Connect with us

Business

Brink’s heist mystery: Questions arise about a timeline that ‘doesn’t make any sense’

Published

on

Brink’s heist mystery: Questions arise about a timeline that ‘doesn’t make any sense’

It has been greater than two months because the multimillion-dollar heist of knickknack from a Brink’s massive rig at a Grapevine truck cease, but key info in regards to the high-profile crime stay in dispute.

There’s debate in regards to the worth of the pilfered items, for instance, with estimates starting from lower than $10 million to greater than $100 million. And questions are actually swirling across the timeline specified by a Brink’s authorized submitting and Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Division paperwork, which recommend an virtually impossibly swift journey for the tractor-trailer.

This a lot is thought: a Brink’s massive rig loaded with the wares of jewelers taking part within the Worldwide Gem and Jewellery Present departed the San Mateo County Occasion Heart on July 11 for a storage yard about 370 miles south in downtown L.A.

From there, the gamers within the case disagree. Brink’s mentioned in a lawsuit that its two drivers made the roughly 298-mile, late-night trek from San Mateo to the Flying J Journey Heart in Lebec in about 2 hours, 4 minutes, even becoming in a cease alongside Interstate 5. To traverse that distance so rapidly, the car would have needed to drive at speeds upward of 140 mph.

It could take greater than 4 hours to drive the route whereas adhering to hurry limits.

Advertisement

Jerry Kroll, legal professional for the sufferer jewelers, who quantity greater than a dozen, mentioned that the sequence of occasions described by Brink’s “doesn’t make any sense.”

“Why aren’t we being advised what occurred right here? This may’t be,” Kroll mentioned. “Our shoppers deserve an evidence. The victims suffered a life-altering theft … and they’re given a set of info that doesn’t add up.”

It’s unclear whether or not the improbability of the timeline laid out by Brink’s and the Sheriff’s Division could possibly be attributed to a easy misstatement or one other mundane rationalization. Comparable caveats apply to questions in regards to the timing of authorities’ response to the crime, wherein thieves stole 22 luggage of booty whereas, in response to Brink’s, one of many drivers snoozed inside his car’s sleeping berth and the opposite was getting meals on the Flying J.

A Sheriff’s Division incident report reviewed by The Instances mentioned that each drivers advised a deputy that their car left San Mateo at about 12:01 a.m. — data additionally famous by Brink’s in a authorized submitting. At 2:05 a.m., the massive rig arrived on the Flying J, and the motive force went to get his meal, in response to Brink’s. Upon his return 27 minutes later at 2:32 a.m., Brink’s mentioned, the motive force found that the 18-wheeler had been compromised. A information launch issued by the Sheriff’s Division on July 18 mentioned that the theft occurred throughout the identical time-frame.

The sheriff’s incident report, which was drawn from preliminary interviews with the drivers, mentioned that deputies responded to a “car housebreaking name for service” on the truck cease round 3:56 a.m. It didn’t say when the drivers alerted legislation enforcement, leaving unclear how a lot time elapsed between the crime, its reporting and authorities’ response.

Advertisement

Requested in regards to the chronology, Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Sgt. Michael Mileski mentioned, “We’re not ready to supply up to date data presently,” although he famous that investigators with the division’s main crimes bureau had carried out in-depth interviews with all these concerned.

Brink’s spokeswoman Dana Callahan mentioned that the corporate is “persevering with to work with the legislation enforcement businesses investigating this incident. We defer to these businesses on questions on their investigations.”

Kroll mentioned essentially the most unlikely ingredient of the chronology disclosed by Brink’s pertains to the 18-wheeler’s journey because it approached the Grapevine. Brink’s has mentioned that the car stopped on the Buttonwillow relaxation space about 1:49 a.m. so one of many drivers may use the toilet, after which continued on to the Flying J, reaching it about 16 minutes later. The Buttonwillow relaxation cease is about 55 miles from the Flying J. Masking that distance in a bit of greater than 1 / 4 of an hour would require driving at speeds upward of 200 mph.

“There’s no credibility to it,” Kroll mentioned.

Lately, two Instances journalists made separate automotive journeys down that 55-mile stretch of the Interstate 5. One of many drives took 46 minutes and the opposite, accomplished in site visitors that was at instances very heavy, took 1 hour, 21 minutes.

