http://www.corporationwiki.com/graphs/roamer.aspx?id=35231154
Lowell Aptman, Michael Lee, John Pecoraro (Mail
Fraud, State and Federal fraud
multiple counts), Martha Guiry, Monica
Sturm, all
appear involved in what might be federal mail fraud.
Pecoraro's profile is split in three ways on this website
consistent with three of the letterheads, companies, and entities
from where he approached us to perpetrate his crimes.
John R. Pecoraro of Aequicap
John R. Pecoraro of CastlePoint
John R. Pecoraro of Tower Group
AEQUICAP and John Pecoraro Fraud Violations (examples):
This filing focuses on the state and federal
frauds/violations/charges under Aequicap's handling.
John R. Pecoraro's first state filings in the loss referred to
herein contained frauds, deceptions, concealments, misrepresentation
of material fact, and more. He knowingly and willingly lied to
state officials in his filing in an effort to avoid liability in
what his own investigator stated was a million dollar loss.
The first filing made by Pecoraro's organization at the time is
found at
www.FraudDocumentation.com/media/statefiling1Aequicap.jpg .
Note: This filing was made to the state and not sent to the
victims/offended party as required. To obtain copy of this
document a Freedom of Information Act discovery was required.
It almost makes sense that Pecoraro would try to hide his deception
and fraud in this manner.
It seems the tactic exercised by claims personnel concerning the
incident listed above are attempting what appears to be an age old
insurance trick to deny a claim (frivolously?) which is
clearly bad faith, and have
gone so far as to lie to support
their stance (fraud). They
have knowingly and willingly concealed and misrepresented
information and material fact and recently have insisted the only
course of action is litigation in court. Meanwhile
notice has
been given to their board of directors who have failed to
intervene, thus making the claims manager, board of directors, and
all those party to this file guilty of both
Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, and
Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress. The
clear case of fraud to avoid the responsibility is compounded by the
outrageous, extreme, intentional, and reckless. There is
a clear pattern of repetitive abuses, to our vulnerable position,
while the claims personnel failed in their duties to provide
good faith handling, and
to the contrary committed fraud.
Each member of the board of
directors
for
failing to properly act/intervene are at the least party to the
fraud and guilty of negligent infliction of emotional distress by
failing to act.
Clearly the attempt of an insurance company to avoid or deny
liability in a rear-end collision on an open stretch of interstate
highway requires fraud, deception, misrepresentation and concealment
of material fact to support the frivolous stance. The
insurance company(companies) clearly responsible in our wreck have
used many devious tactics to sidestep their liability, in fact there
may not be a single ethics or insurance law that has not been
violated by the deviants. Clearly the corporate structure
appears to be set to similarly deceive, conceal, and misrepresent
ownership, interests, and liabilities/responsibilities. Since
fault in a rear-end collision is absolute and irrefutable, we are
continuing to notify entities, sub-entities, management and board
members of related companies in an effort to connect with a
responsible party who understands the writing on the wall. The
purported claims manager is clearly a dishonest person committing
multiple acts and attempts of fraud. As we reach out to
branches of the corporate parent companies we hope that a reasonably
responsible person will come forward to accept the liability and
responsibility, lest the wounds continue to fester and cause further
undue hardship to the multiples of victims in this claims handling
fiasco.
John Pecoraro (CPCU, SCLA) appears guilty of knowingly,
willingly, and repeatedly committing fraud. It appears a
pattern of behavior and potentially part of the corporate culture
and operating procedure for this person. Mr. Pecoraro has
committed his frauds personally and corporately. He has
committed multiple counts of fraud under each of several places of
employment and
under multiple positions he has operated under. These are not only each and
separately chargeable, but in many instances Pecoraro's fraud will
constitute both state and federal violations. Pecoraro has
been advised many times of his unlawful activity, yet continues to commit frauds under the corporate
names of Aequicap, CastlePoint, and Tower Group/Tower Insurance, and
potentially others. He has used various company names which
appear to be "shell companies" set up to hide or avoid liabilities.
Some of these entities have already failed since incident which
initiated my introduction to this company. Additional
filings will be made to try to locate the real entity in this "house
of cards" to avoid liability. Each corporate entity has been
advised and is separately and
individually responsible for the acts of fraud conducted while Pecoraro was under their employ/agency agreement. Pecoraro
himself privately and personally is equally responsible for each act
or omission leading to fraud. Violations were committed that
constitute both state and federal offenses. This filing will
cover state and federal offenses for the company listed in part
against the company above. Charges outlined herein will
demonstrate specific correspondence issues wherein Pecoraro and his
principles are responsible. Because of the nature of
Pecoraro's deviant behavior each one can/will be addressed
separately in both state and federal courts, under each of three
corporate entities for a total of no less than 6 cases. Each
case will focus on a document set with the other documents utilized
as support documents. This should serve to put Pecoraro
and his employers in six (6) unwinnable situations, all by way of
Pecoraro's maneuvering (apparently at the behest of his employers).
Additionally Pecoraro's mishandling of the case extends fraud, party
to fraud, and ethics/insurance violations to as many as 30 other
people under the corporate umbrella of the parent companies.
We reserve the right to pursue each one separately, specifically,
personally, and/or corporately as we choose. Some of those
filings will be made this day so that the 60 day window of
opportunity for resolution all begins and runs out at the same time.
This should soon become an extremely costly endeavor for the devious
side of the equation.
The charges outlined herein will be pursued in both state and
federal court at the option of the victim. In many of
Pecoraro's violations his use of interstate offices, entities and
U.S. mail takes his state violations to the federal level.
Additional charges and violations are attributable to Pecoraro's
underlings. Theirs will be addressed separately giving the
parent entities still more violations to address in similarly
unwinnable conditions, thus uncovering what appears to be a corrupt
corporate culture headed in part by Pecoraro.
Mail fraud
is covered by
Title 18 of the United States Code, Chapter 63
Additional information, correspondence, etc on
this case is being made accessible on the website,
www.FraudDocumentation.com .
All adjusters, whether company,
independent, or public, have
significant ethical obligations
in Florida. Indeed, these
adjusters even have an
obligation to turn each other
into the Department of Financial
Services. The failure to do so
is, by itself, a breach of the
adjuster’s ethical obligations:69B-220.201. Ethical Requirements.
(Rule 3g) An adjuster
shall promptly report to the
Department any conduct by
any licensed insurance
representative of this state
which violates any provision
of the Insurance Code or
Department rule or order.
