Someone Stole My Rolls Royce
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/g5Sp3sxm and see the full video at https://lnkd.in/gaxZy-YY and at https://lnkd.in/gGr5BKfn and at https://zalam.com/blog plus more than 4200 posts.
Investing in California real estate in the 1980’s was fun. Whatever you bought you could sell for more. The doctrine: “there is always a greater fool than I,” worked.
Li Chen Hua immigrated to California from Hong Kong in 1981. He did it legally, winning a lottery for a Green Card. He came to the U.S. with his savings (converted from Hong Kong dollars to diamonds for ease of transportation).
Li set himself up in a condominium on Wilshire Boulevard just west of the community known as Westwood and east of Beverly Hills. It only cost him $500,000. He bought three other condos in the same building that first year and paid his mortgages and living expenses from the rent he collected.
In 2008 the bottom fell out of the California real estate market. Mr. Li, found himself owning real estate mortgaged to over $14,000,000 but worth only $9,000,000. The rents he collected were not sufficient to pay the various mortgages and allow him to continue in the life style with to which he had become accustomed. He needed to make a great deal of money fast and then, leaving his mortgagees to fend for themselves, return to Hong Kong for a pleasant retirement.
Mr. Li’s cousin was the number one luxury car dealer in all of the People’s Republic of China. She had no competition, an almost unlimited supply of vehicles, and overhead limited to shipping costs. Li’s account at CitiBank, Hong Kong was growing. He put his savings in broad-based stock mutual funds specializing in high risk emerging markets. His investments doubled in two years.
Li decided it was time to stop while he was ahead. He would ship his pRoger Parsons, the claims supervisor at Massive and Stoney Insurance Company, looking out his window at the slow moving, brown Illinois River, was about to order a check for the settlement when he received a report from the NICB that the car had been shipped by Li to Hong Kong a month before the reported theft. Customs officials in Hong Kong reported the car arrived and was picked up by its consignee. The NICB had copies available of the shipping documents with Mr. Li’s signature.
Massive and Stoney retained counsel to examine Mr. Li under oath about the theft. Li and his attorney appeared at Massive’s lawyer’s office belligerent, demanding immediate payment of a legitimate insurance claim.
“Mr. Li is a wealthy and highly respected member of the community. This examination under oath is a waste of time and an attempt to create useless and unwarranted delays. If payment is not received immediately, Mr. Li will sue Massive and Stoney for bad faith” Len Shyster, Li’s attorney, orated.
The examination under oath was not completed. Using his testimony at the examination under oath the NICB, working with Massive and Stoney and fifteen other insurers, the California Highway Patrol, the US Customs Service and the Fraud Division of the California Department of Insurance resulted in a major arrest of 41 individuals, including Li, for insurance fraud, grand theft, and fraud against lenders. A ring of insurance criminals who made hundreds of millions of dollars from insurers across the United States was stopped because one of the criminals allowed his customs broker to record the VIN number of his automobile before it was shipped out of the US.
Li, the instigator of the fraud, testified against his coconspirators. He served six months of electronic confinement to his penthouse apartment and paid $250,000 in restitution to one insurer.
He is now living a comfortable retirement in Hong Kong.
ZALMA OPINION
The state should be proud that they took down a massive insurance fraud scheme but, because they needed him, Li retired a rich man to Hong Kong. He may regret it now that the Communist Party took over Hong Kong.
No alt text provided for this image
(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/
Arsonist Tried To Represent Himself, Failed, and Sought Habeas Relief
Post number 5357
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/he-who-acts-his-own-lawyer-has-idiot-client-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-d4bwc, See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Karacson’s Arson for Profit Attempt Required Skill & Experience to Succeed
In Steve Ellis Karacson v. David Shaver, Warden, No. 25-1089, United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit (May 20, 2026) Steve Karacson was convicted in Michigan state court of arson and insurance fraud after evidence showed he burned his own insured home. Investigators found multiple points of origin, gasoline odor, and evidence tying him to the scene, including cell-phone location data and a receipt showing he had purchased a gas can and gloves shortly before the fire.