Advertisement

The Flying J Journey Heart in Lebec was the location of a Brink’s jewellery heist in July.

(Myung J. Chun / Los Angeles Instances)

The timeline was first disclosed in an Aug. 4 lawsuit filed by Brink’s towards the affected jewellery corporations, whose merchandise the corporate was transporting to the L.A. space for an additional commerce present. The grievance is a part of a wider authorized dispute between the Richmond, Va., firm and the jewelers over the dimensions of the stolen haul.

The Brink’s lawsuit alleged that the pilfered objects had a declared complete worth of $8.7 million — a determine it mentioned was drawn from agreements signed by its jewellery enterprise clients. The grievance seeks to restrict any payout Brink’s may must make to the jewelers to that quantity, alleging they “considerably under-declared the worth of their shipments.” (Some jewelers have mentioned that they assigned their merchandise decrease values than their fair-market prices to scale back delivery charges.)

Advertisement

The jewellery companies later alleged in a lawsuit filed towards Brink’s and different events that the unnamed tractor-trailer drivers’ conduct was “grossly negligent” — and that “lax safety” by the corporate allowed the theft to happen. The lawsuit for alleged breach of contract and extra claims mentioned the jewellery corporations’ merchandise was value about $100 million. It seeks at the very least $200 million in restitution and damages.

The sheriff’s incident report, dated July 11, reveals new particulars in regards to the heist.

Written by a deputy who arrived on the scene, the report mentioned that the motive force who dined on the Flying J discovered upon his return to the car that its lock had been “lower away and the latches, the place the lock as soon as was, had been bent. The lock was no the place [sic] to be discovered.”

The sleeping driver famous that he “didn’t see who dedicated the housebreaking or hear something uncommon, or discover that they had been being adopted by anybody,” the report mentioned. However, it mentioned, the thieves left one thing behind: “steel fragments on the base of the trailer’s locking mechanism.”

The incident report mentioned that the tractor-trailer’s cargo — which included gems, jewellery, watches and different valuable objects — was contained in “orange marked Brinks luggage.” It additionally mentioned that the blue 2019 Volvo massive rig was “marked Brinks.” It didn’t be aware the presence of car safety features that jewelers and others within the business have advised The Instances they anticipated Brink’s to have utilized when delivery invaluable merchandise. For instance, the report doesn’t point out an alarm on the door of the Brink’s trailer or cameras anyplace on the car.

Advertisement
Jewelry on display.

An proof photograph offered by the FBI reveals a sampling of things stolen within the Brink’s heist.

(FBI)

Arnold Duke, president of the Worldwide Gem and Jewellery Present, mentioned he “at all times thought there was” an alarm on the door, “however actually by no means checked it.”

“I used to be underneath the impression that every part had satellite tv for pc monitoring, cameras, alarms,” he mentioned.

Callahan didn’t reply to a query in regards to the car’s safety features however has beforehand mentioned that Brink’s doesn’t disclose data on the subject as a result of it may compromise operations.

Advertisement

Investigators consider that the heist was the work of refined criminals, given the dearth of violence and the velocity of the thieves’ work, amongst different elements. Sheriff’s Division investigators, who’re working with the FBI, have mentioned that they’ve obtained video footage associated to the incident.

Jewelers say that their companies have been upended by the lack of their merchandise. “For a few of them, [the theft] has fully destroyed their monetary lives,” Kroll mentioned.

As for the vexed timeline, he mentioned: “Brink’s has some explaining to do to the court docket — and to my shoppers.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Business

State Farm seeks major rate hikes for California homeowners and renters

Published

on

State Farm seeks major rate hikes for California homeowners and renters

State Farm General is seeking to dramatically increase residential insurance rates for millions of Californians, a move that would deepen the state’s ongoing crisis over housing coverage.

In two filings with the state’s Department of Insurance on Thursday signaling financial trouble for the insurance giant, State Farm disclosed it is seeking a 30% rate increase for homeowners; a 36% increase for condo owners; and a 52% increase for renters.

“State Farm General’s latest rate filings raise serious questions about its financial condition,” Ricardo Lara, California’s insurance commissioner, said in a statement. “This has the potential to affect millions of California consumers and the integrity of our residential property insurance market.”

State Farm did not return requests for comment.

