Insurance company excluded key video evidence in fraud case against policyholder

A Finnish court has acquitted Sofia Tuomi of serious fraud charges after ruling that her insurance provider, Fennia, withheld critical video evidence during the investigation, Yle’s MOT investigative program reports. Legal scholars describe the case as highly unusual, raising concerns over the integrity of the pre-trial process.

The Kanta-Häme District Court dismissed all charges against Tuomi in March 2026, following a years-long legal battle initiated by Fennia. The insurer had accused Tuomi of faking a severe chronic pain condition, CRPS, after a workplace fall in 2017 to fraudulently claim over €1 million in disability benefits. Fennia terminated her payments in 2020 after deploying private insurance investigators to surveil her.

Court finds selective evidence presentation
Central to the prosecution’s case was a video compilation prepared by Fennia, showing Tuomi walking her dog without mobility aids—footage the insurer argued proved she had misrepresented her condition to medical professionals. However, the court determined that Fennia’s compilation omitted another video from the same day, in which Tuomi is seen struggling painfully up stairs with her husband’s assistance, appearing unsteady and in distress.

“This is improper,” said Sakari Melander, professor of criminal law, in comments to MOT. “Prosecutors have a legal obligation to consider evidence that contradicts the charges. The judgment states unequivocally that other footage from that day exists—but it wasn’t presented. That’s highly problematic.”

Matti Tolvanen, another criminal law professor, called the case “bizarre”, noting that while victims (or affected parties, like insurers) may submit material to police, “the setup here is unusual and risks one-sided evidence.” Unlike tax auditors, who operate under official accountability, Finland’s insurance investigators—governed only by broad financial-sector guidelines—lack statutory oversight.

Prosecution marred by irregularities
The case faced repeated delays after the initial prosecutor refused to handle it, forcing the Prosecutor General to appoint replacements. The court ultimately ruled that Tuomi’s fluctuating mobility—common in chronic pain syndromes—was misrepresented by Fennia’s selective editing. The insurer’s surveillance report also failed to document her need for assistance on stairs, a fact confirmed in trial.

Fennia declined to appeal the acquittal, leaving the ruling final. Tuomi, now in her late 20s, told MOT the ordeal had overshadowed a decade of her life: “Of course it feels good to be cleared, but I’m also deeply sad. I should’ve spent my early adulthood thinking about normal things—who to see, whether to go out, work—not fighting this.”