The interview that began as an accusation
Eight months after a low-speed rear-end collision, a claimant submits a soft-tissue injury claim supported by a medical report describing restricted neck movement and an inability to lift heavy objects. The insurer's surveillance shows the claimant loading shopping bags into a car, lifting a toddler, and attending a gym session where she uses a rowing machine. The assigned investigator, a former police officer with three days of fraud training, plans to open the recorded interview with: 'We have video of you at the gym, so we know you're lying.' The claimant arrives with a friend who wants to sit in and film the interview on a phone, and asks whether she should have a solicitor. The interview is booked for 45 minutes in a hotel meeting room; the insurer's instruction is to 'come back with a signed admission or a withdrawal'.
1. Critique the planned opening and describe the structure and questioning approach you would use instead.
Read the worked answer
The planned opening is a confrontation without foundation. The investigator knows only that the claimant did things the medical report says she cannot do. That is an inconsistency to be explored, not a lie to be announced. Accusatory openings produce an angry denial, a complaint, or an admission from a vulnerable person that is worth little and can be attacked as oppressive.
Better structure
- Plan: what must be established - her account of the accident, her symptoms over time, her daily function, the specific filmed activities, her explanation for them - and in what order evidence will be disclosed.
- Set the scene: who you are, the purpose, that this is not a police interview, that she may be accompanied, how the record will be used, that she may correct or add anything.
- Free recall: her account of the collision and, separately, a 'day in the life' description covering shopping, lifting, exercise and work, before any evidence is shown.
- Introduce evidence in stages: 'A recording shows you lifting a toddler on 14 March - can you tell me about that?' Then probe with open questions, using the exact wording of the medical report.
- Test alternatives: whether the report is wrong, whether she improved, whether the activity caused pain afterwards, whether a solicitor or expert overstated her account.
- Close: anything to add or correct, next steps, a copy of the record.
Tone: neutral and unhurried, no leading questions, no threats of prosecution or costs, and no reference to the insurer's 'admission or withdrawal' target - the objective is a reliable account.
2. How do you deal with the friend, the phone filming and the question about a solicitor, without losing the evidential value of the interview?
Read the worked answer
The friend. A companion is generally allowed, particularly where the claimant may be vulnerable or anxious. The companion may support her but may not answer for her. If the friend prompts or answers, note it in the record and, if it continues, adjourn. Do not make the friend's presence a confrontation.
Filming. She may record for her own purposes. You should record too, with her consent, and state on the record that both recordings exist. If recording is refused, take a detailed contemporaneous note, read it back and ask her to sign. If she will not continue without her own recording and you have no recorder, adjourn and re-fix - do not conduct a disputed interview with no record.
The solicitor. There is no general right to legal representation at a civil claims interview, and the investigator must not pretend otherwise. But refusing a reasonable request can make the process look unfair and undermine the evidence. Explain that she may have a solicitor present; if she wants one, adjourn and re-fix promptly, recording the request and the reason.
Boundaries. Do not question her about liability for the accident - that belongs to the instructed solicitors - and do not seek a waiver or withdrawal under pressure. The insurer's instruction to return with a signed admission is not a proper objective; it invites exactly the conduct that destroys the evidence's value. Document the instruction and your reasons for not following it.
3. The claimant gives an account that is partly inconsistent with the surveillance but offers explanations. How do you convert the interview into dependable evidence, and what should the report to the insurer contain?
Read the worked answer
Record. Audio with consent where possible; otherwise a full timed note with speaker attribution. Retain the original file unedited, with a hash or retention reference.
Statement. Draft a witness statement in her own words covering her account, her symptoms over time and her explanations for each filmed activity. Ask her to read it, correct it and sign each page. If she declines, record the offer, the refusal and any reason given.
Exhibits. Reference the medical report, the dates of the surveillance, the names of those present, and the recording. Keep the chain of custody and do not destroy drafts.
Separate fact from opinion. The report should contain the transcript or notes, then a clearly labelled analysis of inconsistencies, without characterising her as dishonest. Use 'her account of lifting is inconsistent with the medical report's restriction' rather than 'she lied'.
Follow-up. If she offers an innocent explanation - a good day, a physiotherapy regime, a different date - test it against gym records, treatment notes and the surveillance timestamps before drawing conclusions.
Disclosure and decision. The material will be disclosable in litigation; do not edit or withhold it. The interview is not the decision: pass the evidence to the claims decision-maker with a recommendation, keep access restricted, and check the data protection basis for holding and sharing it.