John R Pecoraro has continually throughout the entire claim
failed to accurately investigate and utilize the proper day, date,
and time of the loss. He has been corrected on multiple
occasions, as has his underlings, and his principles. This not
only constitutes failure to properly investigate, but the
intentional deception, misrepresentation of fact, and deception is
an attempt at fraud leading to what I have been advised by his
underlings to be fraud. Ms. Rori Strickland and Keisha Pusey
under his employ at Aequicap (previously, as well as CastlePoint and
Tower Group after these violations) advised me verbally that their
plan was to attempt to avoid payment of the claim by claiming late
notification by their assured. It would appear their continued
misrepresentation, concealment and deception falls in line with this
intended (yet frivolous defense). As stated numerous times in
the correspondence the underwriter cannot claim/use this defense
unless it precludes their ability to investigate or prejudices their
position. Whereas Aequicap (CastlePoint and Tower Group as well for
that matter) have had their position compromised it is clearly a
result of incompetence and dishonesty by Pecoraro and his staff.
The continued misuse of the day, date and time indicates clear
attempt at fraud, and improper reporting and investigation.
February 22, 2011, Notice John R. Pecoraro
sends a letter from his new position at Tower Group, explaining he is/was
manager of claims for a period at CastlePoint, and transitioned over from
Aequicap. In this letter Pecoraro implicates each company which appears to
have knowingly supported Pecoraro's abuses thus far. As one can see each
company and Pecoraro himself are jointly and separately responsible for this
activity. It appears a part of their corporate culture and the companies
have made an example of Pecoraro by promoting him while doing this behavior.
See
www.FraudDocumentation.com/media/PecFeb2011statefiling1advisingtransitionofcompany.jpg
and
www.FraudDocumentation.com/media/PecFeb2011statefiling2advisingtransitionofcompany.jpg
As we look in to improper investigation to which Pecoraro and his
staff are clearly guilty of we see they have no idea what the
property damages are, no idea what the personal injury damages are,
and have no idea the cause and extent of damages. They have no
road study, and they have misused the forensic evidence they did
obtain (which is clearly fraud). As one can see this day I am
filing Civil Remedy filings for both the property adjuster (Rori
Strickland) and the personal injury adjuster (Keisha Pusey)
outlining their inattentiveness and some of their failures and
incompetence. Clearly John R Pecoraro who has been their
manager at Aequicap, CastlePoint, and Tower Group as these deviants
were promoted through the system should be held accountable along
with his subordinates. Fortunately, as a result of the
incompetence of his underlings, bad faith issues, deception, and
frauds of his underlings, Pecoraro was brought in to work on this
case. He opened and introduced himself amid accusations of
fraud and bad faith and committed multiple acts of bad faith and
fraud in his introduction, and has continued such bad behavior
throughout the interactions with him. He was promoted by
management who were kept well advised and in the loop of his
deceptive nature and practices.
At this juncture I am reserving the right to sue John R Pecoraro
and each of his employers separately, corporately, locally and
federally for his attempts at fraud, fraud, and patterns of fraud
among other ethics and insurance charges. Whereas it might
seem out of character to sue for the fraud first, during the fraud
litigation the appearance of "no valuation" will not only prove the
lack of proper investigation, bad faith, and fraud, it leaves
Pecoraro and his team defenseless and convicted as charged.
NOW, it is easy to see why I refer to him occasionally as dishonest
or incompetent. He has failed in his fiduciary obligations to
protect all of his clients, employees, and himself.
Oddly, one must ask why is he going to such extremes to avoid a
claim/loss that he has not properly evaluated?
Clearly, the fraud poses the problem of incriminating this guy and
his people on all counts. To think he claims to have CPCU and
SCLA endorsements!! This position he is in more than 9 months
after the loss by his own dishonesty and incompetence is an
inescapable liability. Pecoraro seems to be a toxic asset to
his employers because this is all borne out of his bad behavior and
his continued bad behavior opens the doors to all his principals,
employers, subsidiaries, parents, etc. It would make a
wonderful book or movie. One that he should have to watch from
prison.
While under the employ of Aequicap John R Pecoraro (CPCU/SCLA)
sent the following listed correspondences (All will be made
available for viewing in the correspondence section of the newly
launched website,
www.FraudDocumentation.com wherein John R Pecoraro and his
employers are the featured launch expose');
October 8, 2010: John Pecoraro from Aequicap sends an email to Ted Whidden:
In Pecoraro's October 8, 2010 email (See
www.FraudDocumentation.com )
he acknowledge's two scathing letters (September 19 and
October 1,
2010) that I sent to his people. These two correspondences are
posted on
www.FraudDocumentation.com as
4 page and
8 page letters with
attachments. Do not hesitate to go there to the Pecoraro links
and read these mails. The deceptions of Pecoraro's team in the
first three weeks are clearly spelled out, including but not limited
to deceptions by Lowell Aptman on
behalf of CEO Michael Lee (Tower
Group/CastlePoint) and the deceptions listed against
Rori Strickland
and Keisha Pusey. (At this time a law enforcement
investigation on Pusey and her activities is underway. There
are more of these type/style of investigations to come.
Information on these investigations will be made available at
www.FraudDemonstration.com ) Pusey
who was apparently under the direction/management of both
Esther Palmer and
John R Pecoraro created issues that she along with her managers
should be held accountable. Since there is so much
deception and fraud one can see why as a victim this would be
problematic to provide to these deviants......At any rate,
Pecoraro
acknowledges two letters going into minute depth about the
violations of his subordinates and his parent company operatives.
In this introduction letter,
October 8, 2010, Pecoraro fails to
demonstrate competence of integrity. He lies (fraud) in a
number of ways.
1) Pecoraro makes attempts to conceal the fact that his
driver/assured and only witness to the claim commits fraud at the
scene by providing improper insurance coverage documents.
Note: The only witness on Pecoraro's side is a dishonest trucker,
providing falsified insurance documents at the scene, who knowingly
and willingly was driving carelessly as charged, and is likely
guilty of criminal negligence, willful misconduct, at fault/liable
in the accident, and fraud............Pecoraro's client company
Oliva Delivery may equally be responsible for the fraud/false
documents because surely the driver did not produce the documents on
his own. Meanwhile the false documents (proof of insurance)
were apparently produced by a company which Pecoraro supposedly
worked for. With a dishonest witness/assured in an at fault
accident one would think the claims manager would not heighten the
loss/cost by committing so many acts of fraud.
