Here is a forensic report by Mr. Seroogy based on assumed facts. He never examined this totally burned vehicle. The insurance company denied the claim on this mail order forensic report. There is no assumption in forensics. Now, there are what they refer to as legitimate forensic examiners (I guess Mr. Seroogy is supposed to be one) that state I spread lies. Is this a lie? No, its fact and I will be putting more of these on the site. I have one more mail order report by Mr. Seroogy on a vehicle that has not been recovered for two years. That claim was also denied because of Mr. Seroogy’s crack report.

After each page, there are notes revealing where Mr. Seroogy is not being the most honest about his background to the Canadian courts.

It is my understanding Mr. Seroogy is on the IAIL education committee and the ethics committee for the Coalition of Forensic Examiners.

 

http://www.iail.org

 http://www.forensicauto.net/

 

Basically, in my opinion he sold his title “Forensic” to the insurance company in order to assist the insurance company in not honoring the theft claim.

The insured stated to me that the judge told the insurance company that they needed a forensic report or they would have to honor the claim. A year and a half after the theft event, Mr. Seroogy wrote his report on the vehicle. He stated there should have been denting to the door to prove forced entry. The problem is that this vehicle was consumed by fire. The glass and rubber weather stripping was destroyed. The vehicle’s computer was destroyed and there is no reference as to if Mr. Seroogy even examined the ignition lock. The steering column was destroyed by fire.

Even if he had examined the vehicle in its burned state, because of the severe fire damage, the opinion from a competent examiner should have been inconclusive.

Reports like this make the whole industry look bad and yet insurance companies are complicit in requesting such an analysis on a vehicle that was never examined. Issues like this leave the perception of insurer fraud, not of insurance fraud on the part of the insured.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

HOME