert can compare impact directions, damage, heights and vehicle data. Ask which vehicles were actually examined, which photographs were available and which assumptions were used in the reconstruction. Old damage, an earlier repair or moving the vehicle after the accident can affect the interpretation.
A delta-v calculation concerns the change in speed of a vehicle. It does not in itself prove that an accident was caused deliberately, nor is it a complete medical assessment of injury. Those different conclusions each require their own line of reasoning.
Keep the original photographs, the accident report form, any dashcam footage, witness details and messages relating to the accident. Have relevant digital data secured in good time. The absence of camera footage months later does not automatically mean that your statement is incorrect, but it can make your evidential position more difficult.
Your own insurer or the WAM insurer?
A claim under your own insurance policy is subject to different rules than a personal injury claim brought as an injured party against the other side’s compulsory motor liability insurer (the WAM insurer). The statutory forfeiture of cover for deliberate deception under your own policy cannot simply be applied to an injured third party. See Supreme Court (Hoge Raad) 6 July 2018, ECLI:NL:HR:2018:1103.
That distinction does not make an incorrect claim unassailable. Damage that does not exist need not be compensated, and knowingly unlawful conduct can have consequences of its own. But the insurer must rely on the correct legal basis. The position of an unwitting passenger also differs from that of someone who allegedly took part knowingly in a staged collision.
Giving a statement during the investigation
Ask beforehand about the purpose of the interview and the topics to be covered. Say so when you do not know something or can no longer remember it precisely. An estimate must be recorded as an estimate. Read the record carefully and have incorrect wording corrected before you sign.
Do not sign a statement merely because the investigator says that otherwise no payment will follow. At the same time, a blanket refusal to answer relevant questions is usually not a solution. Legal guidance helps you cooperate carefully while keeping the investigation within its proper limits.
Rejection, recovery and registration
Ask for separate decisions on your claim, any repayment, investigation costs, termination and registration in the External Reference Register (EVR). A recovery claim must be itemised. A registration is subject to its own conditions and requires an individual assessment. An eight-year registration is not an automatic consequence of every suspicion.
Frequently asked questions
Does minor damage prove that the collision was fake?
No. The damage pattern is one part of the investigation and must be linked to the vehicles, the circumstances and the other available data.
Is it suspicious that I know the other driver?
That may raise a question for the investigation, but knowing each other does not in itself prove an agreement to cause damage.
Can I instruct a counter-expert?
A targeted technical reassessment can be worthwhile. Agree in advance on the questions to be answered, the available data and the costs.
As a passenger, am I in the same position as the driver?
Not necessarily. Your knowledge, your involvement and the legal basis for compensation must be assessed separately.
Can the insurer demand investigation costs?
Ask for the legal basis, the necessity and an itemised breakdown. An invoice is not automatically payable in full simply because fraud is alleged.
Which documents should I send to Arslan?
The accident report form, reports, original photographs, statements and all decision letters concerning payment and registration.
Read more about investigations into how an accident happened, the burden of proof in insurance fraud and requesting an investigation report.
Have the suspicion of a deliberate collision and your options for a defence assessed.
This page provides general information and is not legal advice about your own situation. No rights can be derived from its content.
