RICO Act Violation

Civil Filings

Buy the Book, Fraud: The Unforgivable Crime







Contact Us





'Ted' Theodore Lewis Whidden

Create Your Badge

     Exposing Fraud and Deception to protect the public good.

    www.frauddocumentation.com     www.frauddemonstration.com    www.frauddevelopment.com  

Correspondence contained herein is considered a reasonable copy of the original.  During formatting some content may have been electronically altered.  In some cases names have been masked or modified to assist in connecting or protecting those involved. In several instances the disclaimer at the bottom of emails shared thru the underwriter's messaging system were removed in web formatting. It will likely be found that the use of disclaimers in their email footers is an attempt to conceal material data, and to use this as a tactic to intimidate victims. (Thus another pattern of fraud emerges.)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Fwd: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: "Elliot Orol, SVP General Counsel Tower Group" <eorol@twrgrp.com> , "Joel Weiner, SVP Strategic Planning Tower Group" <jweiner@twrgrp.com> , "Austin Young, Director Tower Group" <ayoung@twrgrp.com> , "Christian Pechmann, SVP Marketing and Dist. Tower Group" <cpechmann@twrgrp.com> , "Jan Van Gorder, Director Tower Group" <jvangorder@twrgrp.com> , Rori Strickland <Rori_Strickland@aequicap.com> , Susan Eylward <seylward@twrgrp.com> , "Salvatore Abano, CIO Tower Group" <SAbano@twrgrp.com> , EPalmer@twrgrp.com, Michael Lee <info@twrgrp.com> , "Pusey, Keisha" <KPusey@twrgrp.com> , "Steven Schuster, Director Tower Group" <sschuster@twrgrp.com> , "Strickland, Rori" <RStrickland@twrgrp.com> , "Laurie Ranegar, SVP Operations" <lranegar@twrgrp.com> , "William Fox, Director Tower Group" <wfox@twrgrp.com> , John Pecoraro <John_Pecoraro@aequicap.com> , LAptman@twrgrp.com , "Pecoraro, John" <JPecoraro@twrgrp.com> , Adam Perri <aperri@twrgrp.com> , MSturm@twrgrp.com , Keisha Pusey <Keisha_Pusey@aequicap.com> , "William Hitselberger, CFO Tower Group" <whitselberger@twrgrp.com> , MGuiry@twrgrp.com , "Robert Smith, Director Tower Group" <rsmith@twrgrp.com> , "Gary Maier, SVP Chief Underwriting Officer Tower Group" <gmaier@twrgrp.com> , "Charles Bryan, Director Tower Group" <cbryan@twrgrp.com> , "Michael Lee, CEO Tower Group" <MLee@twrgrp.com> , Ruth Oren <ROren@twrgrp.com> , "William Robbie, Director Tower Group" <wrobbie@twrgrp.com> , ibarahona@twrgrp.com , cbyrd@twrgrp.com , edemps@twrgrp.com , ldavila@twrgrp.com , acarty@twrgrp.com , mestepa@twrgrp.com , rgaynor@twrgrp.com , tkennedy@twrgrp.com , amccoy@twrgrp.com , cmilian@twrgrp.com , dnelson@twrgrp.com , racosta@twrgrp.com , jbaron@twrgrp.com , jclaxton@twrgrp.com , miler@twrgrp.com , mkahn@twrgrp.com , clovisone@twrgrp.com , jphillips@twrgrp.com , jquach@twrgrp.com , breed@twrgrp.com , nscola@twrgrp.com , rszumigata@twrgrp.com

Elliot Orol (and All),

You folks seem to have a strange way of dealing with your liabilities.
You seem to think burying your head in the sand (or somewhere?) is a
defense. Elliot, you must be looking pretty silly to those around
you. Your lead claims guy, John R. Pecoraro introduces himself to a
victim in a wreck one year ago today (October 8). He takes a
frivolous stance by denying liability in a rear end collision.
Whereas he claims a "reservation of rights" which to a text book
insurance criminal looks like a good defense the "CPCU/SCLA"
endorsement deviant lies to support his stance (fraud) and has now
filed numerous deceptive filings to continue supporting his crime.
Irregardless of whether your ruse of "reservation of rights" holds any
area for your defense, fraud is fraud. The frauds stand irrespective
of all else. Do you get it? A weak/devious defense position does not
eradicate the many other laws broken here. Are you an idiot, or can
you see it?