Lara noted that nothing immediately changes for policyholders as a result of the filings. His said his department would use all of its “investigatory tools to get to the bottom of State Farm’s financial situation,” including a rate hearing if necessary, before making a decision on whether to approve the requests.

Advertisement

That process could take months: The department is averaging 180 days for its reviews, and complex cases can take even longer, according to a department spokesperson.

The department has already approved recent State Farm requests for significant home insurance rate increases, including a 6.9% bump in January 2023 and a 20% hike that went into effect in March.

State Farm’s bid to sharply increase home insurance rates seeks to utilize a little-known and rarely used exception to the state’s usual insurance rate-making formula. Typically, such a move signals that an insurance provider is facing serious financial issues.

In one of the filings, State Farm General said the purpose of its request was to restore its financial condition. “If the variance is denied,” the insurer wrote, “further deterioration of surplus is anticipated.”

California is facing an insurance crisis as climate change and extreme weather contribute to catastrophic fires that have destroyed thousands of homes in recent years.

Advertisement

In March, State Farm announced that it wouldn’t renew 72,000 property owner policies statewide, joining Farmers, Allstate and other companies in either not writing or limiting new policies, or tightening underwriting standards.

The companies blamed wildfires, inflation that raised reconstruction costs, higher prices for reinsurance they buy to boost their balance sheets and protect themselves from catastrophes, as well as outdated state regulations — claims disputed by some consumer advocates.

As insurers have pulled back from the homeowners market, lawmakers in Sacramento are scrambling to make coverage available and affordable for residents living in high-risk areas.

Times staff writer Laurence Darmiento contributed to this report.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

High interest rates are hurting people. Here's why it's worse for Californians

Published

on

High interest rates are hurting people. Here's why it's worse for Californians

By the numbers, the overall U.S. economy may look good, but down at the street level the view is a lot grimmer and grittier.

The surge in interest rates imposed by the Federal Reserve to slow inflation has closed like an acrid cloud over would-be homeowners, car buyers, growing families, and businesses new and old, large and small. It has meant missing opportunities, settling for less — and waiting and waiting and waiting.

It’s not that the average American is underwater. It’s that many feel that they’re struggling more than they anticipated and feel more constricted. In the American Dream, if you work hard, things are supposed to get better. Fairly or not, that may be a big part of why so many voters have expressed unhappiness with President Biden’s handling of the economy.

The cost of borrowing, whether for mortgages, credit cards or car loans, is the highest in more than two decades. And that is weighing especially hard on people in California, where housing, gas and many other things are more expensive than in most other states.

Advertisement

California’s economy also relies more on interest rate-sensitive sectors such as real estate and high tech, which helps explain why the state has been lagging in job growth and its unemployment rate is the highest in the nation.

Harder to budget

When interest rates rise, savers can earn more on their deposits. But in America’s consumer society, for most people higher rates mean that a lot of things cost a little (or a lot) more. That makes it harder to stretch an individual or family budget. It may mean giving up on the nicer car you had your heart set on, or settling for a smaller house, or a shorter, less glamorous vacation.

And with every uptick in interest rates, which is almost inevitably passed on to customers, some have had to give up on a purchase entirely.

Geovanny Panchame, a creative director at an advertising agency, knows these feelings all too well: He thinks often about what could have been if he and his wife had bought the starter home they were planning for in 2020.

Back then, they had been pre-approved at an interest rate of 3.1% — right around the national average — but were outbid several times. They figured they’d wait a few years to save more money for a nicer place.

Advertisement

Four years later, the couple are still renting an apartment in Culver City — and now they’re expecting their first child.

Pushing to buy a house and get settled before their son is born in December, they recently made an $885,000 offer for a three-bedroom, 1.5-bath home in Inglewood. They plan to put down 10%. At the current average mortgage interest rate of 7%, that would mean a monthly payment of about $5,300 — $1,900 more than if they had an interest rate of 3.1%.

The source of that increase is the Federal Reserve’s power to set basic interest rates, which determines the interest rates for almost everything else in the economy. The Fed’s benchmark rate went up rapidly, from near zero in early 2022 to a generational high of about 5.5%, where it has been for almost a year. The rate has been higher in the past, but after two decades in which it was mostly at rock bottom, most people had gotten used to both very low inflation and low interest rates.