2) Pecoraro claims to have sent policies of insurance to
include the Aequicap Policy CPA003439, however this Aequicap Policy
has not been produced. Pecoraro has failed to provide/respond
to document requests as one normally would/should in this case.
3) Pecoraro claims to have sent some form of insurance
disclosure for another company/coverage, which the truck/driver was
NOT listed on to a lawyer once under our employ. Not only is
this a failure to provide the policy as requested, and a smoke
screen (fraud?) to conceal the false insurance policy/proof, but the
legal counsel who they claim were sent the policy is the subject of
the September 19, 2010 letter referenced above, and acknowledged by Pecoraro in his
October 8, 2010 email. The
September 19, 2010
letter clearly spells out the relationship and advises the claims
people to have nothing to do with the named attorney. Further
to this the discussions of September 17, 2010 with Pecoraro's
subordinates (Strickland/Pusey) gave strict instructions not to have
anything to do with the attorney. A legal investigations of
what appears to be Pusey's attempt at fraud of that day, lieing and
deception is underway. Pecoraro and his team continue at each
juncture to violate the victim and their wishes, yet 9 months after
a rear-end collision not a single attempt to settle has been
initiated.
3) In Pecoraro's 4th paragraph of his October 8, 2010
letter he states that, "Based on the results of our investigation,
it is out position this trailer was not illuminated......"
This seems odd since a recorded conversation with the
"forensic
expert" David Brill at the time of attendance clearly states the
trailer was illuminated. For more information on the
David
Brill recording and statements go to
www.FraudDocumentation.com , and see Civil Remedy filings of
this day/date. The complicated factor is that either David
Brill lied in his report to Pecoraro, or Pecoraro lied in his
utilization of the information from the report. We anticipate
the lies came from Pecoraro, because he repeatedly demonstrates
questionable claims and judgment issues. Clearly incompetence
and dishonesty pervade our dealings with him. What a bold
statement to make in a public document? Not really. It
is true. Look at the earlier filings and/or
www.FraudDocumentation.com for the records of the case.
Pecoraro later makes his deception stronger/firmer in a
fraud/filing with the State Commissioner of Insurance on the nature
or results from the "forensic investigation"............For the
record, David Brill is recorded by making comments similar to the
following during the forensic attendance/evaluation:...........Mr. Brill recorded our
encounter using a digital voice recorder as did www.tedwhidden.com> ">the owner of the farm (and victim in the accident).
In that recording Brill advises there is no way that a driver can be
at fault in a rear end collision. He advises that reflector
lenses on the vehicles are good for more than 600 feet irrespective
of illumination. Mr. Brill advised that the reason for his
attendance is to determine whether
the insurance company needs to
pay $800,000 or $1,000,000 to settle. Mr. Brill's "microscopic
filament" photography clearly demonstrates the right rear tail light
of the tow was illuminated, the truck lights were illuminated, there
are pictures shared demonstrating the trailer was illuminated at the
wreck scene, and the left rear trailer tail-light was clearly an
operating replacement to get the WORKING trailer lights home (right
rear tail-light was broken in the incident and damage removal so
Brill knowingly failed to test the broken right rear tail-light).
All this should be clear in Brill's report otherwise deception and
competence issues spill over. Mr. Brill's recorded
statement at the time of attendance clearly indicates that the truck
and trailer was illuminated. There is no shortage of deception
on the claims handling side of this loss. I anticipate some
competence issues, but the simplicity of illuminated trailer is
proven and recorded by both myself and
David Brill. Not only is/was this recording universally
agreed in advance, Brill was put on notice of the ongoing
fraud/deception prior to his attendance, and him and his employers
were reminded of the recorded attendance the day after his
attendance (Note my September 30, 2010 email to
David Brill copy to
Keisha Pusey,
Rori Strickland,
John Pecoraro, Fla Dept of Financial
Services (oversight), the Florida State Insurance Commissioner, and
Michael Lee
(CEO of Tower Group
Insurance). Much of this information will be made public
on
www.FraudDocumentation.com .
John R Pecoraro's attempt to deny liability by way of misusing
David Brill's report/attendance is
clearly fraud.
In John R Pecoraro's October 8, 2010 email he claims lack of
illumination (which is soundly refuted by his forensic expert and
only supported by his driver who knowingly committed fraud,
criminal
negligence, and willful misconduct leading to the wreck....??) is a
deception and attempt to conceal material fact. The peculiar
claims manager then states: "As a result, we are herewith denying
liability for this claim." His continued stance of denial
using this mis-information is "perfection" of the fraud he
attempted. Nine months have passed. This clearly points
to failure to settle in a timely manner, fraud, material
misrepresentation and a host of other issues. We have
encouraged the deviant many times to revisit the claim to get his
facts in order, but as stated above thus far he can not even get the
day, date and time correct. The bigger issues have not been
allowed to be discussed, because he has blockaded all reasonable
attempts to get him redirected to facts. Continued and
material misrepresentation at every turn has blocked the claims
process. This is all by way of Pecoraro's orchestrated
deceptions. Review of correspondences at
www.FraudDocumentation.com will clearly reveal he was made aware
of the deceptions. He will either have to claim gross
incompetence, ignorance, or dishonesty as his defense, leaving his
team defenseless. He is a toxic asset to the company and this
claim/loss. We have called out for greater integrity from the
early days, and all we have been left with is this criminal
activity.
In John R. Pecoraro's 4th paragraph he clearly commits another
fraud (there are many and ALL of them are attempts to slide
opinion/deception in his favor). Pecoraro states "Finally,
according to the police report, you (Ted Whidden) are not listed as
owner of the Chevy Blazer or trailer that was damaged in this
accident." This is clearly a lie. The FHP Report (See
www.FraudDocumentation.com ) clearly lists me as owner of the
Blazer. This is fraud and an attempt to discredit the victim.
The trailer does in fact belong to the victim/driver of the truck,
because as someone rightfully doing the right thing to remove
independent persons from becoming victims of Pecoraro's deception,
the owner of the trailer sold the damaged trailer to the
driver/victim. In fact, the owner/victim in the accident paid
the trailer owner within 24 hours of the trailer owner making a
claim, thus demonstrating clearly how a liability claim should be
handled. It is now Pecoraro's and his clients job to explain
why they did not do the needful.
Pecoraro states in his October 8, 2010 letter that because of my
possession of the damaged equipment that all claims are denied?
Odd.
