Fraud Claims Record Map — 2026-08-28¶
GUARDRAIL: COUNSEL RECORD MAP — FACTS ONLY
This page consolidates the documentary record for three candidate fraud counts, with direct links to the underlying binder sections. Facts and record citations only; every claim is tier-tagged (Documented) or (Principal-record). Count labels are organizational, framed for counsel's evaluation. Legal characterization, count selection, and pleading language are reserved to counsel. Damages quantification lives in the damages volumes and is not restated here.
A) Purpose and Use¶
Each section below states the factual core of one candidate count, maps the record with links to the binder tabs and strategy lanes that hold it, and closes with an evidence-status line identifying what is in hand and what remains outstanding. The Purple-lane links carry the fullest narrative treatment of each count; the White-tab links carry the source documents. A companion page, New Action Evidence Foundation, marshals the same record by cause of action in allegation-feedable form for drafting use.
B) Count Summary¶
| Count | Subject | Start here | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| A | False completion certifications and the May 25, 2023 court record | White Tab 106C, then Purple B010 | Record complete; certified transcript ordered, pending |
| B | Remediation scope: negotiated vs. annexed vs. executed | White Tab 106 | Record substantially complete; one discovery target outstanding |
| C | Insurance proceeds and fixtures | White Tab 115 | Status-flagged; the Verified Petition is in hand and the Stipulation ¶10 release-scope question is before counsel |
Each count's full record is itemized in its section below, one page per line with a description of what the page contains.
C) Count A — False Completion Certifications and the May 25, 2023 Court Record¶
C.1 Factual statement¶
- The Stipulation of Settlement in HP 6086/2020, so-ordered and filed June 29, 2021 (NYSCEF Doc No. 10), required the Remediation Work annexed as Exhibit 1, with work dates of July 20-21, 2021 (¶1). ALC Environmental was Respondent's designated inspection company (¶3); its post-remediation report obligation is at ¶4. (Documented)
- ALC's Post Remediation Verification report was issued August 3, 2021 and transmitted to petitioner's then-counsel on August 11, 2021. Olmsted Environmental's inspection of August 16, 2021 and the resulting laboratory results identified elevated spore levels and incomplete scope execution; petitioner's then-counsel served a written notice of default on August 19, 2021 stating that the agreed scope of work was not performed and the mold was not eradicated. (Documented)
- Affidavits of Candice Kowalewski, MPH and Jack Glass, MS, CIH were filed in the HP proceeding in July 2022 (NYSCEF Doc Nos. 18-19), together with the ALC PRV report (NYSCEF Doc No. 20), in opposition to the motion to restore, representing the remediation as complete. Olmsted's August 2022 on-site audit findings of unresolved contamination and incomplete work are compiled at WT-114 Part E. (Documented)
- At the May 25, 2023 appearance before Judge Remy Smith, Respondent's counsel made an on-record statement concerning the accuracy of the completion affidavits. The audio record is verified and pinned with timecodes at WT-106C; a certified transcript has been ordered from the court. (Documented)
C.2 Record map¶
| Record | What the page contains |
|---|---|
| White Tab 106C — May 25, 2023 Hearing Record | The May 25, 2023 appearance before Judge Smith: verified audio pinned with timecodes, reference transcript, and the on-record statement concerning the completion affidavits. |
| White Tab 107 — Olmsted Mold Inspection Report | Edward A. Olmsted, CIH, CSP's inspection report — the petitioner-side environmental record of the Apartment's condition. |
| White Tab 108 — ALC Post Remediation Verification | The ALC PRV itself — the clearance certification at issue, with its dates, statements, and signatories. |
| White Tab 108A — Mold Abatement Work Scope | The scope-of-work text as it appears in the PRV's own appendix — the standard the certification invokes. |
| White Tab 108B — Post-PRV Inspection Lab Results | The Prestige/EnviroMicrobiology laboratory results and transmitting correspondence following the PRV — dates, samples, and findings. |
| White Tab 109 — Olmsted Response to ALC | Olmsted's written response to the ALC report — where the professional disagreement over completion is stated. |
| White Tab 110 — Olmsted Follow-Up Scope | The additional work Olmsted identified as required after his post-remediation inspection. |
| White Tab 110A — ALC Additional Scope of Work | ALC's own November 2022 additional scope-of-work document, with the native PDF attached. |
| White Tab 112 — ALC Pre-Remediation Inspection | ALC's pre-remediation inspection record — the same firm's baseline before the work. |
| White Tab 205 — Candice Kowalewski Witness Profile | Kowalewski's role, licensure with NY DOL verification, and her PRV co-signature record. |
| White Tab 206 — Jack Glass Witness Profile | Glass's role, credentials, and the documents he signed or annotated. |
| White Tab 303 — ALC Environmental Corporate Profile | The corporate entity (The ALC Group, LLC d/b/a ALC Environmental) — identity, naming, and records for entity-level claims. |
