15-05-2025
- Business
- San Francisco Chronicle
Scammed seniors in California could get $50,000
A state appeals court says 100 or more senior citizens in California, scammed into making medical payments to a company that later went bankrupt, are entitled to payments of up to $50,000 from a state fund for victims of fraud.
A company called Senior Care Advocates told elderly Californians 20 years ago that it could qualify them for the Medi-Cal program for a fee — the state actually accepts applicants without any cost — and charged them thousands of dollars for access to nonexistent health care benefits, according to Tuesday's court ruling. A filing in their case said they were also told they would have access to a skilled nursing home if they paid the fee.
The company went out of business and filed for bankruptcy in 2009. Its leader, attorney James A. Walker of Roseville, was disbarred by the State Bar in 2010. Bar officials said in their disbarment filing that Walker's failure to provide refunds to his victims 'demonstrates a lack of atonement for the consequences of his misconduct.'
But the seniors had no route to compensation until 2021, when a federal bankruptcy court reopened the case and determined that they had been victims of 'financial elder abuse,' with losses from a few hundred dollars up to $66,000.
Hundreds have already gained compensation in separate litigation, but the state's fund for Victims of Corporate Fraud denied payment to more than 120 applicants in 2022. California Secretary of State Shirley Weber, who oversees the fund, said the bankruptcy court's decision 'does not appear to be a qualifying judgment for corporate fraud' under the state law.
The 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles disagreed Tuesday and said the victims could seek payments of up to $50,000 from the fund, depending on their losses and other evidence of the harm they suffered.
Although the bankruptcy court decision did not expressly describe the company's actions as a fraud or deceit, the victims presented their own statements to that court detailing 'the fraud and the suffering that resulted from it,' Michael Pulos, a San Diego County Superior Court judge temporarily assigned to the appeals court, wrote in the 3-0 ruling.
They described how Senior Care Advocates 'propagated a campaign of fear targeting seniors … and convinced them they needed to buy SCA's services because they would need long-term care and that the cost of this care would result in them losing both their lifetime savings and their homes.' Pulos said. Under the law, he added, courts must 'liberally construe remedial statutes in favor of their protective purpose.'
Although more than 120 seniors filed claims with the court, Pulos said the number of payments would be somewhat less because some claims were filed by each of two spouses, and the law allows only one payment to a married couple.
