The use of covert video surveillance exposed an exaggerated claim for personal injury, resulting in the High Court considering a prison sentence for her and her husband
A woman who attempted to claim £750,000 for personal injury after tripping on uneven paving has been found guilty of contempt of court. Barbara Fari and her husband Piper were told by Mr Justice Spencer that both face jail unless he is convinced otherwise at a subsequent hearing. Mrs Fari was allegedly injured in 2008 and was offered £7,500 in compensation by Homes for Haringey, however she pursued a higher claim for £750,000 which was struck out in 2012 after covert video evidence revealed a huge difference between how she presented herself during medical examinations and when she was out near her home in Hornsey
Mrs Fari claimed the fall had aggravated her pre-existing arthritis, to the point where she was no longer able to look after her large family and instead relied on their care. The judge said she had presented a "grossly false" picture of her continuing symptoms to doctors and in legal documents and that her unemployed husband was complicit in the charade
We use overt and covert surveillance to gain evidence against such spurious claims, whether derived from personal injury or from employee absenteeism. We work with many companies, resolving the difficult issues facing business owners. Surveillance for corporate reasons may involve discreet observation of an employee, for reasons of absenteeism or pending tribunal - or to minimise and contain damage to our client
Discretion is a watchword, especially so when handling what may be a delicate issue for private clients. Observation will help you to get to the truth of a matter, revealing someone's actual actions rather than what they may say they do
We may resort to traditional surveillance when obtaining evidence for a legal case, such as proving co-habitation or whether Person A is in Location B at a given time. All reports are collated and may be presented in court
