Zalma on Insurance
Education • Business
Insurance Claims professional presents articles and videos on insurance, insurance Claims and insurance law for insurance Claims adjusters, insurance professionals and insurance lawyers who wish to improve their skills and knowledge. Presented by an internationally recognized expert and author.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
September 24, 2025
Small Frauds Cost Insurers the Most

Don’t Sweat the Small Fraud
Post 5194

See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gkEJm3qy and at https://lnkd.in/gkiZASeT, and at https://zalma.com/blog, plus more than 5150 posts.

"Barry Zalma, Esq., CFE presents blog posts and videos so you can learn how insurance fraud is perpetrated and what is necessary to deter or defeat insurance fraud. This Video Blog of a True Crime Story of Insurance Fraud with the names and places changed to protect the guilty is based upon investigations conducted by me and fictionalized to create a learning environment for claims personnel, SIU investigators, insurers, police, and lawyers better understand insurance fraud and weapons that can be used to deter or defeat a fraudulent insurance claim."

The Accidental Creation of an Insurance Fraudster

The claimant wore plastic framed eye-glasses with thick lenses. He literally fell into a life of insurance crime and fraud.

One day the claimant was walking past a fine restaurant when he fell and broke the frames of his glasses. The manager saw him fall. She rushed out, helped him to his feet and checked his physical condition. He thought he was uninjured but the frames of his glasses had broken at the bridge.

The restaurant manager, fearful of a lawsuit, offered him lunch on the house and asked the cost of the frames. When he told her $80.00, she went to the register and brought him four crisp twenty-dollar bills. The claimant could not believe his good fortune. It was so easy. From that day on he made a good living from many small frauds.

His method was simple and unique at the time. No particular individual was severely harmed by his fraud. Wherever he went he carried with him the broken pair of eye glasses. He would walk into a restaurant in an area far from where he lived. He would hold his broken glasses in one hand and walk up to the cashier squinting. He would say:

“I tripped over your carpet, fell and broke the frames on my glasses. They cost $80.”

One of two things would always happen:

1 A manager of the restaurant would take four twenty dollar bills out of the cash register, apologize, buy the claimant lunch and send him on his way; or
2 the manager took a formal report for the restaurant’s insurance company.

In either event the claimant would profess he only wanted replacement of his glasses. He told the Manager or the adjuster for the restaurant’s insurance company that he would forget any possible personal injuries he may have suffered.

If they did not pay him on the spot, an insurance adjuster would issue a check instantly. No adjuster would take a chance on a lawsuit if he could settle a claim for $80.00.

The claimant would stop and collect his $80 in five to seven restaurants a day. He would seldom buy a meal. He would also, on a small portable typewriter, write letters to various restaurants and other businesses whose names and addresses he got from the telephone book. He would write simply: “I tripped and fell in your lobby and broke the frames of my glasses. Enclosed is the bill from my doctor for replacement. Please send me your check for $80.”

He would send out twenty such letters a day to businesses at random. At least five would merely send him an $80 check in the return mail.

With his earnings, all of which were tax free, the claimant bought a three-bedroom condominium on the west side of town. He furnished the condo with fine furniture, original art and a few antiques. Soon he was driving a new Tesla all electric roadster.

He eventually bought a word processor. He used it with a mailing list he purchased from a credit card company of all its vendors to send out mass mailings of his $80 demand. On good days he would receive ten to twenty $80 checks from varying businesses.

He quickly used up the businesses in his community. He sold the condominium and bought a motor home. He moved from city to city staying in no location more than sixty days.

He would still be doing this multiple fraud if he had learned to spell. His letters always misspelled the word “frames” as “frams.” This misspelling lent a certain amount of credibility to the claims he was presenting. However, one bright adjuster about to write his fifth check for broken glasses “frams” remembered that the four other claimants that he had paid (with different names) misspelled “frames” the same way. He refused to pay.

