How Giving No Quarter Worked
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/insurance-fraudsters-deserve-quarter-barry-zalma-esq-cfe/ and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 4150 posts.
How Giving No Quarter Worked
Many years ago a client I represented was offended that an insured tried to defraud him and the people who were names in the syndicate he represented at Lloyd’s, London. I walked the Underwriter through the debris of the house that was burned, showed him some of the remains of the allegedly highly valuable fine arts, and then explained how he was deceived into issuing the policy. I was the attorney for Lloyd’s underwriters for the fine arts and Imperial Casualty for the homeowners policy. Once it became clear to the Underwriter I was given the following instruction:
“Take No Prisoners!” The military instruction to give no mercy to the enemy. Typically if you give or grant no quarter, you treat someone—usually an opponent or foe of some kind—harshly. You don’t take pity on them or give them any leeway or concession. That is what I did. The claim was denied, the policy was rescinded, and the bad faith suit that resulted was litigated without quarter or concession. It took more than five years, a motion for summary judgment, an appeal, and eventually a judgment in favor of the insurers that resulted in payment to the insurers of every dollar advanced and every dollar expended in investigation and defense of the bad faith suit. That was followed by suits against the claims adjuster, death threats and a bomb threat that took 15 years of my professional life. The appellate decision can be read at Imperial Casualty & Indemnity Co. v. Sogomonian, 243 Cal.Rptr. 639, 198 Cal.App.3d 169 (Cal. App. 1988).
After Mr. Sogomonian and his co-defendants were compelled to pay fraudulent claims against Imperial and the Lloyd’s underwriters dropped precipitously. Giving no quarter to a fraud perpetrator not only defeated a fraudulent claim but deterred others from attempting fraud.
The Imperial v. Sogomonian case and many similar cases is why I am convinced that giving no quarter to a fraud perpetrator is the best way to deter and defeat insurance fraud and why I wrote this book to convince more insurance professionals to emulate the insurers that defeated the Sogomonian attempt at fraud.
How to Proactively Work to Defeat or Deter Insurance Fraud
Available as a Kindle Edition, a Paperback or a Hardcover
What every insurer should know about how it can be proactive in the efforts against insurance fraud by refusing to pay every fraudulent claim, by refusing to settle litigation brought by fraud perpetrators and by proactively taking the fraud perpetrators to court by seeking damages for common law fraud and take the profit out of insurance fraud.
No one knows the true extent of insurance fraud because most attempts at insurance fraud succeed. Estimates are extrapolated from those few people who attempt insurance fraud that are caught.
Insurance fraud is a crime in most states of the United States and in most countries the usual victims of the crime of insurance fraud are insurers. Some creative people have created fraudulent insurance companies that exist to defraud the insurance buying public who acquire insurance from the fraudulent insurers.
The crime of insurance fraud is ubiquitous and is committed by every race, gender, national origin, religion, or sexual orientation.
Unlike other victims of crime state legislatures require insurers create special investigative units (SIU) to thoroughly investigate all potential insurance fraud and present evidence to the authorities so that they can prosecute insurance fraud. Unfortunately, experience of the insurance industry has established that even when the insurer’s SIU presents a case to the state’s Fraud Division or Fraud Bureau for criminal prosecution, it is rare that a prosecution is commenced and a conviction obtained.
State insurance departments brag about convictions in double digits when they receive as many as 1500 reports of suspected fraudulent claims every 30 days. Prosecutors dislike insurance fraud cases because they are usually document heavy while an assault, rape, murder or drunk driving are usually summarized by a single police report and are, therefore, relatively easy to prosecute to a jury or obtain a plea of guilty.
Some insurers are buying Artificial Intelligence software to detect insurance fraud. Others hire retired police officers to operate the SIU and ignore their experienced insurance claims handlers.
Most do the minimum necessary to fulfill the requirements of the anti-fraud statutes and regulations concluding that it is better to pay the fraudsters than to fight fraud attempts proactively.
All insurers and those who regulate insurers agree that regardless of where the insurance is sold, regardless of where the promises made by an insurance policy are required to indemnify an insured, insurance fraud is a serious problem for the insurance industry. All attempt to deter or defeat insurance fraud to one extent or another.
All recognize that if there is an insurance claims that is denied for fraud it is axiomatic that the insured, so accused, will file suit for breach of contract and for the tort of bad faith. Bad faith lawsuits, even when they fail, take the value out of the effort to deter or defeat insurance fraud since defense of the bad faith suit will usually exceed the amount of the claim that was denied.
