
Remains of some British Air India crash victims wrongly identified, lawyer says
Some 169 Indian passengers and 52 British nationals were killed, making it one of the deadliest plane crashes in terms of the number of British fatalities.
Aviation lawyer James Healy-Pratt, whose firm Keystone Law is representing more than 20 British families who lost loved ones in the disaster, said relatives of one victim found out a casket contained 'co-mingled' remains, while a different family were told a coffin contained the body of someone else entirely, not their loved one.
Mr Healy-Pratt, who is a partner at the firm, said the mistakes emerged after the 'sterling efforts' of senior coroner for Inner West London, Dr Fiona Wilcox, who 'picked up DNA anomalies' at the beginning of the repatriations.
'In the first two caskets that were repatriated, in one of the caskets, there was co-mingling of DNA which did not relate to the deceased in that casket or the casket that accompanied it and so that's what alerted her and her team to the fact there was a serious problem,' he told the PA news agency.
'My understanding was that the co-mingling was at the very beginning, which alerted Dr Wilcox to the fact that she had to be 100% assiduous about checking the identification of the incoming remains.
'She was then able to determine that one particular loved one was not at all who the family thought they were.'
The family of three British victims who were buried in India after the crash said there was a 'clear lack of transparency and accountability' in how the identification and repatriation of victims was handled.
Relatives of Akeel Nanabawa, his wife Hannaa Vorajee and their four-year-old daughter Sara Nanabawa said in a statement: 'Recent developments have only confirmed what many feared: that serious mistakes may have been made, and that the dignity and rights of victims and their families were not safeguarded as they should have been.
'In our case, we are confident that we received the correct bodies, based on the hospital's assurances, autopsy reports, their clothing and the personal belongings we recovered.
'But our concern now is not limited to ourselves. We are deeply troubled by what this means for other families who may still be searching for certainty and closure.
'This isn't just a personal tragedy; it is a collective one. And the mishandling of such a sensitive process speaks to a wider failure between the British and Indian authorities to act with care, co-ordination and respect.'
It is understood no blame is being put on any UK agency for the blunders, Mr Healy-Pratt told PA.
'We know that they were not allowed anywhere near the DNA identification chain of custody link to the caskets,' he said. 'That was the Indian authorities, that's what we understand.
'But nobody's actually laid that out formally for families to look at and review, and that's what we want – explanations by the Indian government about who was in charge of that chain of custody, why were there the massive mistakes that were made and, the important thing, how do the families know that there aren't other remains of their loved ones in a fridge in an Indian hospital?'
The lawyer said he believes the mistakes will be on the agenda for Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer's talks with his Indian counterpart Narendra Modi on Wednesday and Thursday.
Mr Healy-Pratt added: 'Somebody has to take responsibility in India for this massive screw up and then they actually have to ensure that they can give proper assurances to the families that the job has been completed and done properly.
'The hierarchy of needs of these families in air crashes, it's always the same.
'The first thing they want is their loved ones back so they can say goodbye to them; the second thing is they want to know how their loved ones died; third thing, they want to prevent further deaths so that all depends on getting number two right; and then number four, it will be some form of financial justice.'
His firm has demanded a written explanation from Air India, including on the involvement of their contractors Kenyon International Emergency Services.
PA has approached Air India's parent company, the Tata Group, and Kenyon Emergency Services for comment, as well as No 10 and the Foreign Office.
Mr Healy-Pratt understands 12 bodies have been repatriated to the UK.
He is investigating the identification mistakes but is also tasked with representing families at inquests, investigating the causes of the accident, taking High Court legal action in England against Air India and taking action against Boeing in the US courts.
Besides those on board AI171, another 19 people also died and 67 were seriously injured.
The only surviving passenger on the plane was Briton Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, who previously told The Sun it was a 'miracle' he was alive but felt 'terrible' he could not save his brother Ajay.
A preliminary report into the incident from India's Aircraft Accident Investigation Bureau found both of the plane's fuel switches moved to the 'cut-off' position 'immediately' after take-off, stopping fuel supply to the engine.