Pecoraro further confirms he knows the attorney mentioned in the
September 19 and October 1 letter no longer works on this case, yet
they continue to send documents to this attorney? Odd.
They acknowledge he is off the case, but then claim to fulfill their
obligations by sending an attorney documents against the wishes of
the victim. How can they know he has been removed, still
correspond, and then assume they are in compliance? In part
the fraud investigations of Keisha Tanisha Pusey who was under the
direction/employ of Pecoraro may shed some light on this.
In paragraph 5 of Pecoraro's October 8, 2010 letter sent from his
position at Aequicap he attempts to conceal his deviant behavior
(fraud?) by askng that all correspondence be directed to him
"exclusively". Of course this is the nature of fraud. It
gets sticky when it goes public.
In Pecoraro's October 8, 2010 email paragraph 5 he asks to
refrain from making defamatory comments. Please note that
where my comments may appear bold, they are not defamatory.
Each and every one is true, and in order for a defamation to occur
there must be something false in the statement. In each
instance there is an abundance of proofs to allow public discussion
of his incompetence and dishonesty, otherwise he would sue for
defamation of character.......Wouldn't he? In order for him to
do it "corporately" then his corporate counsel would have to be
involved, and thus far it appears they are in agreement with my
assertions, otherwise we would hear from them. Oddly, failure
of the parent organization and oversight to get involved after
numerous notices makes them party to the frauds and deceptions, thus
making corporate culture and patterns of fraud appear evident.
Please see my response to John R
Pecoraro, copy to Keisha Pusey,
Rori Strickland,
Michael Lee, Florida Department of
Financial Services, Insurance Commissioner Mike McCarty, and
David Brill, sent on
October 8,
2010. It can be viewed at
www.FraudDocumentation.com .
It begins
with "In an effort to make sure that everyone's personal legal files
are in tact........." This will be linked from one of John
R Pecoraro's "pages" on the expose' website.
On October 13, 2010, John R. Pecoraro appears to have responded
from his position at Aequicap Claims Services, on behalf of his
client company CastlePoint Florida Insurance Company. To this
point, and since Pecoraro has tried so desperately to orchestrate
deceptions and such it is very difficult to determine who he really
works for, who the real insurance carrier is, and where the
responsibility lies. One thing we do know is Pecoraro lies.
He can't seem to help it, and along with his clients they appear to
have no integrity whatsoever based on our limited dealings with
them. As we review the letter of October 13, 2010 you will see
that Pecoraro appears to have no problem extending his deceptions
and delusions to his official state filings. As a CPCU/SCLA
one would think the ramifications and understanding of fraud would
be better, thus making him appear to be extremely stupid, dishonest,
or incompetent. If it were not true then I could not state this in a
state filing, could I?
Firstly, in the October 13, 2010 letter to the Florida Department
of Consumer Services, the person misses the day and date of the
incident. This is/was corrected for him numerous times, and is
clearly stated on the FHP report. This as well as other
deceptions filed by the officers of this company and claims people
perpetuate the illusion of this date. The reasons believed are
stated above as relayed by the other claims deviants at Aequicap.
Day, date and time of the incident is SATURDAY NIGHT, after
midnight, 5 minutes after midnight on the official "date" of August
29, 2010. Effectively it was 5 minutes in to Sunday morning.
Not Monday, Not August 30. This deception is repeated
eventhough on October 8, 2010 Pecoraro acknowledged the victims
letters of September 19, 2010, and October 1, 2010 both of which
clarified this issue and included the FHP report of the incident.
This is an attempt at fraud that Pecoraro continues, AND is a very
clear indication of his lack of proper investigation and failure to
properly report the loss. It is an attempt to conceal the real
date, misrepresent material fact to support their stated rejection
intention, and is yet another form of fraud, which permeates
virtually every contact we have had with him and his people.
Pecoraro's claim that the loss was reported the "same day" of the
loss is further muddled by poor investigation and reporting, the
complications too vast to explain in this format. Leave it
that improper reporting, record keeping and incompetence are the
cause/effect.
Pecoraro in this October 13, 2010 attempt at deception "cushions"
his first deceptions by using the phraseology "it is our
understanding". This is a deceptive practice used by people
trying to cover a fraud in many instances. He can "claim" to
understand whatever he likes, however it is very clear there is no
reason for him to "understand" this absurd idea. Clearly the
FHP report as stated above clarifies this. Pecoraro continued
interweaving of deceptions appears orchestrated to confuse.
For the simplicity of the court we will likely sue in directly for
the frauds to maintain greater clarity. The October 13, 2010
deception submitted to the Florida Department of Insurance will be
made available on
www.FraudDemonstration.com since Pecoraro has failed to make
this document public.
Meanwhile, the claims person states, "It is our understanding
neither of the 2 vehicles, or trailer, are owned by the
complainant."
This
is clearly an attempt to discredit or insult the complainant, but in
turn reveals the lack of proper investigation, and the deception
(fraud attempt) of the claims handlers. See the FHP report
on
www.FraudDocumentation.com
which clearly shows the complainant is owner.
Pecoraro's deception (attempt to conceal) states that on
September 2, there was an adjuster appointed to look at one of the
vehicles and trailer. Deeper review will find this to be
potentially in error, PLUS the adjuster (Rori Strickland) appears to
have purposely maneuvered to try and "miss" the addition vehicle(s)
in the wreck. Another filing will address a few of the many
offenses/violations of Rori Strickland, being mindful she appears to
have been removed within the first 3-4 weeks of the loss. Her
abuses under Pecoraro and Pusey's direction apparently was what
initiated many of the feelings of distrust. Her statements as
were Pusey's so rash and out of line it uncovered early the
deceptive nature and culture within the organization. These
are addressed in part/superficially in the letters of September 19,
2010, and October 1, 2010 as outlined above.
One thing Pecoraro fails to advise in his October 13, 2010 letter
is the content of the early phone calls to Aequicap wherein they
denied coverage, denied knowledge, denied knowledge of the driver,
denied knowledge of the trucking company, etc. The lies and
deception began as soon as they were called and continue to this
day. Clearly in a rear-end collision on a clear stretch of
interstate the following driver is at fault. The games they
are playing is merely an extension of the early deceptions and fraud
initiated using the false insurance verification by their assured,
and continuing with the never ending deviant behavior of the
adjusters.
I could continue to dwell on the idiocy in the letters sent from
Aequicap, but by skipping to paragraph four we see that this letter
again states a very obvious fraud/lie, "We retained an accident
reconstruction expert to inspect the Blazer, trailer and Porsche,
and based on the inspection, it is our position this trailer was not
illuminated or visible while being operated on the interstate".
