That depends on what he was trying to do with that comment.
I believe that he's trying to make a distinction between the number of claims filed by people who take corners faster and the size of the claims made by such people when they do file a claim.
Generally, "fewer" is used when talking about things that come in discrete amounts, and "less" when talking about continuous things. For example, if you were comparing the amount of water in two glasses of water you would say that one has less water than the other, but if you were comparing the number of ice cubes in the two glasses you would say one has fewer ice cubes than the other.
However, "less" is often used even for discrete things when there is a unit attach, such as with money. E.g., we might reasonably say either "the waller contained less than $5" or the "the wallet contained less than $10".
Before the late 18th century "less" was used with discrete things. As with many things in grammar, some prescriptivist decided that people were doing it wrong and made a new rule, and we got stuck with it. And like other such bogus rules (such as not splitting infinitives and not ending sentences with prepositions) current usage is tending away from following the rule.
The main argument I've seen that we need different words for comparing discrete things and comparing continuous things is that it is less ambiguous when it would not be clear what word the comparison word applies to. For instance suppose there were two studies of possible cancer treatments. Study A produced 2 promising treatments and study B produced 4 promising treatments. All of the treatments from study A look like they will be better than all of the treatments from study B.
Using the prescriptivist take on "less" and "fewer" we could say that study A has "fewer promising results" (we are comparing the number of results) but study B has "less promising results" (we are comparing the quality of the results).
Anyway, I think that is the distinction he was trying to make.