The laws of conducting surveillance on insurance claimants can vary by state and even by country.
An article appearing in Out-Law.com highlights the potential conflict of British laws that involve government surveillance and verifying the validity of an insurance claim.
In August 2002, the UK police instructed a private detective firm to observe a former sergeant to see if he was doing anything that was inconsistent with his claimed injuries. Nine minutes of video footage showed the ex-policeman mowing the lawn and in his car.
The former policeman wanted the Tribunal to rule against the police force under RIPA, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, but the Tribunal has found that it has no jurisdiction to do so because the filming of the former policeman did not constitute the kind of surveillance that RIPA governs.
The Tribunal is where individuals who think that their rights have been infringed can complain about the actions of public bodies. The Tribunal, though, only has jurisdiction if the surveillance dealt with is “directed surveillance” within the meaning of sections 26 and 48 (1) and (2) of RIPA.
See: The ruling (27-page / 231 KB PDF)