Apparently the CPCU on the "initial" ethics/code of conduct filing
found that his "reservation" was allowed, but they failed to address
the frauds and other issues. There will be at least two more
ethics/code of conduct violation filings and reviews on Pecoraro. The
next one will address correspondence/statements made since the
mis-guided initial ruling by the CPCU. The CPCU is being asked to
review the initial ruling, and is being asked to seek additional
counsel for the second and third filings against Pecoraro. (It is
anticipated there will be a fourth filing as well.) The key to this
case is there is no limit to the deceptions (fraud) attempted by
Pecoraro. For this reason I have contacted you on numerous occasions
now to advise these are corporate frauds having little if anything to
do with the loss/case. These are frauds in the claims handling
process, and were not committed by your customer the trucking outfit.
These are committed most significantly by your head of claims. Your
entire board of directors has been notified and almost everyone in
copy has now been named in the case, AND Florida Insurance ethics
requires several of them to divulge their knowledge of such activity
to authorities. If they fail or have failed to do this many could be
in violation.

I have asked many times for someone of integrity to contact us
regarding the loss. To this point your claims people have failed in
their obligation to properly investigate the loss, report the loss,
document the loss, somewhere around about 50 frauds appear to have
been committed, and it is very difficult to find any correspondence of
involvement of any of your people that does not cross a legal barrier.
Is there anyone of integrity in your group? Do they realize that
they are held accountable for both their actions and inactions in this
type situation?

As you may be aware I have filed yet another Civil Remedy Filing:

In addition to this one numerous others (36+) naming many in your
corporate leadership are found listed on the right side of the page:

In the above referenced filings (including the last 36 or so) we
specifically asked for several of those in copy above to respond in
person for that which they were named. Pecoraro once again extended
his bad faith handling by responding on behalf of others. They are
now shown this by way of links to their names being listed in the
Florida public record and Pecoraro's response containing what appears
more acts of fraud, deception, intentional infliction of emotional
distress, and negligent infliction of emotional distress among the
many charges listed.

When will we have someone of integrity contact us to address/resolve
these long outstanding issues. Will it take additional filings,
mails, ethics filings, or what? One can see where the tangled web of
deception continues to expand to more and more people, organizations,
laws, public exposure, etc. Many of those in copy may have interest
in these things being resolved. When will you step up to the plate?
These specifically involve the corporate legal position of your
company(s), yet you are failing to respond. The exposure is about to
increase yet again. Are you ready?

Who in your organization should we be dealing with? Pecoraro does not
have the ability, education, skills, or integrity to resolve this.
Who is his replacement? You do realize his offenses are unable for
you or your best legal counsel to avoid, and they will likely take
others with him? Elliot!! How can you remain silent? You do realize
you have already acknowledged notification as well as Michael Lee, and
others? Are you guys that dense? What will it require to have
someone of integrity to contact me to address/resolve this?


Ted Whidden

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>
Date: Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Subject: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested
To: "Elliot Orol, SVP General Counsel Tower Group" <eorol@twrgrp.com> ,
"Joel Weiner, SVP Strategic Planning Tower Group"
<jweiner@twrgrp.com> , "Austin Young, Director Tower Group"
<ayoung@twrgrp.com> , "Christian Pechmann, SVP Marketing and Dist.
Tower Group" <cpechmann@twrgrp.com> , "Jan Van Gorder, Director Tower
Group" <jvangorder@twrgrp.com> , Rori Strickland
<Rori_Strickland@aequicap.com> , Susan Eylward <seylward@twrgrp.com> ,
"Salvatore Abano, CIO Tower Group" <SAbano@twrgrp.com> ,
EPalmer@twrgrp.com , Michael Lee <info@twrgrp.com> , "Pusey, Keisha"
<KPusey@twrgrp.com> , "Steven Schuster, Director Tower Group"
<sschuster@twrgrp.com> , "Strickland, Rori" <RStrickland@twrgrp.com> ,
"Laurie Ranegar, SVP Operations" <lranegar@twrgrp.com> , "William Fox,
Director Tower Group" <wfox@twrgrp.com> , John Pecoraro
<John_Pecoraro@aequicap.com> , LAptman@twrgrp.com , "Pecoraro, John"
<JPecoraro@twrgrp.com> , Adam Perri <aperri@twrgrp.com> ,
MSturm@twrgrp.com , Keisha Pusey <Keisha_Pusey@aequicap.com> , "William
Hitselberger, CFO Tower Group" <whitselberger@twrgrp.com> ,
MGuiry@twrgrp.com , "Robert Smith, Director Tower Group"
<rsmith@twrgrp.com> , "Gary Maier, SVP Chief Underwriting Officer Tower
Group" <gmaier@twrgrp.com> , "Charles Bryan, Director Tower Group"
<cbryan@twrgrp.com> , "Michael Lee, CEO Tower Group" <MLee@twrgrp.com> ,
Ruth Oren <ROren@twrgrp.com> , "William Robbie, Director Tower Group"


As you know (as well as your Board of Directors and office) I have
been standing by in New York for approximately two (2) weeks awaiting
an opportunity to meet with you to discuss a legal issue that is
growing totally out of control. The legal issue has been orchestrated
by your office, using a variety of unlawful abuses to bring us to a
point where we now find ourselves..............The loss/event that
brought about our meeting was ten (10) months ago (August 29, 2010),
and since then I have gone through all the proper protocol to reveal
the frauds sustained to me as a victim in the loss and victim of the
fraud. Your entire Board of Directors was advised yet again on March
23, 2011, nearly 8 months after the event, and it is now ten months
and abuses continue. Is this how you run your business?

