Insurance fraud continues to challenge the industry, often requiring careful investigation to uncover. For organizations like Maryland Auto Insurance, identifying these inconsistencies is critical to preventing financial losses.
Recently, Maryland Auto received a claim filed by a policyholder involving his Buick. The driver reported that in November 2025, at approximately 2:00 a.m., an unknown vehicle struck his parked car from the rear and fled the scene. The policyholder claimed that he briefly blacked out and did not contact the police at the time of the incident. Prince George’s County Police Department confirmed no response occurred at the scene, and the first report of the alleged loss was logged over eight hours later, at 10:25 a.m.
An appraisal of the insured vehicle determined it to be a total loss, with damages exceeding $5,000. The vehicle showed damage consistent with the details of the claim, however, upon further investigation, tag reader and location data revealed that the same damage existed prior to the policy’s inception in October 2025. Furthermore, the vehicle had been uninsured for approximately eight months between February 2025, when the policyholder first registered the vehicle, and October 2025, when the coverage was purchased.
Tag reader sightings of the vehicle before and after the alleged loss occurred at an address not listed on the policy, contradicting the policyholder’s statements that the vehicle was parked and not being driven.
During the Examination Under Oath conducted in January 2026, the policyholder admitted he had no proof to establish the date of loss, could not explain the pre-existing damage, and could not provide documentation for when he first obtained the vehicle.
The policyholder also could not provide evidence to explain why a comparison of appraisal photos and tag reader data confirmed that the damage being claimed was present before coverage began.
Based on these inconsistencies, lack of proof of a covered loss after policy inception, pre-existing damage, contradictory statements, and concerns surrounding proper registration compliance, the policyholder’s account was deemed not credible. Coverage under the Uninsured Motorist portion of the policy was denied, protecting company resources and ensuring fair treatment for all insureds.
Maryland Auto’s investigative work highlights the importance of thorough review, regulatory awareness, and fact-finding in uncovering misrepresentations and maintaining the integrity of the insurance process.