What??? Do you recall what the Forensic Expert said during his
attendance? What kind of idiot would put such a statement in
their state filing???? Recall we advised earlier:
Mr. Brill recorded our
encounter using a digital voice recorder as did www.tedwhidden.com> ">the owner of the farm (and victim in the accident).
In that recording Brill advises there is no way that a driver can be
at fault in a rear end collision. He advises that reflector
lenses on the vehicles are good for more than 600 feet irrespective
of illumination. Mr. Brill advised that the reason for his
attendance is to determine whether
the insurance company needs to
pay $800,000 or $1,000,000 to settle. Mr. Brill's "microscopic
filament" photography clearly demonstrates the left rear tail light
of the tow was illuminated, the truck lights were illuminated, there
are pictures shared demonstrating the trailer was illuminated at the
wreck scene, and the right rear trailer tail-light was clearly an
operating replacement to get the WORKING trailer lights home (right
rear tail-light was broken in the incident and damage removal so
Brill knowingly failed to test the broken right rear tail-light).
All this should be clear in Brill's report otherwise deception and
competence issues spill over. Mr. Brill's recorded
statement at the time of attendance clearly indicates that the truck
and trailer was illuminated. There is no shortage of deception
on the claims handling side of this loss. I anticipate some
competence issues, but the simplicity of illuminated trailer is
proven and recorded by both myself and
David Brill. Not only is/was this recording universally
agreed in advance, Brill was put on notice of the ongoing
fraud/deception prior to his attendance, and him and his employers
were reminded of the recorded attendance the day after his
attendance (Note my September 30, 2010 email to
David Brill copy to
Keisha Pusey,
Rori Strickland,
John Pecoraro, Fla Dept of Financial
Services (oversight), the Florida State Insurance Commissioner, and
Michael Lee
(CEO of Tower Group
Insurance). Much of this information will be made public
on
www.FraudDocumentation.com .
John R Pecoraro's attempt to deny liability by way of misusing
David Brill's report/attendance is
clearly fraud.
These people have 60 days according to the Civil Remedy filing
system to attempt to resolve their inadequacies. As there were
6+ filings before this date we had hoped we would not have to reach
out and touch so many. We also hoped not to go quite so public
as it may not be in everyone's best interest, but fear not, the
public/media display shall continue and one would anticipate a
sensible recipient would resolve this quietly. If my postings
seem irregular, imagine how irregular it is for an insurer to commit
so much fraud and deception on a claim they never evaluated.
This appears to be a normal course of action for the insurance
company. What other explanation would work??? It indeed
looks like a corporate culture of deception, and abuse as a matter
of course. Thus far they have refused to discuss any aspect of
the claim, have knowingly and willingly committed fraud, and have
told me that I have no recourse but to sue them in court. It
is stated, willful, and purposeful delay and an attempt to side step
their obligation. What reasonable person would have handled
the claim in this manner? Pecoraro and his team may be toxic
assets for the industry as a whole.
Additional deceptions exist in the Florida Department of Consumer
Services letter sent from Aequicap on October 13, 2010, but I am
getting tired of writing. Using the letter as evidence the
other charges will be outlined and fleshed out as per letters made
public on
www.FraudDocumentation.com .
The above referenced letters/emails appear to have been sent by
John R Pecoraro while under the employ of Aequicap apparently as a
service provider to other entities. Under many aspects of law,
Pecoraro can be held personally responsible because of his
licensing, endorsements, and alleged experience and knowledge.
Further to this, Pecoraro's employer company, and their principles
can be held responsible for the deviant behavior. The corrupt
corporate culture that appears to foster this type/style of handling
often sets up "shell companies" and/or a convoluted "house of cards"
to side-step liability. At the time of this filing the State
of Florida has made it public information that Aequicap went in to
bankruptcy mid-February 2011, and receivership early March 2011.
Meanwhile, Pecoraro appears to have been promoted up the chain from
the first shell company (Aequicap) to what appears to be the next
upline organiztion. It seems that Pecoraro and his entire
staff/entourage of deviants were hired/promoted to what appears to
be a parent/sister operative or organization. This operative
CastlePoint Insurance which is a puppet or subordinate to Tower
Group seems next in line for the collapse. It looks like these
people set up shell companies with the intent of folding up their
tents before their liabilities come home to rest. The next set
of letters we receive from the deviant Mr. Pecoraro comes from
CastlePoint Risk Management of Florida. By February 22, 2011
Pecoraro send a letter stating he is head of Claims Department at
CastlePoint Risk Management of Florida effective November 2, 2010.
By April of 2011 Pecoraro writes as if he is head of claims for
Tower Group Companies. Clearly they are a fast moving
operation and the deviant activity that was clearly advised to
management of all the listed parents has been a promotable talent
within the organization. For a complete listing of the other
filings and clarification on any and all of these assertions feel
free to review the Civil Remedy filings of this day which includes
filings on Pecoraro from the vantage point of each listed employer,
and the board members of the companies which appear to endorse such
behavior. Clearly the web is becoming more tangled. This
is the problem with fraud and why it is often considered unlawful.
It is clear that people like Pecoraro must stay on the run, and he
is considered a flight risk for his unlawful/criminal behavior.
The corporate entities who promoted this individual for this
behavior obviously display lack of understanding. Additional
notices this date reveal the specific board members notified and
apparently endorsing this behavior including but not limited to the
correspondence sent to board members on March 23, 2011 to which none
replied, and their Civil Remedy filing as a follow-up this date.
