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 ...
Crime Requires 121-151 Months of Imprisonment
Post 5486
Posted on September 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Mr. Baiyewu Is Liable For The Loss Resulting From Acts Directly Attributable To Him And For The Loss Resulting From The Reasonably Foreseeable Acts Of Others Taken In Furtherance of the Criminal Activity
In United States Of America v. Oluwasegun Baiyewu, CRIMINAL No. 21-395 (RAM), United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico (August 26, 2026) the court dealt with a case after on October 20, 2021, a grand jury in the District of Puerto Rico returned a single-count Indictment charging Mr. Baiyewu with conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). About a year and a half later, on March 31, 2023, a grand jury returned a single-count Superseding Indictment charging Mr. Baiyewu and four co-defendants with conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of 18 U.S.C.
CONVICTION
Baiyewu was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to commit money laundering under 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). The charged conspiracy, ...
Insurance Requires Fortuity to be an Insured Risk
Post 5485
Posted on September 8, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Industrial Park Center, LLC, doing business as Mainspring Capital Group v. Great Northern Insurance Company, a foreign insurer, No. CV-25-0330-CQ, Supreme Court of Arizona (September 1, 2026).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified the following question to this Court:
"Is damage to property a “fortuitous” loss when, based on the insured’s knowledge at the time the insurance policy issued, it was reasonably foreseeable that such damage was almost certain to occur if certain preventative measures were not taken?"
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Mainspring owned commercial property leased to Star Fisheries for decades. Star Fisheries’ use of water and salt allegedly caused structural damage over time. In 2010, Mainspring learned of damage and made some repairs but did not implement all recommended preventive measures. In 2021–2022, additional similar structural damage was discovered, and ...
Insurance Requires Fortuity to be an Insured Risk
Post 5485
Posted on September 8, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Industrial Park Center, LLC, doing business as Mainspring Capital Group v. Great Northern Insurance Company, a foreign insurer, No. CV-25-0330-CQ, Supreme Court of Arizona (September 1, 2026).
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit certified the following question to this Court:
"Is damage to property a “fortuitous” loss when, based on the insured’s knowledge at the time the insurance policy issued, it was reasonably foreseeable that such damage was almost certain to occur if certain preventative measures were not taken?"
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
Mainspring owned commercial property leased to Star Fisheries for decades. Star Fisheries’ use of water and salt allegedly caused structural damage over time. In 2010, Mainspring learned of damage and made some repairs but did not implement all recommended preventive measures. In 2021–2022, additional similar structural damage was discovered, and ...