You were advised in March 2011 that this could be handled privately or
publicly. We will be going a bit more public very soon. Be aware
that everyone who knows about the crimes committed by your company
have a responsibility. What is yours? What is theirs? The release
which is now being made available outlines the ethics requirements for
the people under your employ. Ethics codes were made available to
your claims people within a very few days of the original
wreck/incident because they did not demonstrate
knowledge/understanding that they were held to a standard of ethics.
These unethical people are under your direction. Evidence of bad
faith and endorsement by your corporate office, by your handlers, and
agents is abundant.

Again, you and your board of directors were advised March 23,
2011,then two months later (May 24 &27, 2011) I made additional
contacts with your office. Oddly, ignorring the contact doesn't
absolve you or your group of the problem. As you can see the
responsibility is escalating, and your integrity as well as your
entire organization is coming in to question. Early action gives you
a clear scapegoat (your claims manager), meanwhile delay involves more
people. As this continues you and those around you appear to "buy in"
to the claims manager's criminal behavior. A corporate culture of
fraud is apparent. Noting that, several (all?) of your directors were
notified as recent as March 23, 2011 concerning the corporate fraud
seen as a pattern. Some of your other directors may wish to be
present in our meeting, because your legal guidance to this point has
likely brought them in a place of responsibility they may not have
wanted. You are displaying the same incompetence of the claims
manager. Your people are suppose to be professionals. Your people
were advised on September 19th and October 1, 2010 that incompetence
was not a defense. Ask Lowell Aptman and Michael Lee of your New York
office. They should be familiar with this.

For the benefit of those recently brought in to copy, the claims
manager was invited to get involved because of the blatant bad faith
and fraud by his subordinates (September 2010). The claims manager for
the insurance operation committed several blatant and clear cut frauds
in his introduction (and afterwards) to the victims in a loss. The
initial introduction by management orchestrated a fraud which occurred
around about October 8, 2010, correspondence has been posted to the
web. Your claims manager/corporate rep discredited himself in his
introduction, and has committed at least 5 frauds to the State
Financial Office, and put his frauds in the mail making it federal
fraud. Clearly he shored up the bad faith issues committed by your
company and should have been immediately removed from the loss. Good
faith and fraud was alerted to his superiors, who actually promoted
him to higher levels of authority while he conducted this criminal
behavior. This type and style of abuse has occurred at every
encounter with your devious claims team. This was clearly advised to
the Board of Directors, and the CEO has been held in copy on material
documents for 9+ months, and was responded to by the New York office.
The New York office and parent company is clearly
involved.............For the benefit of those to be held in copy the
correspondence and documents are all being made available at
www.frauddocumentation.com . Nothing about this loss is complicated,
but the devious handling is criminal, and all those with knowledge are
required to make written reports to authorities.

Since your office is headed and founded by lawyers, and your board
appears to connect with several legal types, it is a bit difficult to
trust "lawyers" in this. Surely those heading up a devious operation
can see the terrible reflection this type and style of treatment
brings on the legal community, insurance industry, and corporate
America. What does a person have to do to find integrity and
responsibility in law/insurance interests?

To confirm, your corporate office is at 120 Broadway, 31st Floor, New
York City. Please confirm/acknowledge.

I would have preferred to have been invited to your office for a civil
meeting. Since I was not invited, then I will have to consider
stopping by this week if I have not heard from you before. I cannot
standby forever. This is costly for all involved. Your offices in
Miami and New York apparently intend to continue refusing meetings to
discuss and resolve this since the incident occurred. Your failure to
get involved actually involves your office since your "claims manager"
has refused to deal with the situation, is considered a good faith
risk, and has insisted on seeking "legal recourse". Since he stepped
away from the claim, and left no option I have contacted his corporate
legal counsel to see if you endorse the idiotic and criminal behavior
of your claims manager. Do you?


Ted Whidden

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Pecoraro, John <JPecoraro@twrgrp.com>
Date: Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 4:11 PM
Subject: RE: FW: ACF1001306 Theodore & Kenneth Whidden v. Frank
Delgado Yera & Oliva Delivery Service, Inc. d/l 08/29/10
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>
Cc: "Pusey, Keisha" <KPusey@twrgrp.com> , "Strickland, Rori"
<RStrickland@twrgrp.com> , "dbrill@windstream.net"

Mr. Whidden, given your response, it appears your option at this point
is to seek redress through the court system.

