Why Am I listing the shortcomings of the insurance experts--
For everything in life, there are problems and there are solutions. I am defining the problem with some of the insurance expert's methodology as well as conclusions in reported stolen vehicles and burned vehicles.
My associates, my organization and I are willing to be the solution. We do not pick sides and only address these issues with fact in a completely unbiased manner
Feel free to contact us for consultation on your claim or case no matter if you are insurance defense attorney, plaintiff attorney, prosecutor or criminal defense attorney.
We are capable of reviewing the expert's report before it goes to litigation with the merits and the potential liability issues.
We also can refer properly trained individuals for examining reported stolen and burned vehicles for insurance companies with accurate comprehensive reports.
Here is a side note as to all the information supplied on this site: I strive for the accuracy of this information as substantiated and factual. Although the opposition may personally attack me with accusations of credibility problems, calling me a liar, a poser. It must be remembered that for any information on this site, is always copied by opposing attorneys in a poor attempt to discredit me. The information must be accurate or I have the potential for libel, or the information will be used to impeach me if false.
I make this statement to those that are crying about being exposed for what they really are: I recommend that you file suit against me. Just remember, that is when everything comes out and will be part of a public record. It's not libel if it can be substantiated.
If the best the opposing experts can do is call me names and attack me personally on the web, that shows their lack of professionalism. If they were so good, why are they not on the prevailing side against me 67 times?
Instead of the coalition and it's members calling me names and crying about how I am misleading or misrepresenting the information on this site, my answer to this is, file libel suits against me or shut up!
I have been accused of being righteous. Maybe I am. I just believe that the expert should not embellish his qualifications and if he states conclusions, he can prove unequivocally how he got there.
In the cases I have served as an expert witness against the insurance experts, I have been sadly disappointed with their lack of care as it relates to forensics. Its just business for them and they don't care whose life they ruin because of their flawed opinions.
Although the opposing experts can't support their opinions with fact, it is just much easier to attempt to try to do personal attacks on me similar to the Clinton case defining "What is."
This just emboldens me and makes me strive to always improve myself in my profession. I am not alone in this campaign.
There are people right now being accused of a crime all under the title "Forensics" with no proof. Just the expert's one -sided opinion.
I am currently looking for investors for my operation. The potential of profit is enormous and you are also doing a good thing for insured's /defendants. I know of three cases in which the insured was convicted of a felony when there was no real evidence from the vehicle. The game was for the prosecution to win at any cost!
My site does not offer personal attacks against the opposition. It just is a compilation of the facts. Funny, none of these people are saying anything. I guess because they know they are fraudulent and the truth cannot be contested.
Here is a fact---If the examiner does a full and comprehensive report on the vehicle, eliminating all known hypotheses and just states facts (no assumption) and the conclusions are substantiated, chances of the expert having to support his conclusions are next to nil.
If on the other hand, the methodology was flawed and the conclusions can't be substantiated, this almost guaranties the expert will have to support his conclusions in court.
The question at hand is, that if these "legitimate forensic experts" are so good, why is it they have to support so many of their reports in court?
The boys here accused me of using smoke and mirrors when I oppose them in court cases. Why is it then that our side has prevailed 67 out of 71 times in these cases when opposing them?
The judges, juries and opposition attorneys know I can support my opinions. I have proved it time and time again! One may be able to fool the courts one or two times, but not 67 times. Yes, these experts I oppose are empty suits, with embellished credentials, flawed conclusions due to destroying evidence, guessing on the transponder effectiveness etc.
Evidently, this site is causing a stir among these experts and they are like rats on a sinking ship. They are launching personal attacks against me because that is all they know how to do. This site has substantiated documentation on it. Their words, their actions. If insurance companies are beginning to question their findings, it's about time! The problem is that this cancer has gone on for years at the expense of insureds and now there is an avenue to expose them through public documentation.
Here is their very recent response to my website. Do you think they may be being questioned as to their processes and reputations?
It appears as though I have struck a cord---http://www.forensicauto.net/id76.html
They attack my knowledge, my credibility and everything about me. I just put out the facts and after review the site, you will find everything on my end is substantiated. I will be glad to put up my certificates and proof of my extensive knowledge of stolen vehicles, however I require they do the same. Let's see the 60 certificates from the courts showing the expert qualified. Let's see the certificate on automotive repair by the Department of Defense and not a Military form DD 214. The gauntlet is thrown. Instead of the smoke and mirrors boys and the false accusations as to my character.
They call themselves "legitimate Forensic Examiners." I guess we need to know the definition of such.
They state I am delusional with a conspiracy. By my book "Assault of a Forensic Expert Witness" and you will see these are not delusions, but fully supported fact!
This site will give the insurance companies the opportunity to come clean and they will be left with a choice. Either use flawed forensics to deny a claim, or look elsewhere for experts that can support their opinions based strictly on scientific methodology.
These alleged experts that appear to say anything for a buck under the heading of "Forensics" are about to be fully exposed with their own sworn testimony. This information was not readily available in the past, and it was difficult for plaintiff attorneys to find cases for precedent. No longer is this true because this website as well as my books, will reveal the same symptoms in cases across the nation and Canada.
Before exposing these people for what they appear to be, I considered the consequences. These people are ruthless as you can tell by their writings.
If anything were to happen like my untimely death, I have others that have all the documentation I do. If one is looking for a suspect to my death, I would suggest looking into the gentleman that threatened my life in the Ferras vs. Permanent General in Orange County, California in 2005 as well as all the other players listed on this site.
I have stated, they are making it appear to be a war amongst experts. It is not as far as I am concerned. I am just supplying the facts, for the public to make their own informed opinion as to what is going on here, so the insurance companies prosper financially not honoring a theft claim.
If you have a stolen car claim, because of these forensic reports that are not supported with science, you as the insured are considered guilty till proven innocent.
The purpose that the competitor's want this information is self-serving. They can't beat me now and they want to go over this 30 years of writing to see if they can find one word they can twist out of context that I have said. What has this got to do with their faulty examination of vehicles and locks? It doesn't. this is just another form of deflection from fact.
One competitor just put up on his website an unauthorized letter of mine from March, 2001 about how I stated on rare occasions key pathway would work. I did not state "Last key used" as he wrote in his thesis in 2002. I have gained much more knowledge on this bogus process in the last 7 years. I also find it rather strange that he, as a coalition member would consider me dishonest and not reputable and would want to have an endorsement from me. http://www.netsexam.com/KeyPathView.htm
We are about to take on a campaign that will expose the insurance companies and the experts much deeper than anything ever done before. I will expose what I have on these experts through their own words either in depositions, court transcripts and their so-called "Forensic" reports. I don't have to do personal attacks, I let them destroy themselves.
You will see internal insurance notes where evidence was made or assumed by the insurance investigator and relayed as fact.
Here is my mottos:
"You have taken everything from me and all that is left is my balls and my word and your not getting them!" (Scarface)
"Out of the Ashes Comes The Truth."
Let the chips fall where they may.
Thanks for visiting the site and I hope it is enjoyable and informative to you.