Los Angeles District Attorney Says 8 Charged in $177,000 Public Benefits Fraud Case

Good morning. My name is Nathan Hockman. I'm the District Attorney of Los Angeles County. Today we're going to have a press conference about public assistance fraud because it is a situation in this county that is incredibly important given the enormity of the public assistance that goes out every single year. With me up here are the two individuals who head up the Public Assistance Fraud Division. They are Chuck Chiarotta, the head deputy, and Jennifer McDonald, the assistant head deputy. Also to my right is the director in the district attorney's office, Hoon Chun, and the assistant district attorney, Maria Ramirez. Now let's talk about public assistance. Public assistance is the situation where both LA County, the state of California, and the federal government has been enormously generous to deal with the millions of individuals and families here in this county who struggle every day to put food on the table, who struggle to have the necessary resources for housing, medicine, child care, and other types of issues. The amount of money that goes out in public assistance fraud annually in this county approaches $3 billion, reaching approximately 3 million recipients and their family members. So it's an enormous commitment by this county to making sure that these individuals and family members, these children, parents, and whatnot, Have the necessary resources to, again, put the food on the table of housing, medicine, child care. But what we have seen is that there are some individuals, and by some I mean a small number of individuals, who have decided to go ahead and use this money as basically fodder or basically free money for the fraudsters. And by that, again, I want to emphasize that the overwhelming number of recipients of this public assistance money legitimately obtain it. But let's talk about the fraudsters for a moment. These fraudsters fall into two different classes of fraud. Some of them are the actual applicants, and we'll deal... We have six particular cases involving eight different individuals as examples of the fraudulent applicants who are applying for this aid without the necessary qualifications to actually get it. They're lying, cheating, and stealing to get this public assistance money that is otherwise much more appropriately destined and given to those in great need. That is one class. criminals will be talking about today. The second class of criminals are the ones who are ripping off the individuals who otherwise should legitimately receive it. By that, the individuals, when they receive this public assistance money, often get it through an EBT card. These are debit cards that are reloaded every month with the funds necessary to buy the food, the clothing, the medicine. And what happens with these fraudsters is they basically go ahead and rip off the EBT card itself, often with EBT skimmers that are in either ATM machines or local businesses, trying to get the PIN numbers and the actual codes to loot and deplete these accounts before For the actual legitimate recipient can use the money. What we also see with these individuals is that they will steal people's identities to apply for the cards in the first place, and then again, deprive the legitimate individuals of these funds. So, with respect to the prosecutions that my office brings, in 2026 alone, to date, We have brought approximately 340 prosecutions against the various individuals who've committed mostly the applicant type of fraud, resulting in over $4.8 million of loss to the system. Today, we're going to highlight six of these cases involving eight different individuals that are responsible collectively for ripping off from the system $177,000 in public benefits. Now, when I talk about cases that we charge, as I always say, every individual is presumed innocent. Until and unless we prove their guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a courtroom with legally admissible evidence. We intend to do so in each one of these cases and in all the 340 cases that we have brought to date. And with respect to that, again, my statements today are not evidence. Evidence is what will be presented in a courtroom. My statements are an overview of the type of evidence we will present in each one of these cases. So, what we have found with individuals who are ripping off the system on the applicant side is that they generally don't fill out the form, the initial forms under penalty of perjury, truthfully, as they are obligated to do. Then when they are recertified throughout the process to continue to get benefits, they lie under penalty of perjury on the recertification. So let me use a few examples, if I might. One case that we have brought is against Ogi Bouyan of Santa Monica. What is he accused of doing? He's accused of getting over approximately $50,000 of CalWORKs cash aid, CalFresh, and housing assistant benefits by stating under penalty of perjury that he did not have any money in the bank. What you see on the screen... This is one of the bank statements that we actually obtained for Mr. Bouyant. Turns out, excuse me, Ms. Bouyant, turns out during this time, she had investment accounts with a monthly balance ranging from $60,000 to over $1 million, yet she stated under penalty of perjury that she did not have any money in the bank. The second case involves Rana Suleiman of San Dimas. And Rana is accused of fraudulently obtaining over $23,000 