He reported the scheme to the local police and the insurance fraud bureau. Neither showed any interest in such a petty theft. They refused to prosecute. They even refused to investigate to determine whether they should prosecute. The reported fraud was just too small to expend the effort and funds to investigate.

The claimant left that city quickly. Unfortunately, the claimant’s Achilles heel cut into his profits. The adjuster spread the word to all the adjusters he knew, put out an alert on LinkedIn and several insurance and investigation discussion groups to watch out for the broken “frams.” The claimant’s cash flow from insurers dwindled.

Somewhere in North Dakota or Kansas the claimant is still making a healthy living by reporting to honest business people that he has broken the frames on his glasses.

Eighty dollars seems a small amount to avoid a lawsuit. The claimant, with multiple eighty-dollar claims, would average, in the two months he would limit himself to in any community, $2500 a day. His collections were either in person or by mail. He almost never bought a meal.

He was small stuff and no one wanted to bother with. Yet he stole, in his own small way, more than $600,000 a year. He took long vacations from his job. He stayed in the best resorts. He lived the good life because an $80 fraud is just too small to bother businesses, insurers, police and fraud investigators.

(c) 2025 Barry Zalma & ClaimSchool, Inc.

Please tell your friends and colleagues about this blog and the videos and let them subscribe to the blog and the videos.

Subscribe to my substack at https://barryzalma.substack.com/subscribe

Go to X @bzalma; Go to Barry Zalma videos at Rumble.com at https://rumble.com/account/content?type=all; Go to Barry Zalma on YouTube- https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCysiZklEtxZsSF9DfC0Expg; Go to the InsuranceClaims Library – https://lnkd.in/gwEYk.

00:08:29
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Posts
September 18, 2026
Expert May Only Testify to What Experience Supports

Insurance Expert May Not Testify to Speculative and Contains Unsupported Conclusions.

Posted on September 18, 2026 by Barry Zalma

See the full video at and at https://rumble.com/v7fmifw-expert-may-only-testify-to-what-experience-supports.html

In Michele A. Over, and The Estate Of Paul R. Over v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, and State Farm Fire And Casualty Company, Civil Action No. 23-cv-02243-PAB-STV, United States District Court, D. Colorado (September 14, 2026) Michele and Paul Over sued State Farm Fire and State Farm Auto over hail-damage and stolen-vehicle claims.

The operative dispute concerned State Farm Auto’s motion to exclude or limit opinions from plaintiffs’ insurance-industry expert, Aaron Castillo. Castillo.

Law

The proponent of expert testimony must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that an expert is qualified and that the opinions are helpful, sufficiently grounded, and reliably derived and applied. Experience-based opinions must explain how the...

00:03:10
September 17, 2026
Convicted on 29 Tax-Refund-Fraud Counts

150 Months in Prison for Tax Fraud
Post 4846

Posted on September 17, 2026 by Barry Zalma

See the full video at https://lnkd.in/g8rh3JBX and https://lnkd.in/gmkdy-9C, In United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, Nos. 25-10609, 25-10611, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (September 9, 2026) the Eleventh Circuit affirmed all challenged convictions, the 150-month aggregate sentence, and the challenged $4,123,474.55 restitution award.

FACTS

In United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, United States Of America v. Thomas Addaquay, Nos. 25-10609, 25-10611, United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit (September 9, 2026) the Eleventh Circuit affirmed all challenged convictions, the 150-month aggregate sentence, and the challenged $4,123,474.55 restitution award.
FACTS

Thomas Addaquay controlled United Consolidated Accounting and Business Services (UC), nominally a check-cashing business.

The government proved a three-stage tax-refund scheme that converted the resulting refund checks into usable funds through ...

