$40,000 over a three-year period never once suggested to his patients that he was going to overcharge their insurer, a Supreme Court jury heard yesterday.

"Was there ever any indication that he would present some bogus claim to the insurance company?'' defence attorney Mr. Julian Hall asked in reference to his client, Hamilton dentist Vincent Bridgewater.

"None,'' a parade of witnesses who had been treated by Bridgewater testified.

In fact, Mr. Hall told the court, Bridgewater had repaid BF&M Life 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, Mr. Hall said.

The dentist, who has pleaded not guilty to 14 charges of fraudulently obtaining payments from BF&M Life and three charges of attempted fraud, maintains that 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.

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

Yesterday, Mr. Hall queried the dentist's patients on whether or not there had been any hint of fraud during their dealings with him.

Mr. Hall's co-counsel on the case is Mr. Marc Telemaque.

"Did you know that in August of 1991 -- after he had completed all the work -- the bridges Dr. Bridgewater had placed in your mouth weren't quite the right size?'' Mr. Hall asked one witness, Antony Christopher, in a typical exchange.

"Yes,'' Christopher replied. "I had to go back.'' "Did you also know,'' Mr. Hall continued, "that Dr. Bridgewater had sent $1,200 to BF&M Life to correct an overpayment?'' "No,'' Christopher testified. "I did not know that.'' "And there was never a time when he said: `Mr. Christopher, I am going to pull a scam, I am going to bill the insurance company for twice the work I am doing?'' "No,'' the witness answered. "Never.'' Later, witness Evangeline Anderson of Sandys was asked to read from an excerpt of her original Police statement.

"I am completely satisfied with the bridgework and have had no problems with it since,'' read Anderson, who had oral surgery to replace two bridges.

"I do not recall being presented with any bill by Dr. Bridgewater or any member of his staff with respect to this matter.'' Another witness, Carmelita Best of Devonshire, testified that she had received no billing invoice from either Dr. Bridgewater or BF&M Life after her surgery.

Many of the others said they had received a notice from BF&M Life only.

One witness, Sarah Dent, said she queried Bridgewater in person after she received a notice from BF&M Life of a $7,200 claim by the dentist.

Half of it -- some $3,600 -- was payable by her.

"When I showed him the form, he took it and tore it up,'' testified Dent, who later agreed to write a letter on behalf of BF&M Life's case.

"He just said: `Don't worry. You don't have to pay it.'' The trial, which is being presided over by Puisne Judge the Hon. Mrs. Justice Wade, continues today.