• Categories

  • Pages

  • Archives

Anatomy of a Car-Crash Scam

Posted on April 1, 2013 by Lina Maini

scam_alert

According to the National Insurance Crime Bureau, car crash scams are up almost by 50% from the period 2009 to 2012 alone.

Accident investigators are well aware of this insurance claim scam uptick.   Granted, if you are working defense, you will be looking for disqualifiers but those of us who work with plaintiffs’ attorneys are equally as trained and aware of fraudulent claims.  We have to be. Our job, and nature, is to protect our law and legal community clients.

(Recounted in the vernacular.) We have conducted thousands of  MVA investigations at this point in our company’s history.   The majority of the investigations follow a fairly common routine: obtain and review police report, verify factors on said report, interview witnesses and if necessary, on site or actual vehicles involved accident reconstruction.  This is, of course, a very simplified version of the investigative steps involved in MVA cases but again, generally MVA cases are fairly straightforward – from the investigator’s perspective.

Every so often, and more of late,  along comes the case that strikes the investigator as odd.   This is the one where the pieces (sometimes literally) do not come together.  Mid-August 2012, what appeared to be a routine MVA investigation request came across my desk.  The potential clients were  passengers in a vehicle rear-ended by a rental truck.  I was about to assign it out to one of our field operatives for a sign-up and intake when I realized that an out-of-state vehicle was involved. The manager side of me shot down my mental list of state requirements to verify the vehicle’s registrant, owner…

Vehicle 1:

Registrant: Male, 29, recently licensed in PA.

Owner:  U-Haul, (PA). Ok, slam dunk on insurance.  PA driver’s license, valid.

Vehicle 2:

Driver: Male, 52, from the Bronx, NY.

Owner: Livery cab operation in the Bronx. (Same address as driver.)

Victim 1: Female, 38, from the Bronx, NY, soft tissue injuries

Victim 2: Female, infant, age 7, Bronx, lacerations, orbital fracture (ocular)

Victim 3: Male, infant, age 10, Bronx, concussion, broken tooth, face and head lacerations

In the course of a routine def. driver’s address history, one of his former addresses intersected within one block of  our “victim’s” current address in the Bronx.

We ran the adult victim for prior lawsuits.  6 hits.

Intuition. A harder look at the victim’s address history yielded her having lived exactly at the def. driver’s former Bronx address.

I spoke with our client, the attorney, advised him of these developments and requested his permission to re-interview his potential client  and if possible. also have the kids involved present during this meeting.  Approved.

The mother gave a very compelling, emotional account of the accident.  Looking directly at me, eyes dissolved in tears.  She was extremely upset that her children (who were in the cab she had hired to go food shopping) had been injured and traumatized.  I occasionally lobbed a soft question to one of the kids.  They would not look at me directly and answered in staccato, almost sullen responses. (That will happen regardless with most children when interviewed. A stranger is asking them about a painful incident.  We’ve socialized our children to a- not speak to strangers and b- keep quiet about important things unless speaking with a parent or guardian.)  I figured the boy would be the best shot at uncovering anything out of the ordinary as he was older, articulating well,  albeit in spurts,  and not to be a sexist, but boys like cars and actiony-stuff. (Yes, that is professional terminology.)  As the mother was recounting the accident, with a few variations from the attorney’s brief  to me, and now with her eyes diverting from mine, I asked the boy if he had talked to the police and helped his mom explain how the accident had happened.  He said he had talked to the police. ”Did they ask you if you were okay?”  “Yes, ma’am.”  (Intentionally did not ask the next logical question.) Skipped to “Do you remember, Kevin,  if the police asked you if your Mom was okay? Was Sonya ok?”.   He nodded his head  and then blurted out, “ but I don’t  know what happened to Uncle Tommy”.   (Immediate mental note to self, def. driver, middle initial T.) The mother stopped crying for a moment, interjecting immediately, “No, no, Kevin, we do not know if that is the cab driver’s name”.  Then looking directly at me, she said she had used this car service a few times with her children (in tow) so perhaps her son thought he knew him. I slid right over that poor explanation and continued interviewing the mother about her injuries and various other throwaway questions.  Interview completed.

I then took a more in-depth look at the woman’s lawsuit history and another pretty nugget revealed itself.  The def. driver  was also a plaintiff in one of her previous lawsuits. (Apparently, over the years, they’d tired of paying other drivers to rear end them so decided to bring that activity in-house.  The out-of-state license was a nice touch.)

