N.H. Man Took Insurance Monies for Items He Never Replaced

January 11, 2008

  • January 11, 2008 at 1:37 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Dustin

  • January 11, 2008 at 1:38 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    The owner of an engineering firm hoped to make up to $1.5 million over three months by adjusting Hurricane Katrina claims for State Farm, borrowing $150,000 and establishing a line of credit with State Farm Bank to set up shop on the Mississippi Coast in September 2005, according to records filed late Tuesday in federal court.

    Because of the arrangement, Forensic Analysis & Engineering Corp. was beholden to State Farm, which wanted to minimize its Hurricane Katrina losses for wind damage, the lawsuit says. Another vendor that adjusted Katrina claims, the independent adjusting firm E.A. Renfroe & Co. Inc., at times owed 80 percent of its income to State Farm, the court records say.

  • January 11, 2008 at 2:56 am
    DesertRat says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    What does Katrina, a Louisiana insruance issue, have to do with a man in New Hampshire committing insurance fraud?

    Your argument is almost on the level of “Sure I broke into my neighbors house, but why are you arresting me for burglary when there are people committing murder in Hawaii?”

  • January 11, 2008 at 3:12 am
    Anonymous says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    insurance fraud is oneside

  • January 12, 2008 at 12:12 pm
    Scooby says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    If I understand this correctly, the defendant is guilty of using false receipts? It is implied that the defendant did in fact have a loss? His crime is that instead of saying this is my loss and the monetary value is X, he actually said he replaced the items? It’s not a crime not to replace the items when a settlement is reached. The defendant is made “whole” by the monetary compensation of the loss. Thus, the defendant is guilty of being an idiot?

  • January 14, 2008 at 9:15 am
    Doo says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Scooby, your name scares me, but I can’t argue with your logic!
    (All other comments here sound like third graders stumbled onto this site again)………

  • January 22, 2008 at 3:21 am
    Diogenes says:
    Like or Dislike:
    Thumb up 0
    Thumb down 0

    Sorry to be ‘stumbling’ onto the site so late (I’m a fourth grader).
    Estimates, schmestimates. What he did was fraud (golllleeee sergeant, he was convicted of that, what do you know!). Your concept of ‘made whole’ needs some refinement, and it sounds like your morals could use a little nudge to get them back on track. Make sure that if you ever have an insurance claim, that you request me as the adjuster. We can dance around philosophical issues until they rebuild New Orleans.



Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*