The Story That Wrote Itself Video Number 51
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/arson-for-profit-fails-guilt-established-barry-zalma-esq-cfe and see the full video at https://rumble.com/v104lvd-arson-for-profit-fails-and-guilt-established.html and at
and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4150 posts.
Posted on April 8, 2022 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://rumble.com/v104lvd-arson-for-profit-fails-and-guilt-established.html and at
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.
On February 27, 1995 the District Attorney filed the following In the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego that writes this chapter for me. The District Attorney stated, as part of the criminal Information (the charge) as follows:
“COUNT — 1 CONSPIRACY TO COMMIT A CRIME “On or about December 10, 1991 JORGE NOREN HOLLAND did willfully and unlawfully conspire together and with another person (Armen Al Zennedjian) and persons whose identity is unknown to commit the crime of Arson of an Inhabited Structure or Inhabited Property, Penal Code § 451 (b), in violation of Penal Code Section 182 (a) (1).
“The object of the conspiracy was to set fire to and burn the house located at 3030 Shelby Drive, in the County of San Diego, which belonged to and was occupied by JORGE NOREN HOLLAND in an effort for JORGE NOREN HOLLAND to collect the insurance proceeds as a result of the fire “Thereafter, in the County of San Diego, State of California, pursuant to the above conspiracy and in furtherance of the objects thereof:
“OVERT ACT NO. (01): On or about December 10, 1991, at the house located at 3030 Shelby Drive, JORGE NOREN HOLLAND showed Armen Al Zennedjian where the house key to 3030 Shelby Drive was located.
“OVERT ACT NO. (02): ……entered the house with Armen Al Zennedjian.
“OVERT ACT NO. (03):…at the house HOLLAND showed …Zennedjian around the interior of the house.
“OVERT ACT NO. (04): On or about December 11, 1991, …Zennedjian telephoned …HOLLAND to inform him that …Zennedjian would go to the house …on December 12, 1991 to cause the house to catch fire and burn.
“OVERT ACT NO. (05): On or about December 11, 1991, …HOLLAND had a telephone conversation with …Zennedjian about …Zennedjian going to the house …on December 12, 1991 to cause the house to catch fire and burn.
“OVERT ACT NO. (06): On or about December 12, 1991, at his residence in the City of El Cajon, …Zennedjian obtained gasoline cans which he placed into his pickup truck.
“OVERT ACT NO. (07): On or about December 12, 1991, at a gas station near his residence in the City of El Cajon, …Zennedjian purchased gasoline, and filled the gas cans that he had obtained from his residence with the gasoline.
“OVERT ACT NO. (08): On or about December 12, 1991, …Zennedjian drove his pickup truck from the gas station near his residence in the City of El Cajon with the gas cans filled with gasoline to the house located at 3030 Shelby Drive.
“OVERT ACT NO. (09): On or about December 12, 1991, at 3030 Shelby Drive, …Zennedjian obtained the house key shown to him by …HOLLAND at the house…
“OVERT ACT NO. (10): On or about December 12, 1991, …Zennedjian used the house key shown to him by …HOLLAND to unlock the door to the house…
“OVERT ACT NO. (11): On or about December 12, 1991, …Zennedjian entered the house at 3030 Shelby Drive. “OVERT ACT NO. (12): On or about December 12, 1991, …Zennedjian while inside the house
…opened the sliding glass porch door and exited the house…
“OVERT ACT NO. (13): …Zennedjian reentered the house … and carried the gas cans filled with gasoline that he had brought with him, into the house…
“COUNT — 2 ARSON OF AN INHABITED STRUCTURE OR PROPERTY “On or about December 12, 1991 JORGE NOREN HOLLAND did willfully, unlawfully, and maliciously set fire to and burn and cause to be burned an inhabited structure and inhabited property, in violation of PENAL CODE SECTION 451(b). “And, it is further alleged that in the commission and attempted commission of the above offense, the said defendant, JORGE NOREN HOLLAND did take, damage, and destroy property, with the intent to cause such taking, damage, and destruction, and the loss exceeds one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000), within the meaning of Penal Code section 12022.6(b).
“COUNT — 3 FALSE OR FRAUDULENT INSURANCE CLAIM “On or about March 27, 1992 JORGE NOREN HOLLAND did knowingly and unlawfully present or cause to be presented a false or fraudulent claim for the payment of loss under a contract of insurance, in violation of INSURANCE CODE SECTION 1871.1.” The only oddity about the Information quoted above is its rarity. Those of us involved with the Insurance industry should cheer the actions of the San Diego District Attorney and the insurers who refused to pay to avoid litigation with the two individuals alleged by the Information to have committed the crimes of arson and insurance fraud.
Mr. Holland Pleaded guilty to insurance fraud and was sentenced to make restitution to the insurance company and placed on probation. He, in fact made full restitution to the insurance company to avoid immediate incarceration and a copy of that check is hanging on my office wall.
Zalma Opinion
American States Insurance Company (the victim) and its investigator Steve Thompson should be honored for its efforts to defeat this fraud and help the state of California to bring the arsonist to justice.
(c) 2022 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.
Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE, now limits his practice to service as an insurance consultant specializing in insurance coverage, insurance claims handling, insurance bad faith and insurance fraud almost equally for insurers and policyholders. He practiced law in California for more than 44 years as an insurance coverage and claims handling lawyer and more than 54 years in the insurance business. He is available at http://www.zalma.com and [email protected].
Subscribe to Zalma on Insurance at locals.com https://zalmaoninsurance.local.com/subscribe.
Subscribe to Excellence in Claims Handling at https://barryzalma.substack.com/welcome.
Write to Mr. Zalma at [email protected]; http://www.zalma.com; http://zalma.com/blog; daily articles are published at https://zalma.substack.com.
Go to the podcast Zalma On Insurance at https://anchor.fm/barry-zalma; Follow Mr. Zalma on Twitter at https://twitter.com/bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/c/c-262921; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the Insurance Claims Library – https://zalma.com/blog/insurance-claims-library/
Happy Law Day
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/zalmas-insurance-fraud-letter-may-1-2026-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2tywc, see the video at at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
THE SOURCE FOR THE INSURANCE FRAUD PROFESSIONAL
ZIFL – Volume 30, Issue 9 – May 1, 2026
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter (ZIFL) continues its 30th year of publication dedicated to those involved in reducing the effect of insurance fraud. ZIFL is published 24 times a year and is written by Barry Zalma.
DOJ Creates National Fraud Enforcement Division
Will the Feds Take on Insurance Fraud? Possibly as Part of a National Anti-Fraud Effort
On April 7, 2026, the Acting Attorney General, Todd Blanche, issued a memorandum establishing the Department of Justice National Fraud Enforcement Division (NFED). The memo describes an ambitious, but perhaps redundant, vision for this ...
When Abalone Died As a Result of Multiple Causes The Efficient Proximate Cause Requires Payment
Post number 5345
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/efficient-proximate-cause-doctrine-saves-claim-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-yndlc, see the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In American Abalone Farms, LLC v. Star Insurance Company et al., H052643, California Court of Appeals, Sixth District (April 27, 2026) the Court of Appeals dealt with an insurance coverage issue that required application of the efficient proximate cause doctrine.
FACTS
American Abalone Farms, LLC ("American Abalone" ) operates an aquaculture farm in Santa Cruz County, California, raising abalone in tanks. In August 2020, the CZU Lightning Complex Fires led to a prolonged power outage and road closures near the farm. As a result, the farm’s water pumps failed, causing the death of most of the ...
Breach of a Specific Condition Precedent Is a Complete Defense
See the video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
In United Services Automobile Association and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Anthony Wenzell, 2026 CO 25 (Colo. Apr. 27, 2026) Anthony Wenzell was rear-ended in a car accident. He had a significant prior 2014 accident that required back surgery.
Wenzell claimed underinsured-motorist (UIM) benefits under three policies: (1) the tortfeasor’s liability policy, (2) his own primary UIM policy with State Farm, and (3) an excess UIM policy issued by USAA (under his brother’s policy, which contained an “other insurance” clause making USAA’s coverage excess over any collectible insurance).
After receiving the claims, both USAA and State Farm repeatedly requested that Wenzell execute comprehensive medical-release authorizations so they could obtain his full medical records and ...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
It is Fraud to Make the Same Claim Twice
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/fraud-make-same-claim-twice-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-c4g8c and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Chutzpah: After Being Paid for a New Roof Insured Makes Second Claim For Same Damages
Post number 5347
No One is Entitled to be Paid for the Same Loss Twice
In Mohammed Ali Khalili v. State Farm Lloyds, No. 14-25-00611-CV, Court of Appeals of Texas (April 30, 2026) Khalili maintained a State Farm Lloyds homeowners insurance policy for decades. In 2008 he filed a roof-damage claim; State Farm paid him to replace the entire roof (shingles and gutters). Khalili never replaced the roof and repeated his claim.
BACKGROUND
In 2021 he filed a second roof claim. State Farm’s inspectors found the roof “very old” with extensive non-storm-related damage. The claim was denied because (1) the damage did not exceed the deductible and (2) State Farm had already paid for a full roof replacement.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
State Farm filed motion for summary...
What Must be Done after Notice of a Claim is Received by the Insurer
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/gzvvdkMZ and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Below you will read from this post until you reach the the end of this blog post as the free part of an Excellence in Claims Handling post. To read the full article and receive all articles for members of Excellence in Claims Handling you should consider joining as a paid member to get full access to articles for members only, to our news, analysis, insurance coverage, claims, insurance fraud and insurance webinars, by clicking at the subscription link below.
A first party property policy does not insure property: it insures a person, partnership, corporation or other entity against the risk of loss of the property. Before an insured can make a claim for indemnity under a policy of first party property insurance the insured must prove that there was damage to property the risk of loss of which was insured by the policy. The obligation imposed on the insured ...