This information returned to my client.  In her first conversation with the attorney, the potential client had stated she did not know of any witnesses, or the drivers involved in the accident, etc.   He refused the case.  (Please don’t ask if the livery cab “operation”, run by an individual out of his apartment,  had active insurance. Also, I’m not going to describe the ethical decisions that the mother made regarding endangering the welfare of children.)

There has been an astounding increase  in car-crash scams within the past several years and especially now, in an economic downturn.  We’ve literally been told,  by the claimants themselves, “I’ve done this before. With kids getting hurt, the insurance companies will settle.”

Our MVA investigation protocol is to do exactly as outlined above:

Ask the potential client if s/he has been involved in prior accidents. (The primary objective is to determine if the victim has a significant, possibly related medical history.)

Run the def. driver’s background to include address history.

If anything unusual will come out, it is generally during this initial “homework” phase and well before our clients go into significant out-of-pocket.

Our Operatives: Street smart; info savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Filed under: accident, mva, scam | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Can’t Find Your Client? Witness? or the Defect?? 5 Proactive Steps

Posted on March 19, 2013 by Lina Maini

lost and found

Every attorney has his/her own intake survey (generally varying by incident type) and method of working a case.  Below are several situations that our investigators have experienced in the field, and recommendations based on these incidents.  We hope these observations serve a proactive purpose in keeping a case in check.

1. Your client’s emergency contacts.

Situation: On numerous occasions we’ve had to locate a client that has moved without notifying his/her attorney.

Recommendation:  Obtain the complete contact information of at least 2 relatives and 2 friends NOT living with the client.  (Drilling deeper,  obtain the DOBs of the emergency contacts.  This may appear to be a rather aggressive suggestion but,  at least 2 of these 4 contacts should be within the 25 – 45 years old range.  Obtain an email address as these are often traceable. )

 

2.  The witnesses.

Situation: I’m sure you’ve all seen a PAR w/a witness listed as “Johnny, 917-555-1234″. (or same, similarly incomplete police report).   No address, no surname and a cell phone that may or may not be active in 2 weeks, let alone 2 years.

Recommendation(s):  1. Call “Johnny” immediately.  Obviously,  the first objective is to determine his knowledge of events regarding your client’s matter.  2. Obtain his contact information and an identifier.  (Again we suggest DOB.  Many people are reluctant to release their SSN.)  3. Obtain an emergency contact for him.   4.  Check the contact info every 6  months until the case is resolved.

 

3. Professional photographs of the accident scene, especially if citing defect or disrepair. 

Situation:   Several years ago, we had an exterior premises  trip and fall situation wherein we were called to investigate the scene approximately 4 months post-incident.  The injured person made several natural and unintentional mistakes: 1. Not realizing the extent of his injuries, he did not call 911.  There were no on-site witnesses and no responder witnesses, and  2. When he returned a week or so later, after receiving medical attention, he’d taken photos of the accident scene but the shots contained shadows running across the defect rendering it difficult to determine the exact nature and severity of the  defect.   He was to go back and re-shoot the scene but did not.  4 months later, no defect, no repair record.  The homeowner, of course, knew nothing.  Good luck with an area canvass among neighbors.

Recommendation: Send out a professional to photograph the accident scene ASAP.  Don’t expect the client to return and accurately record the scene.  Bear in mind, however, that the defect may have permanently “disappeared” and there may not always be a repair record.

From our good friend, http://www.stus.com:

 car accident

4.  If it seems weird; it probably is.  Check all possible contributory factors.

Situation:  Claimant fell UP the stairs.  She wasn’t carrying bags, wore flat shoes; no drugs or alcohol were involved.  No defects, liquids or debris on the ground.

Recommendation: Measure everything.  After taking detailed step and rail measurements, we realized that a) the steps were unequally sized – from the height between them to the protruding lip of each step (which was excessive at the point where she was caused to trip and b) the rail would have been out of reach from her position regardless, with no secondary wall rail in place.   Rarely do people slip, trip or fall for no reason (unless there is an underlying medical condition.)

 

5. Always check to see if drugs and alcohol were involved. (Defense)

Situation:  Building maintenance crew member claims to have fallen off of a defective ladder.  The ACR showed extremely high bp readings; 3 taken at 15 minute intervals by responding EMS.   Beyond what would be expected even in a stressful situation.