It has sparked questions over whether the crash was deliberate.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Spectator
25 minutes ago
- Spectator
The ballad of broken Britain
In my corner of Bristol, alongside drug dealers, shoplifters and street drinkers, we now have our very own pyromaniac. They started small – an abandoned office chair, a clothing bank and an old telephone box – before moving on to bigger things. Half a dozen cars have been torched over the past few months, including two on my road, and, most recently, a derelict pub. The other Saturday, hearing a commotion outside, my wife jumped out of bed and flung open the curtains. The scene that greeted us was apocalyptic. In daylight, on a narrow suburban street, the arsonist had set fire to three motorbikes parked in a row, which in turn had set alight a car and a hedge. It was pandemonium. People were wandering around in their nightclothes, some barefoot, having been advised by the police to leave their homes. The bikes and car were engulfed in flames, and thick clouds of black smoke billowed over the houses. The fire brigade arrived quickly and soon had things under control, but the resulting carnage was like West Belfast circa the 1970s after a mortar attack. Setting vehicles alight is a serious criminal offence, not to mention incredibly dangerous, yet the police response was sluggish. For weeks, charred motorbike frames and the blackened shells of cars sat on melted tarmac. Wandering the area felt like disaster tourism. Eventually, after mounting complaints, a meeting was called with councillors and police in attendance. However, what was meant to be a discussion about the fires quickly turned into a free-for-all on rising crime. It was a comically British affair – lots of blustering and cries of: 'Do speak up, we can't hear you at the back!' There also seemed to be a few budding local sleuths who'd uncovered some quite extraordinary goings-on that the police were unaware of. Notwithstanding our resident Miss Marples, if we'd gone looking for reassurance, we didn't get any. Although we were told we could report incidents online and expect a response within 72 hours. Amazing. You'd hope the issue would be resolved by then. Still, there were tea and biscuits – so that was all right. In effect, the mostly middle-class crowd came away with the impression that it was down to them to manage the situation: 'You can apply for a council grant to install CCTV at your house, or buy one of those camera doorbell thingies.' The police, it seems, don't have the time or resources. One thing we were promised was increased patrols, but our local 'cop shop' is only open a few hours a week, and I don't think I've seen a policeman on foot in the 20-odd years I've been here. You do see the occasional PCSO, but they engender about as much confidence as a Boy Scout left in charge of an anti-aircraft battery. Thankfully, I recently escaped to Menorca for a week. There's very little crime, no graffiti, no litter, and the sea – a major draw – is crystal clear. The overall impression is of a laid-back, prosperous, well-run place that the inhabitants are proud of. Coming back to the UK was a kick in the Balearics due to the stark contrast. It felt like returning home to find the front door bashed in, the house ransacked and someone cooking crystal meth on the stove. Within hours, we'd seen drug deals, masked youths speeding about on electric motorbikes and drunks stumbling in the road. The usual dope smoke, graffiti tagging and filthy streets completed the picture. If we lived in a more affluent part of Bristol, or some rural idyll, perhaps the return wouldn't have hit quite so hard. But I still wouldn't have been able to escape the headlines: water company bosses pocketing millions while pumping effluent into rivers and seas; polls suggesting almost half of the public think Britain is becoming lawless; a justice system in crisis; dire public finances; a government desperate to avoid another summer of rioting. The sense – to borrow one of the Prime Minister's favourite phrases – is of a country in managed decline. Except the decline isn't being managed very well. Yes, Menorca is small and sparsely populated – easier to keep pristine. And yes, coming home from holiday is always a downer. However, the overwhelming impression was of returning to a country that had lost its way. A 16-year-old boy was recently arrested in connection with the pub fire. Dozens of cars have since had their tyres slashed, and someone took a machete to a row of saplings – so, irrespective of whether or not he's the arsonist, we're not out of the woods yet. Although, thanks to the idiot with the machete, there won't now be a wood – or even a copse. In Richard II, John of Gaunt laments: 'That England, that was wont to conquer others, Hath made a shameful conquest of itself.' Hasn't it just? And, as Abraham Lincoln observed: 'A house divided against itself cannot stand.' So, while tea and biscuits may long have been a social lubricant in Britain, there are times when cohesion is so frayed, we need more than that – and I'm afraid this is one of them. To be honest, though, you'd probably get bored with Menorca after a while. All that sand – it's a bastard to get out of your shoes.