On an individual claim basis it is never cost effective to reject the claim for fraud. However, knowledgeable insurance fraud investigative professionals recognize that an aggressive effort against insurance fraud, refusal to pay a settlement to avoid litigation, and forcing the fraud perpetrator to litigate through trial and appeal will become known to those who make a living defrauding insurers, that the insurer is not a pushover and will avoid fraud attempts against that insurer and move to insurers the fraud perpetrators know will pay rather than fight.
Available as a paperback here. Available as a hardcover here. Available as a Kindle Book here.
(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/
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 ...
Chutzpah is not Enough
Post 5397
Posted on July 20, 2026 by Barry Zalma
See the video and at https://lnkd.in/gNUs2XzT and at https://lnkd.in/g2MawyzX
Magistrate Issues a Search Warrant if there is a Fair Probability that Contraband or Evidence of a Crime will be Found in a Particular Place.
In United States Of America v. Frank Suess, et al., CRIMINAL No. 3:24-308, United States District Court, M.D. Pennsylvania (July 16, 2026) a federal grand jury indicted Frank Suess, Melissa Driscoll, and others in a 55-count health care fraud and anti-kickback prosecution arising from an alleged scheme involving medically unnecessary prescription “foot baths.”
As part of the investigation, the FBI obtained an August 19, 2022 warrant to search Driscoll’s Sterling Pharmacy Yahoo email account for emails from January 1, 2018 through December 31, 2020. Driscoll moved to suppress the resulting evidence, arguing that the warrant lacked probable cause, was overbroad, and rested on material misstatements and omissions.
LAW:
The ...
Fraud Shouldn’t Pay
Post 5396
See the video and at https://rumble.com/v7ctgmq-the-great-jewel-theft.html at https://youtu.be/aRbQ2sJfGwA
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.
The Insured purchased, for the first time in his life, a policy of Personal Articles Floater Insurance (PAF) scheduling $125,000 worth of ladies jewelry. He advised the insurer that the jewelry was always kept in a class E safe at his residence. He also told the insurer that he was employed full time as the owner of a gasoline service station and that he had never been canceled or suffered a previous loss.
One month after the policy was ...
Day Care Owner Loses Subsidies Because She Criticized State
Post 5421
Posted on August 11, 2026 by Barry Zalma
First Amendment Right Will be Allowed to Go to Trial
In Betsey J. Grant v. Maine State Department Of Heath And Human Services, No. 1:25-cv-00490-JAW, United States District Court, D. Maine (August 6, 2026), Betsey J. Grant, a licensed childcare provider and operator of Tiny Tikes Daycare in Trenton, Maine, sued Maine DHHS and several employees after she publicly criticized DHHS before Maine’s Government Oversight Committee and alleged that officials retaliated against her.
She claimed DHHS imposed and extended a conditional license, published stigmatizing information, interfered with subsidies and program funding, removed her from a food program, rescinded an expansion grant, and used biased or falsified evidence in licensing proceedings. Following the March 10, 2023, GOC testimony, Ms. Grant alleges that foster children's subsidies (approximately $30,000) were withheld; she was removed from the ...
Rescission for Material Misrepresentation
Post 5418
Posted on August 5, 2026 by Barry Zalma
An Insurer May Rescind An Insurance Policy Where The Applicant Made A Material Misrepresentation In The Application.
In Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, et al. No. 2024-10359, Index No. 602824/22, 2026 NY Slip Op 04789, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (July 29, 2026) Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company issued commercial insurance policies to 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, and Sanjaya Mallick based on applications stating that the insured property contained two apartment units. After an underlying personal injury action was filed, Union Mutual determined that the property actually contained three apartment units and rescinded the policies on the ground that the defendants had made a material misrepresentation in the applications.
LAW:
A misrepresentation is material if the insurer would not have issued the same policy, or would have issued it only on different terms, had the true ...
Rescission for Material Misrepresentation
Post 5418
Posted on August 5, 2026 by Barry Zalma
An Insurer May Rescind An Insurance Policy Where The Applicant Made A Material Misrepresentation In The Application.
In Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company v. 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, et al. No. 2024-10359, Index No. 602824/22, 2026 NY Slip Op 04789, Supreme Court of New York, Second Department (July 29, 2026) Union Mutual Fire Insurance Company issued commercial insurance policies to 844 Knickerbocker, LLC, and Sanjaya Mallick based on applications stating that the insured property contained two apartment units.
LAW:
A misrepresentation is material if the insurer would not have issued the same policy, or would have issued it only on different terms, had the true facts been disclosed. To establish materiality as a matter of law, the insurer must submit documentation of its underwriting practices, such as manuals, guidelines, bulletins, or rules addressing similar risks.
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
As a result, the...