John R. Pecoraro, CPCU, SCLA

AVP Claims

Tower Group Companies

Fort Lauderdale Office



From: Ted Whidden [ www.tedwhidden.com ]
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2011 9:10 AM
To: Pecoraro, John
Cc: Pusey, Keisha; Strickland, Rori; dbrill@windstream.net
Subject: Re: FW: ACF1001306 Theodore & Kenneth Whidden v. Frank
Delgado Yera & Oliva Delivery Service, Inc. d/l 08/29/10

John Pecoraro,

At this juncture one can see that your denial of liability is a pretty
frivolous stance. For a number of reasons you will soon find that you
are unable to substantiate your position, and with each passing day
you will look more and more foolish.

Please understand if you can/will that irrespective of your devious
dealings or intentions, you still have a fiduciary obligation to your
principles to mitigate their exposure. You have maximized your own
exposure, and greatly increased the exposure to your company, BUT
there are opportunities to still save them some money/embarrassment.
It is your obligation no matter how vivid your imagination to settle
our property losses. We were rear-ended by your misbehaving truck
driver. This is clear. Liability is not questioned. It is merely a
part of a game you are playing. Meanwhile, it has been made clear to
you and your company… both the Blazer and the Porsche involved in the
wreck were primary vehicles to the owners. No matter what you say or
do, your company is liable for the costs to repair/replace the
vehicles. Your continued delay and failure to assume a position of
responsibility could be very costly for your company. Our costs and
inconvenience continues more than 6 months after the wreck, and your
handling is causing unimaginable mental anguish as we negotiate
through this without being in the best possible financial position.
There are business and family issues developing and lingering as a
result of this protracted delay. You and your company are

Your responsibility for replacing our primary vehicles is practically
indisputable. Costs sustained to us as well as damages, interest, etc
are due from your company. A reasonable person in your position would
be required at this time to extend some form of gesture of good faith
(and “Olive branch”) so to speak to get the easily quantifiable
aspects behind us, making the victims “whole” in part where the
vehicle losses have occurred.

Sure, offering to make settlement is an admission of liability, but
you are fully liable and you know it. If you do not by now, then you
are a bigger idiot than I thought initially. The key at this point
for you is to mitigate the damages you have caused. Settling the
vehicle damages is a given. You just need to figure out how to
resolve this after all the damage(s) you have caused. You would look
much better in the eyes of the law and a jury if you owned up to your
deception and made a gracious offer to settle our vehicle loss. Yes,
you are in a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” position, but
that is the nature of fraud. Meanwhile, your principle is on the hook
for increased costs through your deception. Do you want to continue
or increase their pain? You do hope that they help cover your legal
expenses, don’t you? If you had a chance to extend an act of good
faith and did not then what might they do to “help” you similarly? It
is indeed a tangled web you have woven. Deception of this magnitude
likely always brings about this kind of confusion. John you have put
your client company in an unwinnable situation. You owe it to them to
cut their losses. Please put together an offer to settle the two
vehicular damages we have. These will be considered without
prejudice to any other losses, damages, etc. Please include an
element of interest on our losses for the time you have wasted in
doing the proper thing.

It is preferred that someone else handle this. I prefer to have
nothing to do with you or anyone like you. That is indeed an option a
person who is a victim of an insurance claim has in Florida. I
exercise that right.


Ted Whidden

On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 9:39 AM, Pecoraro, John <JPecoraro@twrgrp.com>  wrote:

Mr. Whidden, our position on this disputed claim has been stated in
our responses to your numerous emails, Civil Remedy Notices and
Department of Insurance complaint. At this point, it is abundantly
clear we have opposing viewpoints. If you truly want to “move forward
with your life” and want someone from Tower Insurance Group to contact
you to attempt resolution of you and your brother’s claim, I am that

However, the tone and substance of all communications throughout this
resolution process must be civil and totally absent of all defamatory
rhetoric. Otherwise, the process cannot continue.

I await your response.

John R. Pecoraro, CPCU, SCLA

AVP Claims

Tower Group Companies

Fort Lauderdale Office



From: Ted Whidden [ www.tedwhidden.com ]

Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 9:44 AM
To: John Pecoraro
Cc: Keisha Pusey; Rori Strickland; David Brill

Subject: Re: ACF1001306 Theodore & Kenneth Whidden v. Frank Delgado
Yera & Oliva Delivery Service, Inc. d/l 08/29/10

John R Pecoraro,

Please understand that fraud is a crime. You have committed fraud
multiple times. Every one of your filings to the State Commissioner
of Insurance includes fraud, elements of fraud, and attempted frauds.
In my September 2010 letters/emails to you I advised that losses would
exceed all policy limits, and that your company's mishandling issues
early on stood to increase the value of the claim substantially. Now,
you have committed multiple frauds in your attempt to use unlawful
means to avoid liability (which is a fraud in itself). Understand
fraud typically has no statute of limitations, no limit of liability,
and has nothing to do with the claim/liability. This is a crime you
committed that ADDS to your company's liabilities. You have done an
extremely poor job of protecting your company/client's interests.
Instead of limiting liability you have removed all limitations and
opened up Pandora's box of options for us to pursue you and your
company. Mr. Pecoraro, I advised you and your principles within 2-3
weeks of the incident to stop the pattern of abuses noted at that
time. Since then your parent company appears to have endorsed your
illegal behavior making each of you personally, professionally, and
corporately responsible. The somewhat humorous part is that you have
committed your frauds TO THE STATE agency that investigates and
enforces this type of behavior. If I wasn't writing a book about such
stupid maneuvers and frauds by corporations I would have to start one
now. I think you will make history if you keep going in the direction
you are going.

