logo
What is claim farming – and is there anything wrong with it?

What is claim farming – and is there anything wrong with it?

The Guardian18-02-2025

For many people, the first time they ever heard the term 'claim farming' was last week, when New South Wales police announced seven arrests had been made and an allegedly fraudulent claims farming syndicate had been uncovered.
Police alleged that 'claims farmers' at the heart of the scheme coached former young offenders, inmates and public school students, on how to file false compensation claims for historic child sexual abuse while in care, then sold those referrals on to law firms in Sydney.
Claim farming, a practice that these arrests have shone a light on, is legal in most states including NSW, where intermediaries are allowed to sell on the details of victims to law firms, who then make claims on their behalf. Last week's arrests were not due to claim farming per se, but allegations that the claims being farmed were fraudulent.
Police will allege in court that in relation to the matters they had charged so far, the seven charged stood to make $3.75m. But Det Supt Gordon Arbinja said police would allege in court that at the time of arrest the group held another 100 applications, and the intervention of police last week prevented another $30m in compensation being paid out.
In his press conference announcing the arrests of the allegedly fraudulent claim farming syndicate, Arbinja stated those charged had allegedly targeted three compensation programs, including the National Redress Scheme. The NRS was established after the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse as a means of providing financial redress to victims. The claims are capped at $150,000, but have a lower threshold for proof than civil claims and are far more accessible.
Claim farming is not illegal in most of the country – though Queensland and South Australia have introduced legislation to prohibit it and the NSW government has a draft exposure bill seeking to outlaw the practice.
Groups who engage in claim farming argue they act as trusted intermediaries between victims and a complex, overwhelming legal system and enable more people to access compensation by facilitating introductions between victim-survivors and trusted law firms.
But many lawyers and advocates argue that claims farming itself is too easy to exploit, and makes it harder for genuine survivors to be believed and get justice.
Someone who is familiar with claim farming is Adair Donaldson, a Queensland lawyer who has worked getting compensation for victims – including victims of childhood sexual abuse – for more than two decades. Donaldson has been approached many times by 'claims farmers' trying to sell him the details of potential clients.
He says over the years he regularly received calls, often from members of survivor advocacy groups, offering to refer potential clients to him for a fee.
'This wasn't limited to one or two people. There were a number of organisations that I could think of that were doing this practice,' he says.
'What they would then do is that they often targeted lower socioeconomic areas or people … [or] our prison systems, and they would then contact these people and then engage with lawyers offering to sell their claims to the lawyers.'
Law firms are then able to make civil claims on behalf of the clients – suing institutions or government departments for compensation for historic sexual abuse, for example – and then take their legal fees from the eventual payout.
John Rule, a principal lawyer at Maurice Blackburn, has also experienced these offers – and, like Donaldson, he does not accept referrals from claims farmers.
'Someone who's sort of self-styled as an advocate, they go and collect up a whole lot of claims from a particular institution, say, a particular private school or whatever it is, and then they approach us and try to sell to us in bulk. We've been very conscious about that from the start, of not engaging with those sorts of people.'
Donaldson has heard of claims farmers charging law firms fees of between $4,500 and $6,500 for each client referral. But Guardian Australia has seen documents from one survivor advocacy group citing fees of up to $14,000.
Several lawyers told Guardian Australia they have heard from people who have been 'claim farmed' that the referral fee paid by the law firm to the claim farmer was then added to the individual's legal bill as a 'disbursement', meaning claim farmers are not only profiting from referring victims, but the victims are also effectively paying to be claim farmed.
A key issue, says Rule, is that claims farming could become an 'incentive to turn a blind eye' to suspect claims.
'[Claims farmers can] undermine legitimate claims by survivors of abuse, and those survivors of abuse are, by definition, incredibly vulnerable and already distrustful of the system and the abuse survivors really need a system they can trust,' Rule says.
'An unfortunate reality is that at some of these boys' homes and juvenile detention centres, they had disproportionately higher levels of sexual and physical abuse. So there are a lot of legitimate claims from there, and those ones, I think, are going to be treated especially harshly by defendants and insurers and possibly courts,' Rule says. 'So it has very real world consequences in the way that it will make the process much harder on legitimate survivors.'
One lawyer, who works at Knowmore, the not-for-profit organisation that assists survivors in accessing the National Redress Scheme, has spoken on condition of anonymity about clients who have come to her seeking help after having been claim-farmed.
She says these clients didn't always have a clear sense of who was representing them and how the fees work, and sometimes did not realise the claims farmer was being paid for their involvement in their case.
'[Sometimes] the survivor doesn't even know that the person that seems to be wanting to help them was actually taking a cut. And I think when the survivor does find that out, they feel like they've been taken advantage of, and that those people were out to make money from their pain,' she says.
The lawyer says she has heard of survivors being 'cold-called' by claim farmers asking them about their childhood sexual abuse, which they may not have disclosed to anyone before, in a process she described as being 'not at all trauma-informed', before offering to sign them up to a law firm.
'So the process can be incredibly re-traumatising for them, and then to find that the person that they were trusting had taken advantage of them and used them to make money, clients have told us how devastating that is.'
Jackie Mead, the CEO of Knowmore, is aware of cases where survivors have signed up with claims farmers and been told they will win a huge sum in civil litigation, only for the lawyer to realise that such a claim wasn't likely to be successful because of the higher threshold of proof for civil claims.
'The fallback is that they then say, well, we can get you $85,000 through the redress scheme. But by then, if they've racked up $40,000 worth of legal fees, when they could have had the same service for free in terms of getting their redress payment, that's a massive issue.'
Mead says she knows of cases where half of people's redress payments went on legal fees, something she says is 'abhorrent', especially given that protections are in place to try to ensure the redress payment goes entirely to the survivor of abuse. For example, redress payments cannot be garnished by Centrelink, even if the person had a debt to Centrelink.
Mead says the allegedly fraudulent claims exposed by police last week will have a huge impact on trust in the system – for decision-makers of claims, survivors who might fear they won't be believed, and for public perception of people accessing compensation and redress.
'We have to remember, for so long, these people weren't believed, and so for it now to be a situation where anybody has to scratch their head and think, 'Is this a real claim or is it a fraudulent claim?' It's terrible.'
In Australia, children, young adults, parents and teachers can contact the Kids Helpline on 1800 55 1800; adult survivors can seek help at Blue Knot Foundation on 1300 657 380. Other sources of help can be found at Child Helplines International