All of this is available and will be explained on
www.FraudDocumentation.com
Pecoraro while at Aequicap Property and Casualty sent an
insurance
Violations include ethics violations (See links and listing at
www.FraudDocumentation.com ) and laws as listed below.
| 624.155(1)(b)(1) |
|
Not attempting in good faith to settle claims when,
under all the circumstances, it could and should have done
so, had it acted fairly and honestly toward its insured and
with due regard for her or his interests. |
| 624.155(1)(b)(2) |
|
Making claims payments to insureds or beneficiaries not
accompanied by a statement setting forth the coverage under
which payments are being made. |
| 624.155(1)(b)(3) |
|
Except as to liability coverages, failing to promptly
settle claims, when the obligation to settle a claim has
become reasonably clear, under one portion of the insurance
policy coverage in order to influence settlements under
other portions of the insurance policy coverage. |
| 624.401(1) |
|
No person shall act as an insurer, and no insurer or its
agents, attorneys, subscribers, or representatives shall
directly or indirectly transact insurance, in this state
except as authorized by a subsisting certificate of
authority issued to the insurer by the office, except as to
such transactions as are expressly otherwise provided for in
this code. |
| 624.401(2) |
|
No insurer shall from offices or by personnel or
facilities located in this state solicit insurance
applications or otherwise transact insurance in another
state or country unless it holds a subsisting certificate of
authority issued to it by the office authorizing it to
transact the same kind or kinds of insurance in this state. |
| 624.401(3) |
|
This state hereby preempts the field of regulating
insurers and their agents and representatives; and no
county, city, municipality, district, school district, or
political subdivision shall require of any insurer, agent,
or representative regulated under this code any
authorization, permit, or registration of any kind for
conducting transactions lawful under the authority granted
by the state under this code. |
| 624.401(4)(a) |
|
Any person who acts as an insurer, transacts insurance,
or otherwise engages in insurance activities in this state
without a certificate of authority in violation of this
section commits a felony of the third degree, punishable as
provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. |
John R Pecoraro
(Multiple frauds
in multiple jurisdictions, fla, ny, state, interstate, federal, federal mail
fraud, INCLUDING the corporate heads by way of corporate veil (Monica Sturm),
and Michael Lee’s apparent endorsement).
It appears that the behavior and
criminal activity of John R. Pecoraro
knows no bounds. As we reveal his
misdealings it should become apparent that any harm to the victims of his crime
(or witnesses to his many crimes) could be the responsibility of Pecoraro who
orchestrated and ran with this deception.
He has now committed multiple
frauds, attempts at fraud, misrepresentations, misdirections, AND like the
incompetent/dishonest person he has been demonstrated to be (See CIVIL REMEDY
FILINGS?????) Pecoraro
placed and/or had placed his fraud
filings to the state
in the U.S. mail system making him fully guilty of Federal mail fraud, and
implicating those who fed him the misinformation (Lowell Aptman, Rori.htm">Rori
Rori, Pusey, Martha Guiry, Michael Lee, Esther Palmer, etc) as party
to his fraud. As guilty and party to fraud(s) this demonstrates they are all
unfit to maintain any type of state license, insurance license/certification, or
law degree (bar status). I will outline just a few of his attempts at fraud
below saving some of the more juicy elements for the personal legal pursuit
destined to put him in federal prison for fraud.
The deviant Pecoraro
makes a number
of irrational statements correspondences concerning insurance losses and
specifically in his Civil Remedy filings to the State Commissioner of Finance
and Insurance in his responses to our previous filings. We have re-initiated a
number of filings from different perspectives outlining the numerous frauds,
patterns of fraud, good faith violations, and a host of other issues. Part of
the re-state of these allowed Pecoraro to make conscious, repeated,
premeditated, calculated decisions to either stick to his original frivolous and
deceptive strategy or change strategy. Mr. Pecoraro’s “calculations” have been
in error. He has consistently stuck to the same manipulative and deceitful
plan. Any attempt for him or those he represents to shift their position after
this point is to be seen as an admission to the frauds and attempts at fraud
outlined herein and related to this filing. By re-submitting Pecoraro’s stance
numerous times and stating it to the State Commissioner and posting it in the
regular mail he has made multiple conscious attempts at fraud. I will try to
list the number of attempts at fraud, and the frauds themselves to demonstrate
both violation, claim and proof within the public access Civil Remedy process,
thus making all the claims and documents fully accessible as a legal and
training tool for the public in an effort to make an example of Pecoraro and
deviants who follow his tactics. Unfortunately there are so many criminal
attempts by Pecoraro and his team that I anticipate not counting all of them.
Meanwhile, saving some of the for our personal pursuit to be separated from the
corporate as need be to see that justice is properly served.
I will not go in to all the nuances
of Pecoraro
’s file and concepts of fraud
herein. It is with anticipation that
he and/or his employers will attempt to distort the meaning and application of
concepts of fraud
as their attempt to “defend”. Fortunately this will bring
still more media attention to their concepts, culture, and patterns of
dishonesty. As the company and individuals respond we will oblige each of them
to their own charge of fraud
including, but not limited to removal from
practicing law or utilization of professional licenses for their deceptions. As
we are going to prove a pattern of fraud
corporately their response/strategy is
anticipated.
A definition for “fraud” can be found on the
Internet/web to be:
The term 'fraud' is generally defined in the law as an intentional
misrepresentation of material existing fact made by one person to another with
knowledge of its falsity and for the purpose of inducing the other person to
act, and upon which the other person relies with resulting injury or damage.
[fraud
may also include an omission or intentional failure to state material
facts, knowledge of which would be necessary to make other statements not
misleading.]
Wikipedia states: According to the Collins
English Dictionary 10th Edition fraud
can be defined as: "deceit, trickery,
sharp practice, or breach of confidence, perpetrated for profit or to gain some
unfair or dishonest advantage".[1]
In the broadest sense, a fraud is an intentional
deception
made for personal gain or to damage another individual; the related adjective is
fraudulent. The specific legal definition varies by legal jurisdiction.
fraud
is a
crime,
and also a
civil law
violation. Defrauding people or entities of
money
or valuables is a common purpose of fraud, but there have also been fraudulent
"discoveries", e.g. in
science,
to gain prestige rather than immediate monetary gain.
MAIL fraud
as defined at the U.S.
Postal Inspectors website is:
https://postalinspectors.uspis.gov/investigations/mailfraud/mailfraud.aspx
U.S. Postal Inspectors investigate any crime in which the U.S. Mail is used to
further a scheme--whether it originated in the mail, by telephone, or on the
Internet. The use of the U.S. Mail is what makes it mail fraud.
Mail fraud
is covered by
Title 18 of the United States Code,
Chapter 63.
Pecoraro
’s frauds and deceptive
responses to the State of Florida became Federal fraud
when he arranged to have
them sent by regular mail. Those who participated in compiling, generating,
supporting, copying, etc this fraud
are party to Pecoraro’s mail fraud.
Pecoraro
’s many violations are
clearly outlined in numerous responses sent to him via email and other means
from the victims of the horrific accident and the severe mental abuse of
Pecoraro and his team’s tactic. Whereas we can quote our own documentation and
proofs, we prefer to use Pecoraro’s own Civil Remedy/State of Florida filings.