| Purple PT-001 — False Certification Framework | The reusable argument skeleton: how the PRV and affidavits function against the Exhibit 1 standard, element by element. |
| Purple B010 — Referral Package | The fullest single treatment of this count: targets, centerpiece exhibits, the certification narrative, and a proof-element matrix. |
| Purple B011 — Courtroom Summary | The same record organized as a courtroom presentation sequence. |
| Purple B012 — Settlement Playbook | The same record organized for settlement positioning. |
| White Tab 125 -- Olmsted Correspondence Record | The post-certification correspondence corpus (Oct 2021 - Jun 2023): the documented sequence from non-return of the remediator through the April 2022 further-scope agreement and not-habitable report, the June 2022 reversal, the July 2022 affidavits, and the October 7, 2022 statement of respondent's counsel that the scope does not appear to have been completed. |
C.3 Evidence status¶
In hand: the as-filed affidavits and PRV (NYSCEF Doc Nos. 18-20, court-file copies); the verified audio of the May 25, 2023 appearance; the full inspection and lab-result chain. Outstanding: the certified court transcript of the May 25, 2023 appearance (ordered; vendor quote pending). Newly in hand: the Olmsted correspondence corpus (White Tab 125), documenting the April 27, 2022 further-scope agreement and not-habitable report, the June 13, 2022 reversal, and the October 7, 2022 statement of Respondent's counsel -- recorded contemporaneously by petitioner's then-counsel -- that the scope of work does not appear to have been completed, ten weeks after the affidavits were filed. The April 27, 2022 message from Respondent's counsel is self-designated "for settlement purposes only"; use and admissibility of the designated items are counsel's questions.
D) Count B — Remediation Scope: Negotiated vs. Annexed vs. Executed¶
D.1 Factual statement¶
- The scope the parties negotiated was based on the ALC and Total Restoration scope documents, providing for demolition of the three studio rooms down to the studs, joists, and slab. Petitioner's contemporaneous correspondence states that petitioner had not seen or signed off on the scope of work of SERVPRO (styled "Serve Pro" in the Stipulation), the company that performed the work: an August 2, 2021 email; six written requests for Exhibit 1 on August 13, 2021 (1:41, 2:45, 3:04, 3:22, 4:07, and 6:03 PM); first transmission of Exhibit 1 to petitioner on August 14, 2021, 10:46 AM — fifty-six days after execution and eighteen days after the July 20–27 work window closed — followed by petitioner's two August 15 statements, including his self-correction that the contractor's name had appeared in the stipulation documents sent to him. The record contains no transmission to petitioner of any SERVPRO-issued scope (WT-106D §G); the complete transmission record, verbatim with source pins, is WT-106D. (Documented)
- Exhibit 1 as annexed to the so-ordered Stipulation (NYSCEF Doc No. 10) carries eight printed margin comments initialed "JG," proposing reductions to the written scope: exposure limited to 2 feet, a single limited containment, no biocide, household detergent, and a query of the clearance-spore standard. The same comments appear in the submitted copy (NYSCEF Doc No. 9) and in petitioner's executed counterpart. Attribution of "JG" to Jack Glass is set out at White Tab 106, Section C. (Documented as to the comments' presence and text; Principal-record as to attribution)
- The executed work departed from the written scope: first-layer-only removal in the studios, and a 2-foot cut on the common-hallway wall against the 4-foot removal stated at Exhibit 1 item 6 — matching the "only 2 feet" margin comment. The field-instruction record, including the instructions reported by the SERVPRO project manager, is compiled at WT-114 Part C. (Documented as to executed conditions; Principal-record as to the reported field instructions)
- Respondent retained two companies to scope the remediation; a third, SERVPRO, performed it. The scope of work actually issued to SERVPRO by Respondent is not in petitioner's possession and is a discovery target. (Documented as to the retention sequence; the SERVPRO-issued scope itself is outstanding)
D.2 Record map¶
| Record | What the page contains |
|---|---|
| White Tab 106 — Scope: Court-Ordered vs. Executed | The spine of this count: verbatim Exhibit 1 transcription, the JG1-JG8 margin-comment attribution, a court-ordered vs. reported vs. certified comparison matrix, personnel table, and anchored timeline. |
| White Tab 106A — SERVPRO Field Incident Video | The field video record made during the work, with custody and content detail. |
| White Tab 106B — Stipulation of Settlement | The instrument record for the Stipulation itself — provenance, counterpart status, and filing posture. |
| White Tab 104B — Total Restoration Scope of Work | Total Restoration's native scope package, produced by Respondent — the scope the parties negotiated against. |
| White Tab 113 — Common Hallway 2-Foot Cut | The photo record of the executed 2-foot hallway cut against Exhibit 1 item 6's 4-foot provision. |
| White Tab 114 — Scope Manipulation Evidence Compendium | The consolidated compendium: the court-ordered scope, the reported field instructions, the certification, the professional audit findings, and the late corrective proposal. |