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Child sexual abuse victims 'denied justice' after compensation scheme scrapped over cost
Child sexual abuse victims 'denied justice' after compensation scheme scrapped over cost

Sky News

time04-05-2025

  • Sky News

Child sexual abuse victims 'denied justice' after compensation scheme scrapped over cost

Sky News can reveal that the government has rowed back on a national compensation scheme for victims of child sexual abuse, despite it being promised under the previous Conservative administration. A National Redress Scheme was one of 20 key recommendations made by the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA), but a Home Office report reveals the government has scrapped it because of the cost. Marie, who is 71, suffered alleged sexual, physical, and emotional abuse at Greenfield House Convent in St Helens, Merseyside, between 1959 and 1962, and is still fighting for compensation. As soon as she arrived as a six-year-old, Marie says her hair was cut off, her name changed, and she experienced regular beatings from the nuns and students. She claims a nun instigated the violence, including when Marie was held down so that her legs were "spread-eagled" as she was sexually abused with a coat hanger. Marie has received an apology from the Catholic body that ran the home; she tried to sue them, but her claim was rejected because it was filed too long after the alleged abuse. In February, ministers said the law would change for victims of sexual abuse trying to sue institutions for damages, which was a recommendation from the IICSA. Previously, people had to make a civil claim before they were 21, unless the victim could prove a fair trial could proceed despite the time lapse. Campaigners argued for the time limit to be removed as, on average, victims wait 26 years to come forward. Changes to the 1980 Limitation Act could lead to more people making claims. Civil cases 'can take three to five years' But Peter Garsden, president of the Association of Child Abuse Lawyers, worries that when it comes to historical abuse where the defendant is dead, institutions will still argue that it is impossible to have a fair trial and will fight to have the case thrown out of court. Mr Garsden said it takes "between three and five years" for a civil case to get to trial. He warned that claimants "can end up losing if you go through that process. Whereas the Redress Scheme would be quicker, much more straightforward, and much more likely to give justice to the victims". Victim awarded £10 compensation Jimbo, who was a victim of abuse at St Aidan's children's home in Cheshire, took his case to the High Court twice and the Court of Appeal three times, but, after 13 years, all he ended up with was £10 for his bus fare to court. Despite the Lord Justice of Appeal saying he believed that the abuse had occurred, Jimbo lost his claim because of the time limit for child sexual abuse claims to be made. Neither Marie nor Jimbo is likely to benefit from the removal of the time limit for personal injury claims, which is why Mr Garsden is calling on the government to implement a National Redress Scheme for victims of sexual abuse, as recommended by the IICSA. Hundreds of millions paid to victims The governments in Scotland and Northern Ireland have set up compensation schemes and paid hundreds of millions of pounds to victims. In 2023, the then Conservative government said a similar scheme would be organised for England and Wales. But the Home Office admitted in its Tackling Child Sexual Abuse: Progress Update that it "is not currently taking forward any further steps on the IICSA proposal for a separate, national financial redress scheme for all survivors of child sexual abuse". "In the current fiscal environment, this recommendation is very difficult to take forward," it added. For victims, the scheme was the last chance of compensation for a lifetime blighted by abuse. "The money is about justice and about all the other people who have had to suffer this abuse," Marie said.