These should be sufficient to demonstrate proof in fact of his deception. There
is plenty of other information to be used in this regard as well. Some this
will be organized, posted and made accessible on our website
www.FraudDemonstration.com wherein we will use
Pecoraro, his team, his company and affiliates in our examples for the purpose
of exposing these type and style of tactics. We will make it our goal to have
each person involved fully recognized for the role they played in the
development of this situation. Surely, they will be proud to be outlined and
singled out in such a high profile web system.
At a glance it appears the first
instance where Pecoraro
reponds in writing is his email of October 8, 2010
(LINK????). Oddly, we had been appealing to the company since September 17-19,
2010 (LINK??) to have someone of authority and integrity to contact us. More
than 6 months have passed and we have not had anyone of authority or integrity
contact us. Instead, we were left to deal with Pecoraro, who is the self
appointed claims person in this disaster. Note, Pecoraro’s letter he
acknowledges two letters September 19 and October 1, 2010. (LINKS??). His
acknowledgement will serve to make him aware of and party to all charges
launched in those. Further it places him squarely in the chain of command of
letters shared with the corporate parent, local sub-office, claims agents, etc.
Pecoraro
’s sending of a “Coverage
Disclosure Affidavit” (para 2 of his Oct 8, 2010 email) constitutes a violation
of law. Clearly the Sept 19 and October 1 letters told the insurer to have
nothing to do with the attorney.
Pecoraro
’s para 3 of his October 8,
2010 letter acknowledges some inspections. These inspections will be found to
be evidence of delay, deception and part of Pecoraro’s fraud. The
“reconstructionist” Mr Brill who they claim to have retained was sent to the
property to inspect without proper notice as required under Florida law making
this a violation in and of itself. The attendance and results of the
“reconstructionist” Brill have been mis-used to bring about part of Pecoraro’s
fraud, and will be material to several of his attempts at fraud, making some of
them attempts and some of them perfected frauds.
Para 3 of Pecoraro
’s Oct 8, 2010
letter refers to statements taken from the truck driver. It needs to be
understood that any statement made in error and known or believed to be in error
will constitute fraud
on the part of the person using the statement. As one can
imagine the statement from the trucker is likely unreliable. We haven’t seen it
yet, but the use of information by Pecoraro indicates that it is not only in
error, but Pecoraro knowing used it the erred document. We begin to see his
personal manipulation of data, information, and facts to begin to
emerge…………NOTE: The call for a manager involvement leading to this point 4-5
weeks after the wreck was because of the NUMEROUS frauds and deceptions of
Pecoraro’s underlings. We had appealed to get away from fraud
and deception and
they gave us the “trainer” for fraud
it appears. State records will show we
are demonstrating a corporate culture of dishonest dealings.
In para 3 of Pecoraro
’s October 8,
2010 letter he makes references to the FHP officer and statements. It is highly
unlikely that the statements of the FHP officer will be found to be taken in a
responsible manner, and it should be relatively simple to demonstrate the
frailties in such statements and FHP reporting uses by
Aequicap/CastlePoint/TowerGroup.
Pecoraro
in Para 4 of Oct 8, 2010
letter states that it is “our opinion” that the trailer was not illuminated.
Pecoraro is trying to use the erred “opinion” statement to sidestep his
responsibility to share the truth. Evidence when reviewed including, but not
limited to the attendance of the FHP officer, and the attendance of the
“reconstructionist” will undermine Pecoraro’s statement………Besides, the frivolous
stance of Pecoraro that he eventually uses for claims denial is not even
relevant in a rear-end collision. If it were true (which it is not) it is not
relevant. We see an attempt at fraud
and/or fraud. As we see this develop we
will see that statement leading to this and attempting to mislead are additional
frauds and attempts at fraud.
Para 4 of October 8, 2010 Pecoraro
denies liability in a rear-end collision!! Amazing! Not only is this a
frivolous stance, it is unsupported by the evidence. The fraud
and patterns of
fraud
begin to emerge further.
In para 4, Pecoraro
claims that the
police (FHP??) reports states that I am not the owner of the Chevy Blazer or
trailer. This is a lie! We have an absolute clear fraud/misrepresentation that
can be independently verified by anyone who can read. Pecoraro misrepresents
material facts of the case that are clearly written for anyone to read. One
will notice in each instance Pecoraro always twists the detail in the favor of
those he is trying to protect. Not a single error is made in the other
direction. It is all pre-meditated, focused, and calculated to bring about the
larger deception which is likely denial of liability and avoiding financial and
legal responsibilities in the loss.
In para 4 of Pecoraro
’s October 8,
2010 letter he acknowledges that the “attorney” previously referred to does not
represent us in the accident. In so doing, para 2 and para 4 of Pecoraro’s
letter are in conflict with one another. They advise they are communication
with the attorney, but acknowledge advices not to. Pecoraro and his team use
deception however it is needed. Members of Pecoraro’s team will have their own
charges/violations in regards to this case and their unlawful dealing with the
attorney group.
Pecoraro
uses my “possession” of
vehicles in the accident (para 4, October 8, 2010) as his reason for denying all
claims. Isn’t this odd? Why would possession bring about a denial? Pecoraro
tries to write law at this point. His ideas are twisted so his explanation was
never requested.
In para 5 in Pecoraro
’s October
8,2010 letter he asks that correspondence be sent exclusively to his attention.
No doubt this is to keep his deceptions and ridiculous stance(s) private. This
request was seen as a cloak and dagger tactic of deception. Anything that needed
to be said could be said in public view. With the direction this was heading I
saw no reason to respect his devious directions and intentions.
In one of John R. Pecoraro
’s
frivolous statements (attempt at fraud) he states the trailer being towed behind
our vehicle party to the wreck was a “home made” trailer (See Document???).
Clearly Pecoraro has made an attempt at fraud, because the trailer is clearly
manufactured, has 4 patents, machine welds, and the attempt to be theatrical
with his “home made” claim is an attempt to belittle our assets and losses,
which on five (5??) occasions Pecoraro has denied liability in a rear-end
collision (His biggest fraud
of all, with almost all attempts at fraud
leading
to the ultimate goal of denying liability).
In many ways Pecoraro
and his staff
have harassed the victims of the referenced accident by failing to give the
audience after numerous requests for equitable resolution. Pecoraro himself
have insulted the victims including making fun of their mental and medical
conditions. This man appears to have no conscience, morals, ethics, or
decency. Since his onslaught has at times been electronically it appears in
some ways to be “cyber bullying” of some kind. His continued handling of this
loss/case/claim is a form of harassment with strong elements of slander, libel
and defamation of character in it by way of his responses.
