It’s certainly just an opinion! One that is held by someone with enough personal experience to be able to offer an informed one though.

It’s not the law itself which is questioned but the way it is being interpreted and applied. What happened to me was a travesty. I know with complete certainty that this was fraud but knowing something and proving it are not the same thing. However the proof was there too.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Hardly painful , no costs incurred as all borne by the insurer.

Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance.

It’s an opinion based on personal experience. Conspiracy theories are imagined scenarios which fit the prejudices of those who hold them.

Fraud wasn’t alleged. That would have followed had the result gone the other way, as it should. The Judge got it wrong. I know that as fact. Not an opinion. It was me who was accused. I was there. This was 100% fraud.

The proof exists. The Judge decided to either ignore it or missed it completely.

An appeal is being considered but I anticipate that my insurers will cut their losses on economic grounds and a fraudster will get away with it.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Perhaps only money matters to you!

For me my integrity is much more important as is the need to ensure those who attempt fraud are caught and punished. Which isn’t always possible but is in this case because the proof exists.

So yes, it’s painful.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Donald?, this really you?

Edited by Ouzo Dan (14 Feb 2024 9.41am)

The mountains are calling & I must go.

If the proof was real and existed. Then I am sure the Judge would have sided with you. As such the Judge did not. Therefore there was not enough proof. Unfortunately it is just your opinion here.

You may feel hard done by but in reality the Judge made a ruling based on the facts and proof available.

The role of the The judge is to listen to the evidence of both sides and to the submissions of the barristers / solicitors / lawyers. The judge will then make a ruling based on the available evidence. You clearly did not have the proof required.

If you truly believe that the decision was incorrect then you can appeal the case. Otherwise you should respect the rules and outcome and integrity of the law.