| White Tab 120 — Scope Evolution Comparison | Side-by-side comparison of the scope as it changed across drafts and versions. |
| White Tab 301 — Total Restoration Corporate Profile | The corporate entity, its role in the sequence, and its personnel. |
| Purple B004 — Scope Promise: Referral Package | The court-ordered scope treated as the operative promise — including a dedicated Jack Glass margin-notes section and centerpiece exhibits. |
| Purple B005 — Scope Promise: Courtroom Summary | The promise record organized as a courtroom presentation sequence. |
| Purple B006 — Scope Promise: Settlement Playbook | The promise record organized for settlement positioning. |
| Purple B007 — Execution: Referral Package | The execution record in three steps — contractor substitution, scope substitution, and work execution — with a proof-element matrix. |
| Purple B008 — Execution: Courtroom Summary | The execution record organized as a courtroom presentation sequence. |
| Purple B009 — Execution: Settlement Playbook | The execution record organized for settlement positioning. |
| White Tab 125 -- Olmsted Correspondence Record | The post-certification correspondence corpus (Oct 2021 - Jun 2023): the documented sequence from non-return of the remediator through the April 2022 further-scope agreement and not-habitable report, the June 2022 reversal, the July 2022 affidavits, and the October 7, 2022 statement of respondent's counsel that the scope does not appear to have been completed. |
D.3 Evidence status¶
In hand: the so-ordered Stipulation with Exhibit 1 and margin comments (NYSCEF Doc Nos. 9-10 and the executed counterpart); the negotiated-scope record; the executed-condition record including photo, video, and inspection documentation; the contemporaneous correspondence. Outstanding: the scope of work Respondent issued to SERVPRO (discovery target); the project manager's account is presently an oral record; Glass's written further scope of work, promised April 2022 and referenced again October 7, 2022, does not appear in the correspondence corpus -- ALC's November 2022 additional-scope document is the next scope writing in the record (collection/discovery target for any interim draft).
E) Count C — Insurance Proceeds and Fixtures (Status-Flagged)¶
Status flag: the Verified Petition, dated June 29, 2020, is in hand; the release-scope question (the reach of Stipulation ¶10 against the Petition's claims) is before counsel. This count is presented for counsel's evaluation.
E.1 Factual statement¶
- Following the October 13, 2019 flood, Respondent pursued an insurance recovery relating to the flood-damaged premises. The claim-period record — including the December 3, 2019 non-disclosure request and the January 21, 2020 gut-renovation specification for the insurance claim — is compiled with its documentary anchors at WT-115 and WT-104. (Documented as to the anchored emails; Principal-record as to the surrounding sequence)
- Petitioner's own insurance claim was declined; the declination record is at WT-103. (Documented)
- The fixtures and improvements at issue were installed by petitioner; Respondent's Verified Answer in the HP proceeding pleads that the building is an interim multiple dwelling subject to the Loft Law. The tenant-fixture ownership question is a build-out item. (Documented as to the Answer's pleading; the ownership predicate is under development)
E.2 Record map¶
| Record | What the page contains |
|---|---|
| White Tab 103 — Insurance Declination | The declination of petitioner's own insurance claim — carrier, dates, and stated grounds. |
| White Tab 104 — Pre-Insurance Inspection Meeting | The adjuster walkthrough record, including the discussion of how petitioner's construction would be characterized for the claim. |
| White Tab 115 — Insurance Promise and Abandonment Sequence | The affidavit-ready five-step sequence with its documentary anchors: the December 3, 2019 non-disclosure request and the January 21, 2020 gut-renovation specification for the insurance claim. |
| White Tab 201 — Evan Katz Witness Profile | Katz's role as Respondent's public adjuster and his statements in the record. |
| White Tab 202 — Julian Rivera Witness Profile | Rivera's role at Total Restoration and his February 26, 2020 disclosure concerning the claim's approval. |
| White Tab 302 — Power Adjustment Corporate Profile | The adjusting firm's identity, role, and personnel. |
| Purple T1 — Insurance Fraud Strategy | The full-track treatment, structured as two sub-theories with different victims (the carrier; petitioner), with evidence mapping and collection priorities. |
| Purple B001 — Referral Package | The insurance record in referral format: subjects, evidence chain, and exhibits. |
| Purple B002 — Courtroom Summary | The same record organized as a courtroom presentation sequence. |
| Purple B003 — Settlement Playbook | The same record organized for settlement positioning. |
E.3 Evidence status¶
In hand: the anchored claim-period emails; the declination record; the Verified Answer; the Verified Petition. Outstanding: Respondent's carrier claim file, approval and disbursement records (discovery targets); the fixture-ownership predicate (in development).
F) Related Record¶
The record concerning the negotiation and execution circumstances of the Stipulation is compiled separately and will be transmitted to counsel directly; it is not duplicated here.
END — Fraud Claims Record Map v1.3