In case you are concerned (which would be a change) the doctors have
indicated I have permanent concussion/brain damage, and will have to
undergo therapy to help cope. Your frivolous pursuits have made this
much more difficult than it needs to be. You need to stop your abuses
and games. I fully expect your unlawful maneuvers to cost you and
your company. You need to advise your superiors and E&O of your
problems otherwise risk increasing the losses and exposure more.

Your response to our correspondences leading to date demonstrate
either severe incompetence on your part or extreme dishonesty. Please
have the following read to you by someone who understands insurance,
law, and the English language. Your continued failure in these areas
is not a defense. The letters/endorsements behind your name would
indicate to most people that you have knowledge in these areas. They
demonstrate a level of knowledge and responsbility, therefore the only
thing left to destroy is your integrity and character, which you seem
to do a very good job of.

Mr. Pecoraro, you and your company represent commercial carriers in
over the road trucking. It seems more probable to those outside your
organization that the vast majority of the losses/claims you are
involved in regard a trucker hitting a citizen/consumer. I do not
know that I have ever heard of a car hitting an 18 wheeler, so the
majority of your "claims" you see would seem to be wherein your
assured/client is fully at fault. Your hooligan tactics to offend the
public make you an enemy to the consumer/citizen, and these are
criminal acts you commit routinely as a matter of course in your daily

The incident that brought rise to my and your encounter involved a
rear-end collision by a trucker charged with reckless driving. He hit
us from behind on a long, clear stretch of road and admitted at the
scene to not having his eyes on the road leading to the accident.

Your creative (dishonest and deceptive) response of October 8, 2010
constitutes multiple counts of attempted fraud and fraud. I will
outline a few of them, but they have become far more complicated for
you than ever before. On several occasions (you refer to a "myriad of
complaints") I have encouraged you to review your file giving you
opportunity to amend your foolish stance. On five or more times now
it seems you have insulted me, your industry and the Commissioner of
Insurance by filing your frauds and attempts at fraud to them. You
have complicated your frauds, attempts at fraud, and other charges by
dropping the letters to the Commissioner in to the U.S. mail.
Pecoraro! Understand you are guilty of Federal Mail Fraud!! Not only
are you guilty of state, interstate, and federal frauds, but all those
in your organization who participated in your correspondence and
strategizing are party to the fraud.................You see
incompetence and dishonesty seems to permiate virtually every
correspondence I have received from your team. Much of this began
when I questioned the ability and integrity of those under your
management, then you ramped up the deceptions!! What a person is to
do? Where does it end with you? I kept thinking sooner or later
wisdom would prevail, but your deceptions continue.

Oddly, no reasonable person can see how you can deny liability in a
rear-end collision. No matter what your reasoning is, your stance is
absurd. Your support for your stance constitutes attempts at fraud,
to mislead and deceive to the ultimate end you desire which is denial
of liability. Your denial is actual, and is a perfection of your own
fraud attempt.

At this juncture any change of your claims stance based on a letter
insulting you would serve to demonstrate you are manuevering to "miss"
the fraud, thus it would be an admission of guilt. You see the
problem with fraud once committed is that you are incriminated any way
you turn. You REALLY need to advise your Errors and Omissions
coverage underwriters as I told you to do in my September/October 2010
letters. You are now operating in violation, and very likely they can
avoid covering your legal costs because of late notification........Of
course, as you should know "late notification" is only a defense for
underwriters if it can be demonstrated that the late notification
prejudiced their defenses. You have indeed prejudiced their
defenses........Further to this, you have incriminated your corporate
parent (Tower Group and CastlePoint) because they have been held in
copy throughout, and Tower Group's Lowell Aptman endorsed your
criminal behavior in his September 2010 letter..............Pecoraro,
your frauds remove statutes of limitations and limits of liability and
the frauds should concern YOU and your principle. They were not
committed by your assured, they are fully yours financially, legally,
etc. This "loss" is not something you can pass on to your assured's
loss record, and it may not be something you can pass on to the
reinsurance market, PLUS your E&O may be off the hook as well. You
and your people need to get concerned.

Please allow me to outline some of your frauds herein using only the
response below (and those documents which attach).