Times
3 hours ago
- Times
Financial Ombudsman Service boss paid £230,000 after ousting
The ousted head of the Financial Ombudsman Service received a pay-off of almost £230,000, it has been disclosed in the annual report. Abby Thomas, who left abruptly on 6 February, was paid £229,869 in severance payments on top of her normal salary. The payoff included £100,000 for loss of office, £107,692 in lieu of notice and £22,177 for a period of gardening leave that began on the day she left, the FOS said. MPs on the Treasury select committee have hit out at the manner of her departure and criticised the FOS chairwoman Baroness Manzoor for refusing to answer questions on why Thomas left and whether she was forced out. The FOS, which rules on complaints by consumers about financial services firms and can set compensation orders, is under pressure to reform. Rachel Reeves has pledged to curb its powers so it no longer acts like a regulator after complaints from the industry that it has increased the cost of 'mass redress events'. It has been dealing with a significant rise in claims, mainly related to car finance loans, but also because of concerns about other consumer loans and more people complaining about banks' handling of frauds. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Treasury committee, said this month: 'The handling of this situation by the senior leadership has been deeply disappointing.' Thomas, a former Virgin Media executive, served for less than three years. She has been replaced by James Dipple-Johnstone as chief ombudsman and Jenny Simmonds as interim chief executive. Manzoor is due to retire on August 1. The FOS received 450,000 new inquiries in the year to March, up from 330,000. The motor finance industry is braced for a judgment from the Supreme Court this Friday that could determine the scale of compensation payments for failing to disclose commissions paid to dealers.


Times
3 hours ago
- Times
NatWest faces questions over links to collapsed 79th Group
NatWest is facing scrutiny over its relationship with a collapsed £200 million investment group which insolvency practitioners suspect was a Ponzi scheme. 79th Group attracted thousands of investors from the UK and overseas, before collapsing into administration in April, two months after the City of London police announced an investigation into a 'suspected widespread fraud'. The company has denied wrongdoing. Insolvency practitioners estimate 79th Group owes more than £200 million to about 3,700 people. Some investors have life savings at risk. The matter was raised in parliament this month. The 'main account' of the group was held at NatWest, according to administrators from Kroll and Quantuma. It is understood that the relationship originated at the bank's Southport branch, which is near 79th Group's Merseyside head office. The bank also holds an outstanding charge over a 79th Group entity which was first registered 20 years ago. That company went into insolvency in May. Investors' funds were paid into a 'treasury account [and then] transferred out to other entities', administrators said in a recent report to creditors. They are investigating the 'flow of funds'. Investors' money does not appear to have been 'ring-fenced' and was instead 'pooled' in group accounts. No formal loan accounts appear to have been recorded or board minutes yet identified relating to the management of investors' money, insolvency practitioners have claimed. The bank declined to answer a series of questions over its banking relationship with 79th Group, including how much money was received and processed by the bank; whether it had continued to receive investor funds after the arrests; whether it had failed to detect serious irregularities; and whether NatWest was investigating. A NatWest spokeswoman said: 'Combating fraud is a top priority and we are committed to preventing criminal activity. We will not make any further comment on this case.' Contractual agreements between the group and investors stated that funds would be used for specific projects, including a £250 million holiday park in north Wales and a mining venture. City of London police said in February that four people had been arrested and that 'a large amount of cash, luxury watches and jewellery were found during searches of properties, all of which were seized'. All people arrested have been released on bail and inquiries continue. There have been no charges. The Times reported this month that 79th Group's board included a former senior HM Revenue & Customs official who was in charge of combating fraud for the tax office. Andy Cole, former director of specialist investigations at HMRC, was a non-executive adviser. There is no suggestion of wrongdoing by Cole or that he is being investigated. He has not been arrested. Administrators from Grant Thornton have told 79th Group investors that 'we believe this is a Ponzi', the term for a fraudulent investment scheme in which early investors are paid with money from later investors rather than legitimate business activities. Banks have a regulatory duty to counter the risk that they might be used to further financial crime. Lenders face strict 'know your customer' and anti-money laundering rules; adherence requires due diligence, transaction monitoring and reporting of suspicious activity. Three sets of insolvency firms are engaged on the case. Administrators are liaising with NatWest over the outstanding charge owed to the bank, which has said it is not in a position to release it, according to its report. In 2021, NatWest was fined £264.8 million for anti-money laundering failures related to the gold trading business Fowler Oldfield. This month Barclays was fined £39.3 million for failing to tackle financial crime risks in its dealings with Stunt & Co, which received £46.8 million from Fowler Oldfield.