Direct Line wants its £2.5 million back - accusing the claimant who got it of faking his entire case.
In UK Insurance Limited v Hassankhail [2026] EWHC 1020 (KB), a judgment handed down on May 1, 2026, the High Court moved UK Insurance Limited, an insurer within the Direct Line Group, a step closer to trial in its bid to overturn a settlement it says was obtained through deliberate fraud.
The case traces back to a 2016 road traffic accident involving Bahader Hassankhail, who claimed he had suffered a moderate-severe or severe brain injury. His legal team put his total losses at over £12.7 million. A large chunk of that - more than £1.8 million - was for the lifelong cost of a court-appointed financial deputy, on the basis that Hassankhail lacked the capacity to manage his own money. A settlement of £2.5 million was approved by the court on June 29, 2022.
It did not take long for cracks to appear.
Phone records before the court told a very different story. Thirty-seven text messages - none of which Hassankhail disputed - showed he had been regularly using crystal methamphetamine, GHB, and other drugs throughout the period he was telling medical experts he had never touched drugs in his life. In one particularly striking instance, messages sent on the same day as a key psychiatric assessment showed he had taken drugs the night before - yet he told his consultant psychiatrist that he had never used drugs in his life.
The capacity claim also came apart quickly. Within two months of the settlement, Hassankhail applied to the Family Court for a legal order against a third party, asserting he had capacity to litigate. Within four months, he obtained a declaration from his GP confirming he had regained financial capacity. He had also, separately, secured a tenancy without his court-appointed deputy's knowledge.
Then came the witness statement. David Mansour had submitted a statement in the original proceedings in response to surveillance footage gathered by the insurer. Mansour later contacted UK Insurance Limited to say the statement was false and signed a second statement apologising to the court. The insurer's case is that Hassankhail knew it was false from the start.
Presiding over the disclosure hearing, Master Šabić KC found sufficient grounds to conclude - on the balance of probabilities - that fraud had likely occurred across all three areas. The court ordered wide-ranging disclosure, including bank records, medical files, and legal advice documents.
But the ruling cut both ways. The judge found that a second email from Mansour, held on Direct Line Group's own servers and known to the insurer's solicitors since at least July 2025, had never been disclosed - meaning the case had been presented to the court on a false basis. The judge called the failure deeply concerning.
The full fraud trial has yet to be heard. Nothing in this ruling amounts to a final finding - that remains for another day.
