A motor policyholder’s bid for a crash damage payout has been rejected after the dispute authority supported QBE’s argument that his claim was fraudulent.

The claimant said he was driving to a tobacco shop when the vehicle in front braked suddenly at a traffic light, causing the smash.  

The policyholder said he exchanged information with the other driver, but he struggled to recall details about their vehicle when asked by QBE.  

He reported using a towing company called by the other driver and paying $300 for its services, but later he could not remember the business’ name.

QBE said the crash never happened, noting there were no independent witnesses and no photos, and no one was reported injured despite the claimant saying he was driving above 60km/h at the time.  

The insurer’s forensic specialist concluded damage to the car appeared to be from two frontal crashes and that, in both, the insured vehicle had accelerated from a standstill to about 16 km/h. The brakes had not been used before impact in either crash, they said.  

The man took his case to the Australian Financial Complaints Authority.

QBE suggested the claimant had a financial motive for faking the crash, because he had limited income and the car was insured for $22,620 – more than its purchase price.

AFCA agrees the claimant’s “inconsistencies and contradictions” provide sufficient evidence to back QBE’s case.  

“The lack of photos of the scene, details of the tow truck, non-deployment of frontal airbags and inconsistencies with the purpose of the trip to attend a tobacconist are all unusual,” it said. “Further, [the insurer’s expert] report supports a finding that the damage could not have occurred in an accident as described by the complainant.”

AFCA’s ombudsman is “not persuaded the complainant’s version of events is credible or is consistent with the other known and confirmed evidence”.  

See the ruling here.