True, as Pecoraro
states in his
most recent attempts at mail fraud
there have been a “myriad of complaints”
about Aequicap, CastlePoint, Tower Group staff, handling, management, ownership,
etc yet not one single claim is without strong foundation and basis. Not one
single complaint has been adequately addressed or resolved, thus Pecoraro’s
statement of the “myriad of complaints” tends to implicate if not prove lack of
good faith handling in this case. As any moron can see the “myriad” of Civil
Remedy filings have served to establish fraud
and the pattern of fraud, lack of
good faith, and every single claim and/or violation stated is proved true in the
documents now being made part of public record……….At this juncture the case for
mishandling is stated, documented, proved, and made available for public
discovery. As we incorporate evidence, documentation, and supports for public
access and viewing I reserve the right to liase with any and all media outlets,
rating institutions, any and all board of directors or anyone deemed necessary
for the gathering of data, personal reference information or any supports of any
form deemed necessary for character witness and other types of investigation on
Pecoraro, Michael Lee, Pusey, Rori, and the whole cast of characters
involved in this charade. Understand all that Florida public statutes make
those in the insurance business liable for criminal activity and violations they
are aware of, but fail to report. (QUOTE?????) This not only makes if unlawful
for Aequicap, CastlePoint, and Tower Group personnel to remain silent about
these and other violations, but makes them personally, professionally, and
corporately responsible for the criminal and deviant activity for which they are
aware. I reserve the right to make as many of them aware of the activities to
which I am now aware, so contact with their corporate and personal directories
are within my rights of placing them on notice for their responsibilities or
potential responsibilities in our investigation and litigation. On ??????? I
provided several members of the staff with a copy of the Florida ethics laws for
insurance professionals. Since it is unlikely such a document of integrity
would be passed around in a deviant company I post one online, and encourage
them to be aware. This should help them in their continuing education and
professional pursuits. Of course this should be Pecoraro’s responsibility to
make this available to them. He might take offense.
Febuary 2011 filing
Delay:
A certified “demand” letter for driver/trucking documents
was sent to Oliva
Delivery Services dated 10/1/ 2010. The letter was signed as
received 10/5/2010. Copies of the letter were sent by mail to Aequicap,
CastlePoint and Tower Group. The letter was a demand letter for documents as a
result of the claims handler(s) attempt to shift liability in the direction of
the victims. In the letter it was anticipated that the claims people at
Aequicap would attempt to shift liability. On 10/13/2010 in the adjuster’s
filing to the State of Florida Department of Financial Services the claims vice
president of Aequicap denied liability. It appears the claims deviants want to
“have their cake and eat it, too”. They want to shift liability to the victim,
but do not respond to demands for evidences and information to review the
liability. They cannot do both. They are in violation of law and herein
indicates/proves UNDUE DELAY on their part.
In our Civil Remedy filing 11/20/2010 (filing number
169110, CastlePoint; filing number 168836, Aequicap) we clearly stated that we
stand by awaiting fulfillment of our demand/request of 10/1/2010, acknowledged
on 10/5/2010.
On 12/15/2010 the response to the Civil Remedy filing (of
11/20/2010) by John Pecoraro
responding on behalf of Tower Group and CastlePoint
he “rejected” our assertions of undue delay, yet their failure to comply makes
his assertions appear foolish. They have obviously delayed from 10/1/2010 to
present. Another copy (Certified receipt) of the letter was sent to John
Pecoraro at Aequicap on 12/27/2010. It appears he signed for it himself on
December 30, 2010. He quite obviously has now seen the letter, and is yet again
responsible for delay. We remain standing by for their compliance with the
letter. The letter clearly outlines the intentions of Aequicap/CastlePoint’s
devious handling, and their follow through exactly as the letter outlined they
would. They have been given adequate time to respond. Fulfillment of the
demand list is required according to law no matter what their present or future
stance is. As stated in the 10/1/2010 filing they are responsible no matter
what.
Aequicap and their assured have failed to comply with our
10/1/2010, our 11/20/2010 follow up, our 12/27/2010 follow-up (signed for
12/30/2010 by Pecararo) and now we are in to a new calendar year 2011 and they
have not complied as yet. The claims guy Pecoraro
has accepted receipt of a
copy on 12/30/2010. The claims handlers are clearly in violation of delay. As
stated in the letter of 10/1/2010 no excuse, shift, or change in tactics will
absolve them of the requirement to comply with this demand. The claims handling
techniques in the early days of this loss lead us to write the 10/1/2010 letter
which clearly foretold of their corrupt claims handling techniques. This undue
delay and misdirection in this loss/incident is clearly bad faith, delay, and
likely will constitute attempted fraud
and fraud. Misdirection, deception, and
delay is all we are receiving from these claims people and their principles.
Since we gave plenty of time to comply to the first request
(10/1/2010) and to the second request (11/20/2010), we feel they may be hiding
something. Full compliance is required no matter what moves are made. This is
an obvious sign/proof of delay, and thus renders John Pequeno’s “rejection” of
our claim of delay another attempt on his part to deceive.
We have made a previous Civil Remedy filing to try to get
Pecararo to reveal who he is and what role he plays in this process. He has
responded thus far from numerous company profiles, using different letterheads,
titles, etc. On some of the most recent paperwork he has claimed to be Vice
President of claims. We await explanation and identification as to who we need
to address and their roles in this process.
This “Vice President” of claims is appears guilty of:
Gross incompetence, delay and deception
Willfill and intentional misconduct and negligence
Failure to properly investigate
Incompetence, poor claims handling, improper recording
Misrepresentation
Attempted fraud
leading to fraud.
Numerous Ethics Violations
The claims personnel have been advised that we intend to
hold them personally, privately, and corporately responsible for their devious
behavior. This includes, but is not limited to pursuing action against their
personal licenses to the full extent allowable under Florida, State, and Federal
Laws.
As early as September 17, 2010 we advised the claims
personnel to alert their E&O (Errors and Omissions) underwriters concerning the
behavior and early violations we cited. To this point we have not been
contacted by anyone with integrity in regards to the loss.
We await response to our letter of 10/1/2010, the
11/20/2010 follow up, and the 12/27/2010 follow-up (the identical letter sent
10/1/2010). They are clearly guilty of delay and continued delay and
misdirection while we await these documents almost 4 months now.
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