Free Claim Assessment.
Complete the short claim form to get a free claim assessment & expert advice with no obligations!

Home > Miscellaneous Claims


Exaggerated Personal Injury Claim


Inflated Personal Injury Claim

Sayed Hussein V William Hill Group (2004)

The claimant had grossly exaggerated and inflated his personal injury claim and was awarded nominal damages.

The claimant (H) sought damages for personal injury and other related losses including loss of earnings caused by the defendant's (D) employee's (W) assault on H at D's betting shop.

Head Injury

H alleged that, following an argument with W, W hit him several times with a cardboard tube causing a head injury which resulted in post traumatic stress disorder and memory loss and that his job had subsequently been adversely affected.

H was supported by medical evidence from his GP and a consultant psychiatrist. D relied on H's conflicting statements as to how many times he was hit and contended that he was hit only once or twice and not to the head. D further submitted that H had not suffered injury from being hit by W but that H was grossly inflating his claim and that his medical witnesses were close friends. D's medical expert concluded that H was not suffering from post traumatic stress disorder.

Call FREE now on our 24 hour helpline
Claim Accident Compensation



Post Traumatic Stress

HELD: D's version of events was to be preferred. There were real doubts as to whether H consulted any doctor about the effects of the assault. H's GP's evidence was unconvincing and there was little doubt that he was brought in at a later stage to re-enforce H's claim for compensation. Both H's GP and consultant psychiatrist were found to be friends of H and the papers in the case should be referred to the General Medical Council.

H was not suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. It had not been proved that H had sustained a blow to the head at all. H had not suffered any physical injury, mental impairment or significant pain. H had not been unable to work as a direct result of the assault. H had deliberately exaggerated his claim and had involved others in concocting a grossly inflated claim. H was therefore only entitled to nominal damages of £50.

Judgment for claimant.

Personal – Injury - Damages

QBD (Hallett J) 18/2/2004

LTL 18/02/2004 (Unreported elsewhere)

Document No.: AC0106605

For free expert advice, with no obligation call FREE now on our 24 hour helpline:Claim Accident Compensation


Want to know how much your claim could be worth?  Finding out is quick & easy.
I tripped on an uneven pavement. I landed very awkwardly damaging both my right knee and ankle, needing surgery.
Susan Bailey
See the AAH tv ad starring Esther Rantzen!
That Means no risk, and no money needed to claim.