While the personal injury claims market is currently undergoing meaningful restructuring, it is worth remembering that this is still a multi-billion pound sector. Legislation currently going through the House of Commons and House of Lords will likely reduce claims numbers in the short term but there is already speculation that the proposed changes will be watered down. However, over the last few days there has been some focus on alleged corruption and the sharing of personal data in relation to car crashes.
Many people are becoming concerned about the amount of illegal data sharing incidents regarding car accidents which could result in personal injury claims. The ability to provide a constant flow of live leads is gold dust to claims management companies and lucrative for those able to harvest this data – greed and corruption tend to go hand in hand and we have the perfect example!
Police Officers Guilty Of Corruption
Last week it emerged that former police constable Nigel Mungur had used his position within the Lancashire police force to access data in relation to traffic accidents. Using an accomplice this information was then sold on to personal injury claims management companies who were able to contact individuals directly about a No Win No Fee claim. An undercover police investigation found that Nigel Mungur was able to supplement his income to the tune of £50,000 a year by selling the confidential information. It is believed that in total he made a staggering £363,000 selling the details of car crash victims to so-called “ambulance chasing” claims management companies.
The seven-year operation saw confidential data accessed on more than 21,000 different occasions leading to Nigel Munger setting up his own company called “Personal Injury Company” to sell his leads. Such was the confidence with which he operated that when his company licence was revoked back in 2009 he simply set-up another company using a cheque signed by his wife. The illegal operation only came to light back in 2014 after a number of people complained about receiving cold calls from personal injury claims companies. After it emerged that information discussed on the telephone was only known to the police force this prompted further investigation and eventual prosecution.
A successful prosecution at Chester Crown Court last week saw Nigel Mungar sentenced to 5 years in prison after pleading guilty to misconduct in public office, conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office, money-laundering and unauthorised access to a computer. His wife Nicola, at the time a serving WPC, received a 12 month conditional discharge after admitting obtaining personal data in violation of The Data Protection Act.
Protecting Victims
It is disappointing to see such blatant criminality from a police officers who are meant to be there to fight the criminals. Many people will be concerned that the individuals involved were able to obtain access to highly confidential information without any recourse. We know that this scam had been running for at least seven years with confidential data accessed on more than 21,000 occasions. You would have thought that officers not directly involved with the handling of car crash cases would not have been able to access such confidential data on a regular basis. Indeed, the court heard that on one occasion the victim of a car crash was contacted by a claims management company even before he was interviewed by the police!
There is no doubt that greed plays a major part for those becoming involved in such scams. However, it is the perceived value of these leads which sees many people putting themselves at risk of prosecution and even prison. How can we reduce their perceived value?
The Rights Of Victims
While the act of illegally sharing data for monies is a highly controversial subject, it does also bring other subjects to the table. Where a victim is involved in for example a road traffic accident and injured due to the negligence of a third party, should they be advised of their right to sue the other party by making a road traffic accident claim?
In the above corruption case it is obvious that the alleged victims of car crash incidents were not aware they had the right to sue a third party for negligence under personal injury claims legislation. If they were made aware of this option at the earliest opportunity this may well reduce the value of illicit leads passed on to claims management companies. The real value in these leads is the speed at which they are obtained and acted upon, often catching victims cold and unaware of their rights.
Prosecuting Criminals
It is vital that any prosecutions with regards to illegal data sharing with personal injury claims companies are heavily publicised. In the above instance the former PC was jailed for five years and the WPC received a 12 month conditional discharge. The case also highlighted the enormous income streams this illicit operation created with personal injury claims leads worth a fortune in the correct hands. The authorities have clamped down on criminal gangs “manufacturing” accidents for compensation and those involved in the illicit trade of confidential data but more needs to be done.
The Future
This case amongst others perfectly illustrates the need to clamp down on access to confidential information such as those involved in road traffic accidents. The Data Protection Act is already there to combat illegal sharing of data but with such large sums of money involved the threat of criminal prosecution is overshadowed by greed. If there was a way in which the authorities could create a central database of those looking to receive advice on personal injury claims this would reduce the need and the value of illegal leads.
The so-called “ambulance chasers” would likely find other means to obtain leads but at this moment in time it is vital that the authorities make it as difficult as possible. At the end of the day, those working in the police force have access to confidential data and will always be susceptible to illegal propositions. Perhaps the only way to clamp down on access to confidential data in this instance is to reduce the number of individuals involved and work on a need-to-know basis. There also needs to be more stringent monitoring of those who access such data. Even though there was an electronic trail involving the officers prosecuted this was never flagged by the IT department or individuals in the police force.