Fraud One: Frank R. Delgado (Yera) and/or his company appear to have
committed fraud at the scene of the accident by providing false
insurance verifications. Meanwhile, Delgado (has been party to or has
perpetrated a fraud) is your only witness in the accident. His
credibility and that of his company are already in question. Their
testimony is considered tainted or questionable at any rate.

Fraud Two: The insurance verification given by Delgado at the
accident indicated the truck/driver was covered by a specific Aequicap
Property and Casualty policy, making Aequicap and their personnel
potentially party to Delgado's/Oliva Delivery Services fraud.

Attempted fraud: Your handling of claim/case under "reservation of
rights" is likely an unlawful (but common?) maneuver. Do you
understand the ramifications of this deception?

Improper Notification: In a panic to avoid good faith charges being
reviewed by the Commissioner of Insurance your people arranged for
David Brill to attend. We were only given 12-20 hours notice prior to
arrival and Florida law requires you provide 48 hours. Mr. Brill's
investigation will consume much of the rest of this message, but is
not the full extent of the weaknesses in your case. Additional
charges will be addressed later if need be.

Brill's investigation was for the express purpose of using a
type/style of forensic research to determine if the truck/trailer rig
I was driving was illuminated. Mr. Brill's investigation clearly
revealed that lights were illuminated at the time of incident, YET you
state they were not. This is fraud! Not only did you commit attempts
at fraud in your allegations lights were out, but when you state that
Brill's report/testimony indicate lights were not illuminated is
clearly a misuse of fact. You have committed fraud.

Your denial of liability is an apparent attempt to maneuver the claim.
Maneuvering the claim in this manner is fraud and attempted fraud
itself. When you state something in an attempt to deceive, mislead,
conceal, then you have committed FRAUD AGAIN!

As we proceed we see numerous other attempts to deceive, mislead, conceal:

1) The FHP officer comment, stating lights were not illuminated is an
attempt at fraud. The FHP report provided to you by me clearly states
the FHP officer arrived 32 minutes after the wreck. The comment is
irrelevant, but you use it to try to add weight to your deception.

2) The FHP officers did require the truck/trailer/wreckage be
illuminated to depart the scene. The lights clearly worked. Your
statement to the contrary is either a mistake or there is some
confusion on the party you received it from, or it appears you have
lied again. It is clear you are a liar, so there is no reason to
trust anything you have said. Repeatedly we have asked for someone
with integrity to be appointed to handle this case.

3) Irregardless of lights on or off, the fault in the rear-end
collision belongs to your assured (the 18 wheeler operator). The use
of "lights on-lights off" discussion in itself is an attempt to
deceive, mislead, and conceal and constitutes a fraud on its own.

4) The statement you use regarding Brill's report blocking the
tail-lights of the truck may be an attempt at fraud. Obviously, you
are trying to mislead the recipients or anyone reading your response
that the truck lights are "material". Your statement ignores the fact
that the trailer lights were not obscurred, and proved by Brill's
investigation to be illuminated. Your use of "blocking of
tail-lights" (which is likely a lie at any rate) in itself is an
attempt to mislead, deceive or conceal.........Pecoraro all of your
handling is plagued with frauds.

5) John, your reference to my "possession" of the trucks, trailer,
and wreckage is a warm up to your next set of frauds. It is an
attempt at fraud. Meanwhile, the next set of frauds you commit IN
YOUR FILING to the STATE COMMISSIONER! You not only continue this
pattern of fraud, you appear to have no respect for law enforcement or
insurance practice. (Eventually you state that I do not own any
vehicle in the wreck. This is clearly a lie and fraud on your part.
I sent you copy of the registration, FHP report and other such
information was sent to your claims people early on. They would
likely not have it otherwise because their investigation was so weak.)

Allow me to outline some of your frauds in your first filing to the
State Commissioner. At this point you have made about 5 filings to
the State Commissioner and then placed them in the mail. These not
only constitute fraud, but when you mailed them to me you and your
Pusey posse committed Federal Mail fraud. Your entire organization is
now implicated, and since Florida ethics law requires all licensed
personnel to report any and all criminal violations to which they are
aware, then your people are party by way of that law/connection.

