The Invoice That Did Not Exist

She cannot submit either invoice as support for the claim.

• The invoices have classic fabrication indicators: plain paper, no vendor address, no phone, no tax ID, and a price roughly double an independent market quote.
• 'Everyone pads a little' is a direct request to present a false claim. Submitting it would expose Denise to insurance-fraud liability and license discipline, not just Park.
• The identical 2021 POS claim at another location is a strong duplicate-claim indicator, but it is not proof - equipment may have been legitimately replaced. Investigate before accusing.

Verification steps: contact Pacific Kitchen Supply, obtain a business license and tax ID, request the sales order and delivery receipt, and get the cancelled check or card statement. Ask Park for the 2021 claim file, proof of loss and receipts for the prior POS system.

If unverified: exclude both items from the estimate and the proof of loss, document why in the file, and give Park a written explanation with a deadline to produce proof. Do not sign or transmit anything containing the unsupported amounts. The proof of loss is the insured's sworn document - Denise must never sign it for him or swear to figures she doubts.

Continuation is conditional. She may continue if Park withdraws the false items, cooperates with verification, and the claim proceeds on supported amounts only. If he insists on including them, she must decline to submit the claim and withdraw.

The contingency fee is exactly the problem. A 10% fee on a $34,000 padded invoice is $3,400 of income Denise receives only if the false item is paid. That is a direct financial incentive to look away, and it converts a client's misrepresentation into the adjuster's own motive. The fee structure does not authorize advocacy of unsupported amounts; it sharpens the duty to be skeptical.

Practical safeguards:

• Re-document the file with a written memo of the conversation and the verification attempts.
• Confirm in writing to Park which items are excluded and why.
• Recalculate the fee only on amounts actually recovered.
• If withdrawing, do not condition withdrawal on payment of fees, and do not withhold the client's documents.

Continuing to represent a client who has asked her to participate in a fraud is generally not defensible, even if the padded items are later dropped.

Silence is not neutral. If the claim is submitted with the invoices, or if Denise knows Park intends to submit them through another channel, she risks being treated as a participant rather than a bystander.

Obligations and options:

1. Do not aid. The threshold duty is to refuse to prepare, sign, or transmit a claim she believes is false.
2. Notify the carrier's special investigation unit if a fraudulent claim is actually being presented. Provide factual observations and documents, not conclusions about Park's character.
3. Report to the California Department of Insurance Fraud Division. Public adjusters are not in the same mandatory-reporter category as insurers, but a licensed adjuster who suspects a fraudulent claim should report it; failure to do so while the claim proceeds can be used against her in a licensing action.
4. Preserve the file. Retain the invoices, notes, emails, and verification attempts. Do not alter or destroy records.
5. Avoid defamation risk. Report only what can be documented, and keep the report within the proper channel - not to other contractors, competitors, or the insured's landlord.

Bottom line: Denise's exposure is greatest if she stays in the file and lets the padded claim go forward. The defensible path is documented refusal, exclusion of the unsupported items, and referral to the proper fraud channel if the claim proceeds anyway.