BROADCASTS.com

Published: April 7, 2022, 4:40 p.m.

b'

I Did It  

\\n

https://zalma.com/blogs 

\\n

Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE presents videos so you can learn how insurance  fraud is perpetrated and what is necessary to deter or defeat insurance  fraud.  Arson for Profit Admitted  One of my investigators met with the property manager of an Insured to  start the investigation of a fire claim believed to be arson. Since he  was just starting his investigation with a walk through the burned-out  shell the investigator was making conversation with the property  manager.  

\\n

\\u201cSteve, how long have you managed this property?\\u201d 

\\n

 \\u201cAbout six months.\\u201d  

\\n

\\u201cIt seems the fire started here on the service porch where the damage is  most severe; do you know how it started?\\u201d  

\\n

\\u201cSure,\\u201d the manager replied with confidence and no sign of concern \\u201cI  pulled a mattress off one of the beds, stacked up against the wall by  the service porch and lit it with a Bic lighter. Once it was burning  well, I left and drove four blocks away and came back in time to see the  flames coming from the building. I heard sirens so I just drove home.\\u201d  \\u201cWhy did you do that?\\u201d the investigator asked, incredulous and trying to  stay calm.  \\u201cThe owner asked me to burn the building and said he would pay me 10% of  whatever he got from the insurance company. When are you going to pay  him? I sure could use the money.\\u201d  The investigator of the arson case was experienced. He knew better than  to accept a confession, even one given under oath. The sworn statement  was only usable to defeat the claim if it could be corroborated. 

\\n

Without  corroboration it was useless. He explained the need for corroboration  to Steve.  Arson is not Excluded - It\'s Just a Fire  The Insured explained that he had recently been forced to fire Steve  because his work was shoddy and some of the rent Steve collected never  came to the Insured. Steve had threatened to cause harm to the insured  and had almost succeeded.  

\\n

The insured\\u2019s claim was paid in full. Steve, whose attempt to harm his  ex-employer was blatantly stupid, he faced two felony charges: (1)  Arson; and/or (2) perjury. His case was evaluated for possible  prosecution and the prosecutor \\u2013 since he felt no one was harmed since  the insured was paid \\u2013 refused to prosecute.  The insurer has also authorized counsel to sue Steve to recover the  money it paid to the Insured. After checking Steve\\u2019s lack of assets, a  decision was made not to sue.  ZALMA OPINION  Every claims investigation requires a thorough and complete  investigation. 

\\n

A confession, like that of Steve in this video, is not  always what it seems. Corroboration was needed and when it did not exist  it turned out that Steve was just trying to hurt his employer. A false  denial of the claims based on Steve\'s confession would have been wrong  and would have exposed the insurer to a bad faith lawsuit.

\\n\\n--- \\n\\nSupport this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/barry-zalma/support'