In your "Amended Response" (October 13, 2010) to the Commissioner of
Insurance/Financial Services Division of the State of Florida:

Fraud One: The day and date of the accident is incorrect. We have
corrected this numerous times for you, and advised you to review your
file and the documents we submitted to you. You have failed, not only
perpetuating the fraud, but demonstrating lack of proper investigation
in the process. Whoever fed this information to you is party to your
fraud. Those who copied this type/style of error (such as Lowell
Aptman and Michael Lee and Monica Sturm) are party to your fraud and

Reporting times and discussions appear in error. This could be the
result of ignorance, incompetence, or dishonesty. All are readily
apparent throughout the dealings and correspondence with your company.
I was advised by your claims people (Rori Strickland/Keisha Pusey)
within the first 2 weeks that your intention is/was to deny covering
the claim to/for your principle/assured for late reporting. It looks
like you are holding on to this incorrect date despite many, many
advices otherwise to cause your denial/fraud to be made evident later.
Otherwise, why wouldn't the simplest of investigations reveal and
correct the date. Your maneuvers at every level appear devious.
Fortunately, one of your claims people indicated early on this was the

Attempt at fraud: Your reference advising that is your "understanding"
that none of the vehicles in the accident belong to the driver
(Theodore Whidden) is clearly an attempt to erode the interest of the
victim. It is a lie stated from a position of "understanding" to hide
the fraud. This is an attempt to deceive, conceal, mislead, meanwhile
the FHP report and vehicle registration provided to you clearly
indicates I am the owner of the blazer, and your opinion and
understanding is not really worth that much to anyone at this point.
You were sent registration paperwork within 3-4 weeks of the wreck.
You should never have made this mistake. Improper investigation.
Your insurance/license endorsements should cause you to be held to a
higher standard, but your tactics are brutalizing citizens and appear
to be "endorsed" by both your corporate parents and the State
Insurance Commissioner (if they allow this to occur/continue).

In paragraph 3 of Pecoraro's first letter to the Commissioner he
addresses the trucker's statement. Meanwhile, Pecoraro knows the
truck driver/company provided false insurance verification at the
scene of the wreck. Their credibility is already in
question/investigation, and effectively there are no credible third
party witnesses to the wreck, nor credible insurance/claims personnel
seen to be working on the file. The incident and handling is riddled
with fraud.

Pecoraro repeats his frivolous stance/statement: "We retained an
accident reconstruction expert to inspect the Blazer, trailer and
Porsche, and based on his inspection, it is our position this trailer
was not illuminated or visible while being operated on the
interstate."..............This is clearly fraud. The "reconstruction
expert" is a retired FHP officer and hopefully will understand and
recognize the use of fraud. He is now party to fraud. If he indeed
backs up Pecoraro's LIE, then we reserve the right to use the
recordings of Brill's attendance, and encourage him to retain those
recordings he made. These people were clearly informed that a fraud
case was underway prior to Brill's assignment and arrival. Further
they were notified at the time of attendance and thereafter that all
conversations were being recorded. NOW, if Brill sides with Pecoraro,
then Brill himself is committing fraud. If Brill tells the truth,
then his client who committed the fraud is clearly on the hook for his
own crime.

Pecoraro further states: "And based on the dimensions of the Porsche,
the taillights on the Blazer were blocked from view. There are no
known disinterested witnesses, and the investigating FHP officer
confirmed the trailer taillights were not on when he arrived on the

These are repeated attempts at fraud from Pecoraro's October 8, 2010
email (see below). Since ultimately the insurance company will be
held responsible to validate these statements it would be wise to
retain an identical blazer, Porsche, and trailer for reconstruction.
It seems clear that the statements of the "expert" are being
embellished. The blocking of the lights may lack proper
reconstruction, and is not even relevant since the trailer lights were
visible, not blocked and demonstrated illuminated by Brill's testing.
Brill's testing was the express reason for his attendance and you have
ignored his findings because it did not go the way you wanted. Fraud!
(The discussion of the "blocking of the tail-lights" of the truck is
in itself a fraud, since the trailer tested as illuminated making
truck lights potentially irrelevant in the discussion.)

Pecoraro is clearly guilty of numerous frauds, attempts at fraud, and
other legal offenses. His stance of denying liability is in itself an
attempt at fraud, and there are numerous frauds and attempts he uses
to support this frivolous position. I will be encouraging law
enforcement to investigate this particular behavior and all past
behavior if necessary.

At this juncture I would like to move forward with my life as likely
would all others. Doctors advise me the brain damage from the wreck
now appears permanent. I want to move on.

Pecoraro, Pusey, and Strickland are unfit to be any part of future
negotiations. Pecoraro appears to be a menace to society and a poses
a huge criminal risk to consumers in vulnerable situations.

As a first step it would be encouraging to see him dismissed from his
position and the company, and to see the State of Florida strip him of
his licenses and professional titles. As we have a new Commissioner
of Insurance/Finance, and you snubbed your nose at the last one, it
would make a strong demonstration of dedication to public good to have
you removed from practice. Of course failing to do this in light of
the evidence would bring undue attention to the Office of Finance for
the State. At some point, a level headed person will be able to see
that instead of mitigating exposure.. It is all about risk

Clearly, Pecoraro would prefer to keep his criminal activity hidden
from those around him, but this and other unlawful activity implicates
all those held in copy. Out of respect for them and the possibility
that wisdom will prevail I hold them all in copy..........Despite his
request to keep his criminal activity private.....Isn't THAT an
attempt to conceal? Fraud again!

