Payments were being made to dentists before their dental work is completed, former BF&M Insurance claims administrator Beverley Knights testified yesterday in the alleged fraud trial of Vincent Bridgewater.

But BF&M policy allowed for no payments to be made until after a dental treatment has begun, she said.

Knights was the prosecution's final witness. Defence lawyer Mr. Julian Hall plans to open his case on Monday with a submission before Puisne Judge the Hon. Mrs. Justice Ward.

Under cross examination from Mr. Hall, Knights said a dentist was entitled to payment as long as a treatment had been started.

She said she left her 20-year job with BF&M over a "mistake'' she had made and agreed with Mr. Hall she was made the "fall guy for some inadequacies at BF&M'', particularly concerning "lines of communication''.

She told the Supreme Court jury hearing the case that she felt she was treated "unfairly'' by the company.

It was Knights' job to calculate dentists' claims and send them to Accounts, thus authorising payment of them, she agreed.

She said she calculated the claims on the basis BF&M was responsible for 50 percent of a dental bill.

She agreed with Mr. Hall that it could happen that cheques were issued to dentists for pre-estimates. If they were though, the dentist would usually telephone if there was too much money paid.

However, she said dentists were expected to write "pre-estimate'' clearly on their claims forms, especially following the May 1990 policy change which required all dentists to send in pre-estimates for work over a certain amount due to "excessive amounts of money being paid out to dentists''.

In earlier testimony, Dr. Ian Campbell, said that upon examination of some of Bridgewater's clients, he found he had apparently claimed for an average of one or two more bridge units or crowns than he had put in their mouths. He told Solicitor General Mr. Barrie Meade he was not aware of any legal circumstances in which a patient's portion of the payment may be waved.

Dr. Nigel Chudleigh, who also found the dentist had apparently over-claimed, said a dentist would normally make any decision to cut back on bridge units or crowns before starting the treatment not afterwards.

Dr. Kenneth Snaith, chairman of the Bermuda Dental Board, also examined patients for police and BF&M and found Bridgewater had apparently over-claimed for some patients.

He agreed with Mr. Hall patients sometimes did not come back for treatment after it had been started.

BF&M consultant dentist Dr. Duncan Moran said he had became suspicious of Bridgewater's claims because he seemed to be performing a lot more crowns and bridges than his colleagues.

Bridgewater is accused of defrauding the BF&M of more than $40,000 over a three-year period.

Mr. Hall contends his client had repaid BF&M for work that he had sent in claims for but did not actually perform. He also hadn't been paid yet for work that was carried out.

He said Bridgewater, who denies 14 charges of fraudulently obtaining payments from BF&M and three charges of attempted fraud, maintains the disputed claims were "pre-estimates'' for dental work to be completed.

The prosecution contends that nothing on the submitted claims indicated they were estimates.

Mr. Meade has also pointed out that Bridgewater did not refund BF&M until a Police investigation of the matter had already begun.