in CalWORKs and CalFresh benefits, certifying that she had no assets. Yet at the same time, as we will prove in court, she owned this house that you see in the screen in Menifee, valued at approximately $611,100 and received rental income from this house of $3,200 to $3,600 per month. Including an initial payment during this time of over $19,000 to secure the lease. Yet she certified that she had no assets. The third case involves a couple, Jafar and Adjanae Abdi of Glendale. They are accused of basically fraudulently obtaining nearly $30,000 in CalFresh benefits. Certifying under penalty of perjury that they earned no income beyond Jafar Abdi's temporary job at Bath and Body Works. Yet as you can see from this particular photo, the spouses in fact owned a house in Glendale with an estimated market value of $979,000, which they rented out for $4,825 each month. Furthermore, Mr. Abdi worked full-time at a local college and earned more than $165,000 during the alleged fraud period. Again, had this information been revealed on any of these applications, they would not have qualified for this type of public assistance benefits, but they, as we will prove in court, were willing to lie, cheat, and steal the public assistance funds in order to obtain them. Our next case involves Hasmik Hovindzian as well as Haik Rigorian of Los Angeles, and they are accused collectively of fraudulently obtaining over $38,000 in CalWORKs and CalFresh benefits. Now, they reported that Haik received as an employee of an L.A. bakery income, but what they failed to report is that the couple actually owned the bakery. They repeatedly certified under penalty of perjury that they received no additional income. And as we will prove in court, they actually received $115,055 in corporate income, and they actually listed this in their tax returns. Again, had they been truthful with the public assistance programs, they would not have received public assistance because they did not qualify to receive that public assistance. The next case involves Nadia Daniels of Inglewood, and Ms. Daniels is accused of fraudulently obtaining approximately $21,000 in CalFresh benefits, and she's certified under penalty of perjury that she either had no income or received only income from a part-time job at Nordstrom's, but in fact, she did have a job. And she had, in this situation, almost an ironic job, because she worked for the California Employment Development Department. That's the agency that administers unemployment benefits, with a gross monthly income ranging from $4,500 to $5,980, yet she never revealed this particular job, working for the State Department that deals with unemployment benefits. And the last case that we'll focus on today, amongst, again, the 340 cases that we have brought, involves Nyesha Nicole Taylor of Los Angeles, and she is accused of fraudulently obtaining approximately $17,600 in CalWORKs and CalFresh benefits, certifying under penalty of perjury that she was not employed, as the evidence will show in court that this particular certification is, again, ironic. Because Ms. Taylor worked for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority, L.A. Metro, during this time, earning approximately $1,850 a month, yet didn't reveal this on her application or her certifications under penalty of perjury. So in this regard, I want to thank. The Los Angeles County Department of Public Social Services, We've investigated all these cases, presented these investigations to people here in our Public Assistance Fraud Division, and then worked with us to actually bring these cases to the point at which we're now able to prosecute them. So with respect to people who are actually out there thinking today that maybe I should lie on a public assistance form, Maybe this is just free money that I should be entitled to even though I don't qualify for it because I have assets that make me not qualified or income that makes me not qualified for it. My message is very simple. If you go ahead and do this, like the other 340 people who have been charged with crime, we'll make sure at some point you get arrested, you get prosecuted, and you get punished. Well, we also are seeing, with respect to that other class of criminals who are ripping off the system in a slightly different direction. These are the criminals ripping off the actual legitimate applicants by stealing their EBT information or going ahead and just stealing their identities outright. We have made sure that we are prosecuting these cases, and as you will see in the press release that we are issuing in connection with this press conference, when we go after these individuals, they are looking at years of imprisonment. Because again, using one example of one of these cases involved an individual named, I'm not sure I pronounced his name correctly, Ioannis Alexopoulos. An individual who basically stole the identities and engaged in this EBT fraud involving dozens of individuals. He had pled no contest in October of 2025 to 43 counts of felony grand theft, 10 felony counts of felony identity theft, and even a misdemeanor count of obstructing a law enforcement officer. He was prosecuted, by the way, by one of our great deputy district attorneys, Jessica Palacic. And he ended up receiving two years in county jail as part of his punishment, as well as having to pay all the money back. So again, our overall message is very simple. To the people who receive public assistance benefits and necessarily