I gave you plenty of chances to change your tactics. You entrenched
in the unlawful. Have someone from your parent company contact me to
resolve this issue.


Ted Whidden

P.S. John, since you responded to the "myriad of complaints" you
committed fraud each time, multiple counts, multiple ways. You put
them in the mail (or had them put in the mail) making it federal mail
fraud. This does not look like something an intelligent, honest,
professional would do.

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 3:57 PM, John Pecoraro
<John_Pecoraro@aequicap.com>  wrote:

Mr. Whidden, I have your letters dated September 19 and October 1,
2010 written to Tower Group and AequiCap Claim Services. Pursuant to
your request, I am emailing you our response to your most recent

According to my review of the claim file, you were correctly informed
early on by both AequiCap Claim Representatives that there is a
coverage issue involved in this claim. The coverage issue has to do
with the Truck driven by Mr. Yera not being listed on the policy. As
a result, we commenced our investigation, and are continuing to handle
this claim under a reservation of rights as to the Truckers liability
policy. During the course of our investigation, we determined this
Truck was on an interstate commerce trip hauling goods under Oliva
Delivery Services Motor Carrier Authority. There is an MCS-90
endorsement separately attached to the Truckers policy, and as such,
this endorsement will afford coverage for this interstate commerce
trip. A Coverage Disclosure Affidavit and copy of the policy was sent
to your former legal representative, Mr. Coy Browning.

As you know, we had an appraiser assess the damage to the 1993 Chevy
Blazer, 16' trailer, and 1986 Porsche that was on the trailer at the
time of this crash. We also retained Mr. David Brill, who is a
certified accident reconstructionist, and with your permission he
inspected both vehicles and the trailer. We took a statement from the
Truck driver and obtained your version of the accident as well. As
you know, there were no known disinterested witnesses to this
accident, and the FHP officer that handled this accident neither
observed the trailer lights being on when he arrived at the scene, nor
did he test whether they were working. And according to Mr. Brill's
inspection, the dimensions of the Porsche blocked the view of the
Blazer's taillights.

Based on the results of our investigation, it is our position this
trailer was not illuminated or visible while being operated on this
dark, unlighted section of I-10, and that this lack of illumination
was the cause of this accident. As a result, we are herewith denying
liability for this claim. Finally, according to the police report,
you are not listed as the owner of the Chevy Blazer or trailer that
was damaged in this accident. However, since you have possession of
the Blazer and trailer, and you advised us Mr. Browning is not
representing you or your brother, this denial applies to all claims,
including your brother's bodily injury claim and property damage claim
for the damage to his 1986 Porsche.

Mr. Whidden, if you feel compelled to respond to this email, I
respectfully ask that you please direct all correspondence exclusively
to my attention and also refrain from making defamatory comments.

Thank you.

John R. Pecoraro, CPCU, SCLA

Vice President, Claims

AequiCap, Inc.

954-493-6565 ext 572

954-938-8689 fax



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Iler, Maria <MIler@twrgrp.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Out of Office: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>





---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Demps, Eine <EDemps@twrgrp.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Out of Office: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>

I am currenty out of the office, and will return on 10/18/2011.



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Estepa, Myriam <MEstepa@twrgrp.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Out of Office: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>

Please be advise that I will be out ot the office until October 17, 2011

If your e-mail is related to a CLAIM:



Or contact 800-417-4577 ext 44456 and someone will assit you.





---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Phillips, Joan <JPhillips@twrgrp.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Out of Office: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>



---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Szumigata, Renne <RSzumigata@twrgrp.com>
Date: Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 8:07 PM
Subject: Out of Office: Tower/Castle Point: Immediate response requested (October 8, 2011, one year anniversary of John R Pecoraro's introduction/fraud).
To: Ted Whidden <www.tedwhidden.com>

I will be out of the office the week of October 3rd. I will return on Monday, October 10th. Please email all requests to truck@twrgrp.com  for processing. Should you need assistance, contact Maria Iler (miler@twrgrp.com ) or Maria Kahn (mkahn@twrgrp.com ). Thank you.

This message is intended only for the use of the Addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and/or CONFIDENTIAL. This email is intended only for the personal and confidential use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this email is not an intended recipient, you have received this email in error and any review, dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender immediately by return mail and permanently delete the copy you received.










Supreme Court ruled unanimously written by Judge William Rehnquist concerning Hustler Magazine v Jerry Falwell

"At the heart of the First Amendment is the recognition of the fundamental importance of the free flow of ideas and opinions on matters of public interest and concern. The freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty – and thus a good unto itself – but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole."

Supreme Court Judge Scalia wrote concerning Pope v Illinois

"Just as there is no use arguing about taste, there is no use litigating about it."

Copyright May 2011, All rights reserved by Ted Whidden

www.frauddocumentation.com     www.frauddemonstration.com    www.frauddevelopment.com