An ex-soldier who tried to pocket £1.6m by claiming he was left severely disabled and super-sensitive to the cold while on duty in Estonia has been hit with a £70,000 court bill after being filmed walking with no stick and wearing sandals.
Former lance corporal Michael Mantey, 39, suffered a trench foot injury while in bitterly cold eastern Europe with the Royal Engineers in late 2017.
He sued the Ministry of Defence over its impact, claiming he wasn’t able to walk without an aid and that he had to bundle up in four layers of clothing when he went to see a doctor.
But after MoD investigators secretly filmed him in September 2021, wandering around with no stick or limp, and wearing open-toed sandals and no socks, he dropped his case.
The MoD said that, although the soldier had suffered trench foot, it had got better and he had been ‘deliberately malingering’ to claim a massive payout.
Former lance corporal Michael Mantey, 39, suffered a trench foot injury while on NATO duty in bitterly cold Estonia with the Royal Engineers in late 2017
And he now faces lawyers’ bills totalling more than £70,000 after the MoD hauled him to the High Court and judge Mr Justice Eyre found his claim had been ‘fundamentally dishonest.’
In his claim, Mr Mantey said he suffered his non-freezing cold injury (NCFI) when he had to sleep without a tent in bitterly cold Estonia while on Operation Cabrit in 2017.
An NCFI is a type of cold-sensitive injury to the hands and feet, first noted in the trenches of the First World War, caused when body tissue is exposed to excessive cold and wet conditions.
Mr Mantey claimed he was also subjected to other periods of working in damagingly cold temperatures, but was simply told to ‘man up’ when he complained to superiors.
The Ghana-born soldier had enlisted in the British Army in 2009 and served in the 22 and 26 Engineer Regiments, before being medically discharged in January 2020.
As part of his claim, Mr Mantey said he had incurred ‘additional heating costs’ through having to keep his house warmer than he would otherwise have done, and had to ‘purchase warmer clothing.’
He said the pain in his feet had interacted with a back problem, making it difficult for him to walk and leaving him relying on a stick to get around.
But having launched his claim, Mr Mantey ‘discontinued’ after he was secretly filmed and shown to be able to walk normally, MoD barrister Andrew Ward said during the trial last month.
Mr Ward said the footage revealed Mr Mantey walking without a stick on the morning and evening, and having changed into open-toed sandals and no socks by the end of the day.
That was completely different to how he had presented to a surgeon assessing him for his claim in London in the middle of the same day, when he was seen using a stick and wearing a ‘long, warm coat.’
It was also ‘in marked contrast’ to how he appeared when he saw another medic in relation to his claim a week earlier, when he had arrived limping and wearing layers of clothing.
On that occasion, he had turned up at the doctor’s office, bundled up in ‘three to four top layers, including t-shirt, sweatshirt, a coat, jeans and boots,’ said the barrister.
Mr Ward said the video surveillance footage showed that Mr Mantey could indeed get around without a stick, despite his claims of permanent disability.
He said medical experts could find ‘no medical explanation’ for the difference in appearance and symptoms and put it to Mr Mantey that his presentation with a limp and serious disability to the doctors was a ‘fake.’
Mr Mantey (pictured with a walking stick alongside his wife Georgette Fynn-Mantey) now faces lawyers’ bills totalling more than £70,000 after the MoD hauled him to the High Court and judge Mr Justice Eyre found his claim had been ‘fundamentally dishonest’
Giving evidence, Mr Mantey denied being dishonest, telling the judge that he could sometimes walk without a stick if he was having a good day and his medication was working well.
‘If only someone could see what I go through every day, then this story could be re-written,’ he said.
‘This is just one day of footage. I have been told my injuries would stay with me forever.
‘Pain comes when you’re not prepared for it. It comes when it wants to come..’
Giving judgment yesterday, Mr Justice Eyre said: ‘The MoD says that there was deliberate malingering whereas Mr Mantey says that his presentation at the examination was genuine, with the greater activity shown in the surveillance footage being atypical.’
He said he preferred the MoD’s explanation, finding that Mr Mantey had ‘deliberately presented himself in a false manner’ and ‘deliberately gave a false account of his symptoms.’
Mr Mantey ‘knew that he was not suffering from the symptoms and reduced functionality which he presented and reported’ to various medics in 2021 and 2022, he continued.
‘He chose to report symptoms which he knew were false and from which he was not suffering. He did so in the context of a substantial damages claim,’ he said.
‘The only possible explanation is that he did so deliberately and with a view to enhancing the value of the claim. Such conduct was clearly dishonest.
‘I find on the balance of probabilities that Mr Mantey suffered a minor NCFI, from which he had fully recovered at some point before September 2021.
‘He dishonestly portrayed himself as having suffered a more serious injury which had a continuing and disabling effect, doing so for financial gain.
‘That dishonesty tainted the whole of the claim. It went to the heart of the claim; it substantially affected the presentation of the case as a whole; and led to a significant inflation in the claim’s value.
‘Putting it shortly, there was dishonesty as to a central feature of the case, namely the extent and continuing effect of Mr Mantey’s injuries.’
His claim having been found to be ‘fundamentally dishonest,’ Mr Mantey is now liable to foot the bill for the MoD’s defence, which lawyers say will be more than £70,000.
