Insurance & Claims
The £2.4M fraudulent claim. The timeline that proved it.
When a claimant's narrative contradicts the chronological record, the gap between their story and what actually happened is where fraud hides. We reconstruct the true timeline so you see exactly what the evidence shows — before the payout hits your account.
Reconstruction Timeline
Claimant files claim
Alleges damage occurred on Jan 14 at 3pm during stated incident
Initial claim documentation reviewed
Photos, receipts, damage report all provided by claimant
Claims assessor conducts site visit
Damage consistent with stated timeline — initial assumption: legitimate claim
Detailed timeline review initiated
Security footage, weather records, and witness statements collected
Discrepancy emerges
Weather records show no conditions matching incident description on Jan 14
Fraud investigation launched
Claimant timeline contradicts environmental and surveillance data
The Contradiction
One of these is wrong — and the longer it stays invisible, the more it costs.
What was reported
Claimant stated incident occurred Jan 14, 3pm
Damage photos consistent with description
Initial receipts provided
Assessor found damage as claimed
What actually happened
Weather records show clear skies Jan 14 — no storm claimed
Security footage shows no incident on Jan 14
Satellite imagery confirms conditions
Witness statements place claimant elsewhere that afternoon
Commercial Impact
£1.2M claim deemed fraudulent
Criminal referral filed
Claimant coverage denied
What would you do?
Without reconstruction
Damage assessed against claimant narrative only
Causation accepted based on claimant story
Timeline validated through claim documentation alone
Fraud signals missed until post-payout investigation
Financial exposure uncontained during investigation window
With RippleXn
Claimant timeline cross-referenced against environmental data
Causation validated against maintenance and equipment records
Full incident sequence reconstructed from multiple evidence sources
Fraud signals identified within investigation window
Claim denial supported by timeline evidence before payment
The invisible problem
The fraud that hides in timeline gaps
Claims assessment follows a damage-first narrative. The damage is real, the documents are provided, and the timeline seems plausible. But when you reconstruct the actual sequence of events — weather records, maintenance logs, incident reports, witness statements — the gaps between what the claimant says happened and what the evidence shows actually occurred is where fraud lives.
Incident timing contradicts environmental or surveillance data
Causation story mismatches equipment or maintenance records
Repair work was performed before the incident was allegedly reported
Financial motive precedes the claim date by weeks or months
Witness statements place claimant in different location than alleged
How we reconstruct the true incident timeline
Ingest
Upload claim documentation, incident reports, maintenance records, witness statements, and external data sources
Extract
Timeline events pulled from each source — dates, times, sequences, and responsible parties
Sequence
All events plotted chronologically across all sources to reveal the true incident sequence
Cross-Check
Claimant narrative compared against weather, surveillance, maintenance, and witness data
Surface
Timeline contradictions identified and quantified for fraud assessment and investigation guidance
The commercial reality
See the claim for what it actually is before you pay it
Damage can be real and fraud can be present. The question is whether the timeline of events matches the claim narrative. We show you the gaps.
Ready to apply this to your situation?
Get a personalized assessment. Start with a £149 diagnostic check or dive straight into a full reconstruction.
Click here to find out moreDon't pay the claim until you see the timeline
Upload your claim documentation, maintenance records, and external evidence. We reconstruct the incident timeline and surface contradictions before your payout date.