Nice post, thanks, would not have seen it without you.
This seems like a fairly well researched article. Probbaly worth reading.
It does not discuss as mentioned the real problem of insurance fraud, BUT does clearly acknowledge it; but that is OK because this article is about insurance fraud fraud, and it’s scary, I think.
In fact you would think you would have insurance against people deceitfully going after you for turning in an insurance claim (!), but it is conveniently a criminal complaint they are after, precisely so that liability insurance would not cover it.
They cited “at least a sevenfold return on investment” for the last 20 years on insurance industry efforts to fight fraud. With apparently little downside. On an older guy like the one in the article, their actions could basically usher him out of his life like he never expected.
The solution in part will be along the lines of making it criminal for an insurance company AND THE INDUSTRY “DEEP STATE” type individuals involved not to share exonerating and all information with the accused, PLUS “conflict of interest” type laws preventing them from being too directly involved.
The other part is just shining light on it as the article is doing. I sure will not do any business with the insurance company they use as the main example. I also would tend to pick one with an official policy of staying out of fraud investigations especially as far as paying police, etc.
“I also would tend to pick one with an official policy of staying out of fraud investigations especially as far as paying police, etc.”
Every insurance company conducts fraud investigations and pays some entity to conduct said investigations - staff investigators, 3rd parties, or both.
It is important for the insurance company to root out fraudulent claims, as the old saying goes, where there is money there are crooks.
The question is whether using publicly trained, employed, taxpayer supported government institutions to do the insurance company’s work. Even hiring some of the personnel after working hours raises questions, including a potential conflict should there be a lawsuit or criminal prosecution of the individual.
This reminds me of these security companies that went out and sold home protection alarm systems, with remote electronics/communications. If an incident occurred, system contact the police. Some communities found out that significant numbers of police calls were due to these companies calling in incidents, and most of them were false alarms. In other words, the police were an extension of the security companies, at no cost to the latter. Some communities have started to charge a registration fee for homeowners with security system, and if one does not pay it, the homeowner will be charged for the event, like 4 ties the cost of registration.