“Clearly, we look back and we probably should have kept going and hopped into something,” Panchame, 39, said. “I’ve been really sacrificing a lot to get to this point to purchase a home and now I just feel like I got here but I didn’t work quick enough because interest rates have gotten the better of me.”

Add property taxes and home insurance, and it’s even more painful for home buyers because those costs have also risen sharply since the COVID-19 pandemic, along with housing prices themselves.

Advertisement

A typical buyer of a mid-tier home in California, priced at about $785,000 in the spring, was looking at a total housing payment of about $5,900 a month. That’s up from $3,250 in March of 2020 and almost $4,600 in March of 2022, when the Fed began raising interest rates, according to the California Legislative Analyst’s Office.

It wasn’t supposed to work like that: Lifting interest rates as fast and as high as the Fed did, in its effort to curb inflation, should have led to falling home prices.

But that didn’t happen, mainly because relatively few homes came on the market. Most existing homeowners had locked in lower mortgage rates before the surge; selling those houses once interest rates took off would have meant paying higher prices and interest rates on other homes, or bloated rents for apartments.

For most homeowners sitting on the low rates of the past, their financial well-being was further supported by low unemployment and incomes that generally remained on par with inflation or grew a little faster. And many had cushions of savings built up in early phases of the pandemic, thanks partly to government support.

All of which has kept the U.S. economy as a whole humming along, blunting the full effects of higher interest rates.

Advertisement

“Consumers are doing their job,” said Claire Li, senior analyst at Moody’s Investors Service, though she added that there are now signs of slower spending, evidenced by consumers cutting back on credit card purchases.

Unlike most home loans, credit card interest rates aren’t fixed. And today the average rate has bounced up to almost 22% from 14.6% in 2021, according to Fed data. That’s starting to squeeze more borrowers, adding to their unease.

Rising credit card debt

In California, the 30-day delinquency rate on credit cards is nearing 5% — something not seen since late 2009 around the end of the Great Recession, according to the California Policy Lab at UC Berkeley.

Lower-income and younger borrowers are more prone to falling behind on credit card, auto and other consumer loan payments than those with higher incomes. And it’s these groups that are feeling the effects of higher interest rates the most.

Christian Shorter, a self-employed tech serviceman who lives in Chino, just bought a used Volkswagen Jetta for $21,000. He put down $3,500 and financed the rest over 69 months at an annual interest rate of 24%. His monthly payment is more than $480, and by the end of the loan he will have paid about $15,000 in interest.

Advertisement

Shorter, 45, said he doesn’t have good credit. He plans to take out a personal loan when interest rates drop and pay off the car debt. “Definitely, definitely, they should lower interest rates,” he said of the Fed.

Between the jump in interest rates and prices of new vehicles, some auto buyers have downgraded to cheaper models. The biggest shift, though, especially in California, has been a move by more buyers to turn to electric vehicles to save on fuel costs, says Joseph Yoon, a consumer analyst at Edmunds, the car research and information firm in Santa Monica.

In May, he said, buyers on average financed about $41,000 on a new vehicle purchase at an interest rate of 7.3% (compared with 4.1% in December 2021). Over 69 months, that translates to a monthly payment of $745.

“For a big part of the population, they’re looking at this car market and saying, ‘I got to wait for something to break,’ like interest rates or dealer incentives,” Yoon said.

For a lot of small-business owners, who drive much of the economy in Los Angeles, they don’t have the luxury of waiting it out. They need funds to survive, or to expand when things are going well.

Advertisement

But many can’t qualify with traditional commercial lenders, and when they can they’re typically looking at interest rates of 9%; that’s more than double what they were before the Fed’s rate hikes, according to surveys by the National Federation of Independent Business.

One result: More and more people in Southern California are looking for help from lenders such as Brea-based Lendistry, one of the nation’s largest minority-led community development financial institutions.

From January to May, applications were up 21% and the dollar volume of loans rose 33% compared with a year earlier, said Everett Sands, Lendistry’s chief executive. Interest rates on his loans range from 7.5% to 14.5%.

“Business owners, they’re resilient, entrepreneurial, scrappy — they’ll figure out a way,” he said, adding that he sees many doing side jobs like driving for Uber or making Instacart deliveries at night.

Even so, Sands said, the higher borrowing costs inevitably mean less money spent on things like investing in new technology and software and bringing on additional staff, as well as delays in owners growing their businesses.