Recommendation: Check the medical history.  The individual was on Lipitor and had not taken his medication as prescribed for several days preceding his fall.  (He’d also commented to several co-workers earlier on the day of incident that he was feeling “dizzy”.)  There was absolutely nothing wrong with the ladder, the area surrounding it, nor was he working at a height requiring specialized safety equipment.

Our Operatives: Investigative minds at work.

As always, stay safe.

Filed under: accident, General Information, locate, slip and fall, witness | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

Safest Seat/Cabin On A Train, Plane Or Cruise Ship

Posted on August 1, 2011 by Lina Maini
140 px

Image via Wikipedia

In sticking with the summer vacation season,  we’ve rounded up statistics regarding travel safety.

The safest seat on a:

Railroad Passenger Train:  Is any one outside of the train.  Seriously, a car or two ahead of the rear car.  According to the U.S. government’s transportation accident review authority, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), a  majority  of passenger rail mishaps damage the front cars; secondly, the middle in derailment situations; with the least damage occurring to the near to end cars.  Of course, in the case of a front to rear collision between two trains, the first train will suffer rear car damage, obviously, the first car(s) of the second train will suffer the most damage but these are the rarest collision types.  Final tip: choose a rear facing seat (in the direction of travel).  In a crash, you won’t be thrown forward.

Airplane:  A recently published Popular Mechanics study concludes that, in an airplane crash, 69% of rear cabin passengers are more likely to survive than those in the front rows (generally the first and business classes or in all-coach flights, the first 15 rows).  In the same situation, over the wing seat passengers experience a 59% survival rate, which then drops dramatically to 49% for those in the aforementioned front rows.

The safest cabin on a:

Cruise Ship:  From the Cruise Critic, mid to upper cabin, facing outward, in the ship’s aft (rear) section.  Cruise line accidents, while extremely rare, tend to damage the hull (usually in the  front part) first, thereby exposing the lower and inner cabins to immediate flooding as well as by positioning alone, these cabins have more restricted avenues of escape.  Overall, we recommend staying away from any cruises along the Somalian coast, regardless of cabin choice.

Enjoy your vacation.  According to Rebirth of Reason, staying at home is not an option.

The most recent statistics from the National Safety Council show that death by falling from a bed, chair or other furniture is almost as likely as death by air transport.  As of 2008, your odds of dying from an in-home fall are about 1 in 379,000 while your risk in an airplane is about 1 in 484,000.  You are safer hurtling through the air at 530 mph in a  metal container than you are standing on a chair in your own home reaching for a can of tuna.

BNI Operatives: Street (air & sea) Smart: Web Savvy.

As always, and especially when traveling, stay safe.

 

Filed under: Safety | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Celebrity v. Average Joe/Jane Offenders and Police 10 codes

Posted on November 30, 2009 by Lina Maini

The recent Tiger Woods’ driving “incident” at his Florida estate has sparked quite the discourse among friends in the law enforcement, investigative and legal professions, focusing on:

Are celebrity offenders treated differently from the “average Jane/Joe” offenders? If so, how and why?

There was a general consensus (Congress: take note) amongst us that celebrity offenders are treated differently.  Weaving this agreement, with the how and why,  is no more a perfect example than the  past Friday Tiger Woods incident.  The facts, as we know them to be at this time, are:

1. Tiger Woods was driving his Lincoln Escalade SUV on his property at approx. 2:35 a.m. Friday and somehow hit a fire hydrant and his neighbor’s tree.  His wife, swinging a handy golf club, smashed out the vehicle’s window(s) to, purportedly, rescue her husband.

2. Although police arrived on the scene shortly after the incident, as reported by the Associated Press,  Florida State Troopers have been denied follow-up access to Mr. Woods three times, thus far.

3. At 2:00 p.m. today, via Twitter and his Web site, Mr. Woods, vaguely commented that he had embarrassed his family and “it” would never happen again.

4. His privately retained attorney, Mark NeJame, stated that Mr. Woods had complied with Florida requirements for this type of incident, which calls only for the presentation for review by police of the driver’s license, vehicle’s registration and proof of insurance.

Points 1, 2 and 3, while curious indulgences, don’t raise the questions that Point 4 smacks one over the head with.  I.e.  a) The tree was not on Mr. Woods’ property; the damage, thusly,  was to another’s property.   Did the neighbor simply accept the loss?  b) The on scene police investigation yielded that Mr. Woods was in serious condition and at times unconscious.  An RMA was obviously accepted by police, then why has the follow-up investigation by FSP not been allowed? (We may do things a bit differently here in NY but even as a CYA measure, a detective would have gotten a sign off on that issue.)  and c) Can a private citizen own a fire hydrant in Florida? If not, can Mr. Woods simply blow off the Florida State Police when municipal property is involved?