FACTS
Karacson initially had appointed counsel, but his relationships with both appointed attorneys ...
Foolish to Repeatedly Disobey Court Orders
All That Remains For Trial Is Plaintiff’s Damages On Each Of These Claims And Establishing Proximate Causation Of Those Damages.
Post number 5348
See the full video at and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus 5300 posts.
In Linh Wang v. Esurance Insurance Company, No. C24-0447-JCC, United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle (May 1, 2026) John C. Coughenour, United States District Judge, found that throughout this case, culminating with its briefing on Plaintiff’s renewed motion and that Defendant has subjected Plaintiff to unnecessary motion practice for clearly discoverable information and made dubious representations (including to the Court).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
This case involves an underinsured/uninsured motorist insurance bad faith claim arising from a 2017 motor vehicle collision. The plaintiff, Linh Wang, alleges that Esurance Insurance ...
The Right to Negotiate with Insurer is Not an Assignment of Claims
Post number 5347
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/ambiguous-contract-repair-assignment-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-2xppc, see the full video at https://rumble.com/v79is1s-ambiguous-contract-to-repair-not-an-assignment.html and at and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5300 posts.
Nebraska Requires an Actual Assignment to Allow Contractor to Sue Insurer
In Millard Gutter Company, a corporation doing business as Millard Roofing and Gutter v. Farmers Mutual Insurance Company of Nebraska, also known as Farmers Mutual Insurance, also known as Farmers Mutual, No. A-24-818, Court of Appeals of Nebraska (May 5, 2026) Millard sued Farmers as an assignee of Jane Anzalone who had hired Millard Gutter to repair the roof of her home and agreed to allow Millard Gutter to coordinate with her insurer, Farmers Mutual, concerning reimbursement for repairs authorized under her insurance policy.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
In ...
Qui Tam Case Without Evidence to Prove Fraud Fails
Post number 5369
Read the full article at https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/qui-tam-insurer-contended-defrauded-barry-zalma-esq-cfe-pgfgc and at https://zalma.com/blog plus more than 5550 posts.
In People Of The State Of California Ex Rel. Heath & Yuen, APC v. Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC et al., B342847, California Court of Appeals, Second District, Eighth Division (June 5, 2026) Heath & Yuen, APC defended parties in an automobile collision case involving a McLaren and a tour van. After that case settled for $25,000, the firm filed a qui tam action under California’s Insurance Frauds Prevention Act (IFPA) against Silver Bird Auto Leasing, LLC, X-Law Group, PC, and Filippo Marchino. The firm alleged three fraudulent acts in the underlying litigation:
1. the complaint falsely stated the McLaren was making a “legal turn,”
2. respondents produced a fraudulent repair bill/estimate, and
3. respondents failed to disclose Marchino’s GEICO insurance and its payment for repairs....
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
Full Faith and Credit Act Controlled
Read the full article at https://lnkd.in/evHXiiFE and at https://zalma.com/blog.
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
Post number 5368
Posted on June 9, 2026 by Barry Zalma
In Prime Insurance Company, Inc. v. Medicab Transportation, LLC, Jason Rhodes, and Dale Johnson v. Prime Insurance Company, Inc and Prime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. No. 2:24-cv-421-SPC-KRH, United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Fort Myers Division (June 3, 2026) Medicab, a paratransit company, bought two policies in 2021: a Business Auto Policy from PPCI and a Commercial Liability Policy from Prime. Both policies, as originally written, appeared to cover injuries arising from loading and unloading patients from Medicab vans.
After a patient, Margaret St. Aubin, fell while being unloaded from a van and suffered injuries, her Estate made a $1 million demand. Prime and its claims administrator concluded that the Commercial Policy’s loading/unloading language had been included by mutual mistake, because...