Advertisement

“Some of them lose out in progressing forward.”

‘When you put everything on the line, you get desperate.’

— Jurni Rayne, Gritz N Wafflez

Jurni Rayne, 42, started her brunch business, Gritz N Wafflez, as a ghost kitchen in February 2022, preparing food orders for delivery services. She financed that by maxing out her credit cards and getting a merchant cash advance, which is like a payday loan with super high interest rates. Her debts reached $70,000.

Advertisement

“When you put everything on the line, you get desperate,” said Rayne, a Dallas native who moved to Los Angeles a decade ago and has worked as a manager at California Pizza Kitchen and the Cheesecake Factory. “You don’t care about the interest rate, because it’s something like between passion and insanity.”

She has since paid off all the merchant loans. And her business has seen such strong growth that last year Rayne got out of the ghost kitchen and into a small spot in Pico-Union, starting with just three tables. She now has 17 tables and a staff of 14.

This fall she’ll be moving to a bigger location in Koreatown and has her sights on a second restaurant in South Los Angeles. But she frets that she could have expanded sooner if interest rates had been lower and she’d had more access to financing.

Economists call that an opportunity cost. For Rayne, it’s personal.

“Absolutely, lower interest rates would have helped me,” she said.

Advertisement

For many others, the wait for lower rates continues without the balm of intermediate success.

Lynn Miller, 60, began looking to buy a home in Orange County about a year ago, hoping to upgrade from her current 1,600-square-foot apartment.

“It’s not bad, it’s just not mine — the dishwasher is crappy, the washing machine is old,” she said of her rental in Corona del Mar. “I’m obviously not going to invest in these appliances. It’s just different not owning your own home.”

It’s been a discouraging process, she said, especially when she inputs her numbers into the mortgage calculators on Zillow and Realtor.com, which churn out estimates based on current interest rates.

“If you look at those monthly payment numbers, it’s shocking,” Miller, a marketing consultant, said. “It’ll get better, but it’s just not better right now.”

Advertisement

She’s continuing her house search — she’d love to buy a single-family, three-bedroom home with a backyard for a dog — but is holding off for now.

“I’m still waiting because I do think that interest rates are going to go down,” Miller said, although she knows it’s a guessing game. “I could end up waiting a long time.”

Continue Reading

Business

California lawmakers advance tax on Big Tech to help fund news industry

Published

on

California lawmakers advance tax on Big Tech to help fund news industry

The California state Senate on Thursday passed legislation aimed at helping the news industry by imposing a new tax on some of the biggest tech companies in the world.

Senate Bill 1327 would tax Amazon, Meta and Google for the data they collect from users and pump the money from this “data extraction mitigation fee” into news organizations by giving them a tax credit for employing full-time journalists.

“Just as we have funded a movie industry tax credit, with no state involvement in content, the same goes for this journalism tax credit,” Sen. Steve Glazer (D-Orinda) said as he presented the bill on the Senate floor, casting it as a measure to protect democracy and a free press.

Its passage comes the same week lawmakers advanced another bill that seeks to resuscitate the local news business, which has suffered from declining revenue as technology changes the way people consume news. Assembly Bill 886 would require digital platforms to pay news outlets a fee when they sell advertising alongside news content.

Advertisement

Glazer said his bill is meant as a complement to the other measure, adding that he and its author, Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), plan to work with the companies that could be affected by both bills “in balancing everyone’s interest.”

The legislation passed 27 to 7, with one Republican — Sen. Scott Wilk (R-Santa Clarita) — joining Democrats in support. As a tax increase, it required support from two-thirds of the Senate and now advances to the Assembly.

A Republican who opposed the bill said technology is changing many industries, not just journalism, and that some of the innovations have led to inspiring new ways to consume news, such as through podcasts or nonprofit news outlets.

“These are all new models, and very few people under the age of 50 … even pick up a paper newspaper,” said Sen. Roger Niello (R-Fair Oaks.) “So this is an evolution of the marketplace.”

Opponents of the bill include tech company trade associations Technet, Internet Coalition and Chamber of Progress; the California Chamber of Commerce; and numerous local chambers of commerce.

Advertisement

Supporters include unions representing journalists, a coalition of online and nonprofit news outlets, and the publishers of several small newspapers.

Continue Reading

Trending