00:05:23
September 14, 2026
Court Enforces Fifth Amendment & Refuses to Compel Answers

Major Fraud Perpetrator Asserts Fifth Amendment Privilege to Avoid Prosecution

Post 5489

Posted on September 14, 2026 by Barry Zalma

Fraudster Refuses to Answer Questions About His Alleged Fraud

See the full video at https://lnkd.in/gvicAMDr and at https://lnkd.in/gvicAMDr

In Great American Insurance Co. v. Gemstone Property Management, LLC, et al., No. 23-cv-9100 (LJL), United States District Court, S.D. New York (September 8, 2026) Great American Insurance Company alleged that it was defrauded through a scheme in which Subin Associates, LLP recruited individuals to stage construction-site injuries, arranged unnecessary medical treatment and litigation funding, and pursued fraudulent personal-injury claims.

Luis Manuel Garcia Salcedo, resulted in a $6 million settlement. Non-party Jose Hernandez allegedly worked as an assistant manager at Subin, operated Hernandez Associates, and owned litigation-funding companies that shared office space with Subin and provided services to its clients.

After Great American ...

00:05:14
October 02, 2026
Announcement About False Claims Act Settlement Results in Damages Suit

Employee Report of Fraud Results in Damages Suit After Qui Tam Suit Settled

No Statutory Hearing Right Arose Because No Dental Commission Complaint License Suspension, Revocation, Or Sanction Occurred.

Post 4855

Posted on October 2, 2026 by Barry Zalma

In Abbas Mohammadi et al. v. William M. Tong et al., No. AC 47598, Court of Appeals of Connecticut (September 29, 2026) Abbas Mohammadi owned and operated Columbia Dental, P.C., which provided dental services through multiple Connecticut offices; Columbia Oral Maxillofacial Imaging, LLC served as the billing entity.

From April 2012 to February 27, 2013, Columbia Dental employed Brittany Ames Mahoney as a dental assistant. During her employment, Mahoney claimed to have discovered certain billing irregularities, including, but not limited to, false and fraudulent reimbursement claims submitted to the Department of Social Services for services rendered to Medicaid beneficiaries. Mahoney filed a complaint and an affidavit in the United States District Court for the District of...

post photo preview
October 01, 2026
Zalma’s Insurance Fraud Letter – October 1, 2026

Another Anniversary for Barry Zalma, Inc

Posted on October 1, 2026 by Barry Zalma
From October 1, 1979 – 2026

Post 4854

Read the full issue of ZIFL at https://zalma.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/ZIFL-10-01-2026.pdf Forty seven years ago today I left the world of the employed and became an entrepreneur by opening my own law firm. The law practice was incorporated shortly thereafter as Barry Zalma, Inc.

When I opened for business on October 1, 1979, I had no clients and no certainty that I would have any in the future. I had borrowed money from the bank to carry me through the first six months and was concerned about my ability to pay the loan with my third child about to be born.

Much to my surprise and pleasure, on October 1, 1979, at 8:10 a.m., the best claims handler in the London market, Alan Warboys, called from London and provided me with my first case as an independent lawyer to represent Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s, London. He, and the Lloyd’s Underwriters he represented, showed faith in me as a lawyer and insurance expert. Alan is now, although ...

post photo preview
September 30, 2026
Suing for Services Provided, and Paid for, is Fraud

Defendants Successfully Moved for Summary Judgment

Post 4854

Posted on September 30, 2026 by Barry Zalma

In Jeffrey Wayne Phillips v. Creative Website Studios, et al., No. 5:23-CV-568-BO-BM, United States District Court, E.D. North Carolina, Western Division (September 28, 2026) the Court needed to rule on the order and memorandum and recommendation (“M&R”) of the Magistrate.

Jeffrey Wayne Phillips had contracted with Creative Website Studios and SR Telecommunications for website and hosting services. He alleged that defendants repeatedly billed him for hosting periods he had already paid for and later took down his website. Phillips claimed the outage prevented him from bidding on U.S. government security contracts and sought roughly $300 million in consequential damages.
LAW

Under North Carolina law, fraud requires a false material representation or concealment, intent and effect of deception, resulting damage, and reasonable reliance. Obtaining property by false pretenses similarly requires an ...

post photo preview
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals