Just a little earlier this year, people were talking about the persistence of auto glass fraud claims throughout recent years. Recently, a Massachusetts case has just highlighted the problem again: a 53-year-old auto glass repair business owner, Robert Giller, has just pleaded guilty to no less than 40 counts in total, with half of those being classed as incidents of false insurance claims.
Robert Giller is a Peabody local who owns both an auto glass repair business, the New England Glass Co., and an automotive repair and body work centre, Advanced Automotive Concepts. Giller was brought to court after two insurance companies became suspicious of the claims he had been submitting to them, which were already becoming extravagant as far as the average auto glass claims go. In a climate too where insurance companies are growing ever warier of dubious submissions, Giller’s claims were naturally scrutinised and submitted for investigation.
Apparently, Giller made 20 claims to several insurance companies, who all paid the amounts claimed by the auto glass repair shop owner. Among the insurance companies listed were Safety Insurance, Fireman’s Fund, Electric Insurance, and Plymouth Rock Insurance. Nearly $30,000 in fraudulent claims was submitted to insurance companies by Giller—not exactly an enormous amount, especially considering that other recent and high-profile insurance fraud cases have seen people being charged for submitting claims going up to hundreds of thousands or even a million in total. Still, insurance fraud is insurance fraud, and as the judge involved in the case, David Lowy, noted, such incidents have an impact on the entire system of insurance as well as the judiciary itself.
Giller was represented by Attorney Tom Dreschler in court, and pleaded guilty to the 40 counts for which he was accused. Besides the 20 insurance fraud counts, there were also 2 counts of attempted larceny, with the remaining 18 counts going to felonious larcenies. Dreschler argued in favour of a far lighter sentence than what the prosecutors were demanding—a year of probation—by bringing forth witnesses who could attest to the defendant’s good conduct and character. Dreschler also argued that Giller was in fact a model citizen and suggested very heavily that the chief reason Giller had actually chosen to plead guilty was to spare the judiciary of a long and expensive process in court. In a classic move, Dreschler also had Giller’s developmentally challenged son brought into court at one point in the proceedings, apparently to demonstrate what sort of things Giller cared about. The judge still sentenced the auto glass repair owner to 9 months of probation (which were still an improvement over the 1 year for which the Atty. General was angling) and also directed him to pay almost $40,000 in fines as compensation for his criminal offenses.
