Accident or insurance fraud? Three suspects in an accident with a BMW M3 (Beringen)

Thirty-something plead not guilty. “It has been six years now that the police say I was not in the car. But I still have the scars of the accident on my leg,” shouted the resident of Beringen. Two insurance companies filed complaints against the suspects. According to them, the accident on February 24, 2018 at the intersection between Leliestraat and Pastorijstraat in Koersel-Beringen was fake. Around midnight, one of the defendants hit the side of a BMW M3 with his driving school car. The effect was significant for BMW which enjoyed priority from the right. The driver’s side door was wedged between the seats.

The fact that the driver escaped unharmed is not accepted by insurance companies. “I was only able to jump into the passenger seat. I never wear a seat belt,” said the accused. “Regarding the high cone and that when the car is hit 28 meters away,” the civil society asked questions.

Employee discount compared to catalog value

It raises further questions among lawyers that the BMW was bought at a huge labor discount. “The car was bought for 70,000 euros, but it is fully insured for the list price of 90,000 euros. They want to get a profit of 20,000 euros at the expense of the insurance company. This is a forgery and an attempt to defraud,” the lawyers were angry.

Guilt was also confirmed for the prosecutor. “The BMW was stopped at the time of the collision according to the expert. This is evident from the data released from the vehicle. Furthermore, there are no signs of sanding on the vehicle.” The prosecutor demanded 1 year in prison and a fine of 1,600 euros for the BMW driver and his colleague who bought the car at an employee discount. The driver was sentenced to 8 months in prison and fined 1,200 euros.

Lawyer Jan Keulen stood before the two defendants and argued for their release. He criticized the fact that the accident was sold by BMW and that the expertise to deal with is no longer possible. “Protection rights have been violated. Arguing on a technical level is no longer possible.” The lawyer also pointed out that the two experts came to different conclusions about, among other things, the speed at which the car was struck. “There is no exact science to this.” In addition, Keulen pointed out that his client was unable to work for several weeks after the accident. His colleague also asked for the release of the third suspect.

Decision of May 13.