Reed vs Tesco Stores Limited

This case involved a staged car accident and fraudulent claims made by the claimant, Alexander Michael Reed, against Tesco Stores Limited, with the court ultimately ruling in favor of Tesco.

TLDR:

• Reed filed a lawsuit against Tesco for damages following a car accident.
• Tesco counterclaimed, alleging the accident was staged and involved deceit and conspiracy.
• The court found in favor of Tesco, awarding damages and exemplary damages for the fraudulent claims.

The claimant, Alexander Michael Reed, pursued a claim against Tesco Stores Limited in relation to a collision between his Mercedes Benz and an Iveco Daily Van driven by Tesco's driver, Mubarik Qaaje, on 04 November 2019. Before commencing proceedings, Reed received £12,010 from Tesco for the pre-accident value of his vehicle, paid on a without prejudice basis.

Reed sought to recover general damages for personal injury and special damages in respect of credit hire, with the claim valued at £10,359.70. Tesco filed a Defence, Counterclaim, and Part 20 proceedings, alleging that Reed and Qaaje had deliberately driven into each other, pleading deceit and conspiracy.

Qaaje took no part in the proceedings, and judgment was entered against him on 27 September 2021. The Defence to Counterclaim was struck out, and the Claim was struck out on 23 September 2022. Judgment was entered in Tesco's claims for deceit and conspiracy, and the case proceeded for Assessment of Damages against Reed and Qaaje.

Tesco identified 12 litigated cases and other non-litigated linked cases connected to this action, suggesting a series of staged accidents involving drivers from the Greenford depot to recover compensation from Tesco. The court found that these accidents, including the one involving Reed, were part of an extensive conspiracy to defraud Tesco.

Expert evidence from forensic collision expert Mr. Etherington supported Tesco's claims, concluding that the damage to Reed's vehicle was consistent with a deliberate collision. The court accepted this evidence unequivocally.

The court reviewed dashcam footage showing Qaaje's vehicle driving forward and Reed's vehicle veering deliberately to collide with Tesco's vehicle, demonstrating that Qaaje's account of the accident was fabricated.

The court examined similar fact evidence, revealing connections between Reed and other individuals involved in staged accidents. Reed's vehicle was linked to multiple fraudulent claims, and Reed was found to be at the 'heart and centre' of the conspiracy.

In terms of damages, Tesco was entitled to recover the £12,010 interim payment and additional compensatory elements, totaling £13,786 plus accrued interest from Reed, and £1,786 plus accrued interest from Qaaje. The court also awarded exemplary damages of £20,000 against Reed and £18,000 against Qaaje, reflecting the scale and egregious nature of the fraud.

The court commended the diligence and forensic work of those instructed on behalf of Tesco, ensuring comprehensive presentation of evidence and compliance with court directions.

Legal representatives: Mr. Aaron Pulford (instructed by Keoghs LLP) for the Defendant/Part 20 Claimant.

Judicial Panel: HHJ Baucher.

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EW Misc 7 (CC)