The voyeuristic appeal of the Tiger Woods case aside, it comes down to a call for fairness.  Had you or your neighbor or your son’s teacher, presumably all “average Joes and Janes”, crashed a vehicle into someone else’s property and taken out a fire hydrant, on the busiest news day, a local field reporter, shivering in her network provided strappy heels, would be busy earning a day’s salary hunting down an articulate neighbor to interview on camera.  On a really slow, uneventful day, she might even be on the scene with police still present, pointedly ignoring her questions.  The camera guy would have, at least once, panned over the offender’s mailbox or front door; wherever the (alleged) defendant’s address is posted. 

So why the difference in treatment?  I don’t think we, and certainly not the Florida State Police, will be satisfied until a complete investigation has resolved the matter.

Perhaps Mr. NeJame is preparing Mrs. Woods with the Bullwinkle defense.  That would certainly explain the club-wielding glass party.  Judge me guilty now, but I would have done the same under similar circumstances.

In the meanwhile, we’re sure the local crime reporters will continue to listen in to police radios, especially in celebrity enclaves. Well, we, along with celebrity news reporter, TMZ,  might as well all understand what is being transmitted.  Below are commonly used (generally) nationwide police 10 codes:

* 10-1 poor reception
* 10-2 good reception
* 10-3 stop transmitting
* 10-4 message received, affirmative, ok
* 10-5 relay this information to ___.
* 10-6 busy
* 10-7 out of service
* 10-8 in service
* 10-9 please repeat your message
* 10-10 negative
* 10-12 standby
* 10-13 civilians present and listening
* 10-15 en route to station with suspect
* 10-18 urgent
* 10-19 return to station
* 10-20 specify location/my location is ___.
* 10-21 place a phone call to ___.
* 10-22 disregard
* 10-23 stand by on this frequency (also “On scene” in some areas)
* 10-27 vehicle registration request
* 10-28 arrests/warrants on driver’s license
* 10-29 arrests/ warrants on the vehicle
* 10-32 gun
* 10-33 emergency traffic follows, hold routine messages
* 10-34 frequency open (cancels 10-33)
* 10-36 what is the correct time of day?
* 10-39 false alarm, premises was occupied
* 10-40 false alarm, no activity, premises appears secure
* 10-41 begin watch
* 10-42 end watch
* 10-45 fueling vehicle
* 10-49 en route to assignment
* 10-50 accident
* 10-51 tow truck needed
* 10-52 ambulance needed
* 10-53 road blocked at ___.
* 10-54 animals on highway
* 10-55 security check
* 10-57 hit-and-run accident
* 10-58 direct traffic
* 10-59 escort
* 10-60 squad in vicinity, lock-out
* 10-61 personnel in area
* 10-62 reply to message
* 10-63 clear to copy info?
* 10-64 message for delivery
* 10-65 net message assignment
* 10-66 net message cancellation
* 10-67 person calling for help
* 10-68 dispatch message
* 10-69 message received
* 10-70 prowler, fire alarm
* 10-71 gun involved, advise nature of fire
* 10-72 shooting, fire progress report
* 10-73 smoke report
* 10-74 negative
* 10-75 in contact with ___.
* 10-76 en route
* 10-77 ETA ___.
* 10-78 need assistance
* 10-79 bomb threat, coroner’s case
* 10-80 bomb has exploded
* 10-81 breathalyzer report
* 10-82 reserve lodging
* 10-83 work school crossing at ___.
* 10-84 if meeting ___, advise ETA
* 10-85 delay due to ___.
* 10-86 officer on-duty
* 10-87 pickup
* 10-88 present phone number of ___.
* 10-89 bomb threat
* 10-90 bank alarm at ___.
* 10-91 pick up prisoner
* 10-92 improperly parked vehicle
* 10-93 blockage
* 10-94 drag racing
* 10-95 prisoner/subject in custody
* 10-96 psych patient
* 10-97 check signal (“On Scene” in CA and other areas)
* 10-98 prison/jail break
* 10-99 wanted/stolen record
* 10-100 dead body
* 10-200 alarm

Bulletin’s site of the week: gizmodo.com. Best tech site online.

BNI Investigators: Street smart; Web savvy.

As always, stay safe.

Filed under: 10-codes, accident, investigation, police | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 186 other followers

%d bloggers like this: