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/
Policy Limits Demand Accepted Settles Claim
Post 5434
Posted on August 26, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g-ZtsSgK and at https://lnkd.in/ghMBdYWR
A Contingent Offer Accepted Ends the Dispute
In Farmers Insurance Exchange, a California Reciprocal Insurance Exchange, The Superior Court For The County Of San Bernardino, Kathleen Ann Wood, E087128, California Court of Appeals, (July 9, 2026) Farmers Insurance Exchange insured Doyle Archer under an automobile policy with bodily injury limits of $15,000 per person and $30,000 per accident.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Archer rear-ended Kathleen Ann Wood at a red light, causing Wood to assert a bodily injury claim against him. Wood’s counsel sent Farmers a pre-litigation settlement demand offering to resolve Wood’s claim for the available policy limits, stating that if the $100,000 demand exceeded the policy, the offer was for the policy limits.
Farmers timely responded in writing, agreed to pay Wood the $15,000 per-person policy limit, and provided the requested ...
Policy Limits Demand Accepted Settles Claim
Post 5434
Posted on August 26, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g-ZtsSgK and at https://lnkd.in/ghMBdYWR
A Contingent Offer Accepted Ends the Dispute
In Farmers Insurance Exchange, a California Reciprocal Insurance Exchange, The Superior Court For The County Of San Bernardino, Kathleen Ann Wood, E087128, California Court of Appeals, (July 9, 2026) Farmers Insurance Exchange insured Doyle Archer under an automobile policy with bodily injury limits of $15,000 per person and $30,000 per accident.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Archer rear-ended Kathleen Ann Wood at a red light, causing Wood to assert a bodily injury claim against him. Wood’s counsel sent Farmers a pre-litigation settlement demand offering to resolve Wood’s claim for the available policy limits, stating that if the $100,000 demand exceeded the policy, the offer was for the policy limits.
Farmers timely responded in writing, agreed to pay Wood the $15,000 per-person policy limit, and provided the requested ...
The Largest Residential Burglary of All Time
Post 5407
Fraud & the Fear of Bad Faith Suits
Posted on July 22, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gWQQEySW and at https://lnkd.in/gyhdK6wv
This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud explaining why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is one of a collection designed to help to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the Perpetrators than any Other Crime.
This is a Fictionalized True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud explaining why Insurance Fraud is a “Heads I Win, Tails You Lose” situation for Insurers. The story is one of a collection designed to help to Understand How Insurance Fraud in America is Costing Everyone who Buys Insurance Thousands of Dollars Every year and Why Insurance Fraud is Safer and More Profitable for the Perpetrators than any Other Crime.
After ...
Communications with Arson Investigation is Privileged
Post 5488
Posted on September 11, 2026 by Barry Zalma
ACE Was Not Required To Produce Any Disputed Document Because Each Was Protected By The Attorney-Client Privilege, or The Work-Product Doctrine.
See the full video at and at https://rumble.com/v7fbzvo-arson-for-profit-is-ground-to-deny-claim.html
In Rubesne Resources LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company v. ACE Property And Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-02300-DDD-SBP, United States District Court, D. Colorado (August 30, 2026) Rubesne Resources LLC sought insurance coverage from ACE Property and Casualty Company after a January 5, 2024 fire destroyed its business.
South Metro Fire Rescue classified the ignition as intentional, and ACE’s retained expert concluded that gasoline had been poured in multiple areas and ignited. ACE retained coverage and subrogation counsel, National Subrogation Services, and a cause-and-origin expert ...
Arson for Profit is Ground to Deny Claim
Posted on September 11, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Communications with Arson Investigation is Privileged
Post 5488
ACE Was Not Required To Produce Any Disputed Document Because Each Was Protected By The Attorney-Client Privilege, or The Work-Product Doctrine.
See the full video at and at https://rumble.com/v7fbzvo-arson-for-profit-is-ground-to-deny-claim.html
In Rubesne Resources LLC, a Colorado Limited Liability Company v. ACE Property And Casualty Insurance Company, a Foreign Corporation, Civil Action No. 1:24-cv-02300-DDD-SBP, United States District Court, D. Colorado (August 30, 2026) Rubesne Resources LLC sought insurance coverage from ACE Property and Casualty Company after a January 5, 2024 fire destroyed its business.
South Metro Fire Rescue classified the ignition as intentional.
After reviewing the disputed documents in camera, the court found that each was protected.
LAW
Colorado Revised Statutes § 10-4-1003 requires ...
Referral of Claims to its SIU Is Not Bad Faith
Post 5487
Posted on September 10, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In WIZ Collision, LLC, on behalf of itself and as assignee of Jawara Small, Chester Street LLC, and Aziz Brooks v. GEICO Corporation, No. 25-cv-4201 (KAM)(JAM), United States District Court, E.D. New York (August 28, 2026) Wiz Collision, a New York City auto-body shop, regularly repaired vehicles and submitted insurance claims for customers. It alleged that GEICO repeatedly approved claims and repairs, then referred certain claims to its Special Investigations Unit, stopped issuing payments, and delayed resolution despite ultimately finding no fraud.
Wiz Collision sued on its own behalf and as purported assignee of three customers, asserting contract, good-faith, consumer-protection, and injunctive claims. GEICO removed the case and moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6).
LAW
Under Rule 12(b)(6), a complaint must plead facts supporting a facially plausible claim. Article III standing requires a concrete injury, ...
