True Crime of Insurance Fraud Video Number 55
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/true-crime-insurance-fraud-video-number-55-barry-zalma-esq-cfe and see the full video at
and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4150 posts.
Most insurance companies are formed by major corporations with considerable assets. They are capitalized with serious money needed by the Insurer to cover losses until profits are made. The company is staffed with insurance professionals who believe in the concept of spreading risk. The insurers, whether new or old, provide a definite service to the public.
Betty Bruja wanted to start her own insurance company. She had been an insurance broker for ten years. In those ten years she had trained herself with books and training courses from the Insurance Risk Management Institute, the Society of Certified Property and Casualty Underwriters, the Insurance Institute and the Insurance Claims Library. By devoted and lengthy study Betty obtained the designation CPCU in the minimum time allowed by the Society of CPCU.
She studied underwriting and claims handling. No person, Betty thought, was as knowledgeable about insurance as she. No insurance company operated efficiently. Massive profits could be made if she only was put in control.
For ten years Betty Bruja toiled in the trenches of the insurance industry obtaining a small income off 5% to 15% commissions. She was frustrated. She knew she could make money if only there was capital to fund a new insurance company.
Ms. Bruja hired an independent adjusting company to investigate and adjust claims. Since none of the policies had any wording, she denied coverage on most claims by creating a policy exclusion to fit the claim. During the first year of her program of fraud she paid no claims and collected $500,000 in premium.
Robin Sleuth was the owner of a small traveling carnival. He had purchased a policy from Betty and renewed it with PPC. He was pleased with the premium. He needed a certificate of insurance in the name of the City of Ojai because his carnival was setting up on an empty lot owned by the City. Betty was slow in issuing the form. Robin looked at his insurance file and noticed he never received policy wording from Betty. He faxed her a letter demanding a complete copy of his policy and a certificate.
Betty, recognizing a trouble maker, sent Robin a notice advising, since they could not agree, that his policy was canceled flat and she returned the premium he had paid. Robin was furious. He was forced to cancel his appearance in Ojai and scramble to get insurance through another agent. The premium was twice that he paid to Betty.
PPC immediately hired a private investigator and counsel experienced in fraud investigation. They flew to Robin Sleuth’s home city and interviewed him. They obtained copies of all written evidence and obtained Robin’s promise to maintain the originals in a secure place that were not to be destroyed.
The lawyer and investigator then flew directly to the city where Betty did business and arrived at her new paneled offices. They demanded to see Betty.
Betty, resplendent in her tailored wool suit and silk blouse, met them with courtesy. They told her whom they represented and that she was issuing policies in the name of PPC without authority. Betty was shocked. She denied that she issued policies without approval. She would do everything she could to help them. Ms. Bruja wanted, however, before discussing it with them further, to speak with her lawyer.
Betty’s lawyer was an honest person. He would never go along with her fraud. She needed something to show him. On her computer she created a letterhead for Nicholas Claus Insurance Services, Houston, Texas. The letter, which she created, was dated six months before. Claus, as Managing General Agent for PPC, authorized Betty, as exclusive agent in her state, to write CGL policies for carnivals, bungee cord facilities and hang glider parks.
PPC and its lawyer were satisfied. They had stopped a fraud in progress. They reported Betty to the Insurance Department and advised the Department of the agreement. The Department, overburdened with other work, did nothing since PPC had solved its problem.
What was unknown to PPC, its lawyer, or Betty’s lawyer was that the next day she picked a new insurance company name. Betty rolled all of her clients into Surety and Providence Insurance Company (SAPIC). She told each that she had been duped by PPC but had protected them by getting insurance for them with SAPIC.
Betty is living well. Fraud seems to pay for her. Soon she will make enough money to actually capitalize a legitimate insurance company.
Unfortunately, for Betty, a three-year-old child fell out of a WhirlyGig and became paralyzed. The parents of the child sued the carnival who presented a claim to Betty. She immediately and retroactively cancelled the policy and refused the claim. The carnival had no option but to file bankruptcy and the child became a ward of the state. Betty, emptied her bank account and moved to a retirement community in Sao Paulo, Brazil and never tried to be in the business of insurance again.
ZALMA OPINION
Insurance fraud comes in many different guises. Betty hurt innocent people and profited from her crime. She should have been punished by the Department of Insurance and her license to sell insurance pulled. It didn’t happen and she is now living well in Sao Paulo.
(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 ...