Stamp fanatic professor stole 3,000 items from Scotland's national archive
Stamp fanatic professor stole 3,000 items from Scotland's national archive

The Guardian

time25-03-2025

  • The Guardian

Stamp fanatic professor stole 3,000 items from Scotland's national archive

Scotland's national archive has traced the mysterious disappearance of more than 3,000 historical documents over a period of 30 years to a history professor with an all-consuming interest in stamps. The theft began to unravel when a National Records of Scotland archivist attended an auction in London in 1994. There, he discovered that 200 of the items for sale belonged to the archive, some still marked with their NRS reference numbers. The items, 3,100 items in total, mainly family, estate and business correspondence, were traced back to an academic and archivist, Prof David Macmillan, who died in 1987. Born in Ayrshire, Macmillan studied history at the University of Glasgow before teaching at the University of Sydney and then Trent University in Ontario, Canada, where he was a professor for 20 years. Records showed that he made annual visits to the NRS archives as a user from 1969 until 1980, when he was caught taking a single item from the archive in Edinburgh and his access was immediately revoked. It was assumed at the time that this was an isolated incident. But the scale of his thefts became apparent in 2012, when a researcher saw a reference in an online catalogue at Trent University to an item he thought may have belonged in Scotland and raised concerns. NRS archivists went on to discover about 2,900 items which had been stolen by Macmillan and then gifted to Trent University's archives after his death. Although Prof Macmillan was not convicted of any offences, NRS is confident that he carried out the thefts, which experts believe were motivated by his interest in stamps and postmarks. The correspondence he took was not of high financial or historical value, and it remains a mystery why someone whose own working life was sustained by the use of archives would abuse the trust of these institutions in such a blatant manner. Dr Alan Borthwick, head of medieval and early modern records at NRS, said: 'In essence he was looking for correspondence, especially from parts of the world where Scots were involved in general personal or business matters, but also routine domestic correspondence, which might turn out to have unusual postmarks – a bit magpie-like, he was attracted by something 'shiny' even if most people couldn't see the attraction.' NRS now has almost all its documents back in their rightful position, overseen by more robust security measures than Macmillan encountered, which protect its collection of 38m documents spanning nearly 1,000 years of Scottish history. Of the 3,100 items returned, about 2,000 were stolen from the NRS archives, with others taken directly from other institutions across the UK including the National Archives and the University of Glasgow, the University of Edinburgh and the National Library of Scotland. About 500 items were found to belong to collections held by private owners, and 100 items remain of unknown origin. Alison Byrne, chief executive of NRS, said: 'These historical thefts were on an unprecedented scale and carried out we believe by one individual who was a regular visitor to the institutions he stole from. 'Thanks to the highly detailed and painstaking work of NRS archivists, we have been able to restore these records to their original collections and ensure they are available for study once again.'

Alleged sexual abuse claim farm kingpin used law firm to get fraudulent $650,000 government payout, police allege
Alleged sexual abuse claim farm kingpin used law firm to get fraudulent $650,000 government payout, police allege

The Guardian

time25-03-2025

  • The Guardian

Alleged sexual abuse claim farm kingpin used law firm to get fraudulent $650,000 government payout, police allege

An alleged kingpin of a fraudulent claims farming ring used a prestigious law firm to submit an allegedly fraudulent historical sexual abuse compensation claim worth more than $650,000 against the New South Wales government, a court will hear. Fotis Frank Antonios, 54, was arrested in February and is facing 21 charges, including multiple charges of inciting people to make fraudulent claims of historical child sexual assault and dishonestly obtaining a financial advantage. Antonios also faces a charge of dishonestly obtaining financial advantage by deception. Police will allege he made a fraudulent historical child sexual abuse compensation claim against the Department of Communities and Justice between 2020 and 2022 for alleged sexual abuse at Mount Penang Boys Home between 1987 and 1988. Police allege the claims resulted in fees of approximately $415,000 paid to Slater and Gordon Lawyers, with a settlement of $244,303.29 paid to Antonios after legal fees, according to the court documents. Antonios is also charged with submitting a fraudulent application for compensation to the National Redress Scheme and gaining financial compensation up to $150,000 from the government. He has been refused bail. Police allege in court documents that Antonios received multiple payments of approximately $2,200 referrals of individuals to the law firm AJB Stevens Lawyers Sydney, after allegedly inciting people to make fraudulent statements of historical child sexual assault or abuse. No charges have been laid against any of the law firms and police have not suggested the law firms knew the claims were allegedly false. Charges have been laid against 10 people in relation to an alleged fraudulent 'claims farming' ring. New South Wales and Queensland police made the arrests through Strike Force Veritas in February. Det Supt Gordon Arbinja alleged that 'claim farmers' approached former young offenders, inmates and public school students, and encouraged them to file fraudulent compensation claims for historic child sexual abuse while in care. The claims were brought against the NSW Department of Communities and Justice and the NSW Department of Education. Antonios and his nine co-accused will face court in Sydney on 22 May.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store