Motorcyclist who tried to sue council over pothole claim is landed with £13,000 legal bill

A motorcyclist faces £13,000 in legal costs after lodging a dishonest claim against Sunderland City Council.

The man lodged a compensation claim stating he had hit a pothole in South Hylton in November 2016 while riding a motorbike, suffering a knee injury.

An ambulance crew, who were suspicious of the circumstances surrounding the incident, called the police to attend. A review of the police log revealed that the resident had refused to provide any details of the accident.

In addition there was no evidence of a motorbike, helmet or debris at the scene.

Because of these concerns the council declined to make a settlement offer and made the resident aware of all the inconsistencies, however the resident continued with court proceedings which the council was required to defend, and incur legal fees.

During the case held at Sunderland County Court on Monday March 2, the resident was cross-examined about his claim and its inconsistencies. A witness who was said to be independent was actually a friend of the resident.

Judge Traynor found the claim to be 'dishonest' and has made a finding of 'fundamental dishonesty' against the resident.

As a result, the resident is liable to pay council costs of £13,000.

Sunderland City Council's Cabinet Secretary, Councillor Paul Stewart said: "This is another example of the council dealing diligently and robustly with all claims made against it. If discrepancies are found then the council will and does act in the interests of the public purse.

"It is not acceptable for anybody to think that they can make up a false claim and then expect council tax payers to pay up. All insurance claims made against the council are thoroughly investigated.

"This is public money, the council takes all claims against it very seriously. A case like this shows how expensive it can be trying to defraud the council."

This case follows a previous claim in October 2019 where a resident was also found guilty of 'fundamental dishonesty' and ordered to pay £19,000 of costs.