receive them, to all the families that will be receiving them as we get into this Thanksgiving holiday, we will make sure that the money is available for you so that you can buy the necessary food, clothing, medicine, and whatever else you need. But to the fraudsters, beware. We're going to come after you. It is an insult. To everyone in Los Angeles County who is willing to make these benefits available to the people who need them, that you think you can rip them off, please come to a different conclusion or you will be in the next batch of 340 people we end up prosecuting. So at this point, I'll take any questions with respect to this particular series of cases involving public assistance fraud. So investigators get a range of tip-offs. It can be actual individuals that are effectively whistleblowers that find out that someone is gaming the system and bring that to the attention of the Department of Public Social Services, DPSS, or other law enforcement. Often it can be the actual auditors that go back into the files. And they seek to confirm much of the information that has been presented. Because when the information is initially presented, in part, it's based on an honor system. That you're going to check the boxes accurately, fill out the application accurately. And then if you do receive it, you're also swearing on your penalty of perjury that you're entitled to these benefits. So when the auditors go ahead then and check to make sure that you, for instance, don't have any assets, and you claim you have no assets, and then they do the analysis and the investigation, they find out you have a million-dollar home, or you actually own the bakery that you didn't report, or you have bank accounts up to a million dollars in them, they will then build those cases, hand them over to the district attorney's office, and we will prosecute. Yes. The consequence, the consequence to each individual, the maximum consequence, depending on what they've been charged with, can be up to years in state prison or county jail and paying all the money back at a bare minimum, paying all the money back as far as what and these cases also get charged as felony cases. Now, with respect to how we then proceed, these individuals sometimes will be arrested. Sometimes they'll be sent letters to show up at a particular court date. When they're in court, they will then have the ability at any point to admit what they did and plead guilty. To the extent the case goes on, as is their constitutional right, we'll present those cases to a preliminary hearing. If we're held to answer and they still want a trial, we will present that case at a trial. To the extent, again, that throughout the process, they want to admit the crimes that they've committed. They can plead guilty or plead no contest, go through the process to determine what their punishment should be with the judge, and then we'll move on to the next case. It actually depends on the particular case because, again, often these can be continuing problems. In other words, you can apply in one of these cases, for instance, someone applied in 2019 and they didn't get caught till 2023 and have received benefits for effectively four years. We then go back, of course, and charge them with all the criminal violations concerning that time period, but that particular case took longer than a lot of our cases. Again, if the auditors happen to come across something in their first audit, that can be a relatively quick case involving just months rather than years. So I would say that the time frame involves probably spanning from months to years. Well, I think that 340 cases is significant in one year. And granted, there are obviously millions of people receiving these benefits and billions of dollars are being dealt. The DA's office is open for business. We actually had, compared to 20, even 2025, a 20-fold increase in our cases in 2026. You know, I can't speak of what happened before I became District Attorney and that prior District Attorney's focus or lack of focus by candidly on public assistance fraud. But since I've become District Attorney and empowered Mr. Chiarotta and Ms. McDonald to go ahead and bring cases of people who've committed these crimes, we are bringing more and more cases. And again, ultimately, the message, though, is a message of deterrence. We're hoping by even having this press conference that the word gets out in the community that ripping off this system is no longer going to occur with impunity without any consequence to your action, that we are looking, we are going to bring the cases, and we hope that then deters any of the individuals who are now thinking, is it free? You know, can I just get this money? You know, does it matter if I qualify or don't qualify? Our message is, again, quite clear. You qualify, get the money. You don't qualify, don't even apply for it. Because if you do, most likely you're going to be committing a whole series of crimes, and you'll end up as one of the next 340 cases. There are potential investigations going on right now that do involve organized crime. These particular cases, the six cases I've highlighted, were actually highlighted to show the gamut. And so the spectrum, if nothing else, but geographically and through the different types of fraud, how the system is being ripped off. But yes, we are investigating organized crime as it pertains to public assistance fraud. Yes. So in order to protect yourself, we actually have six points of advice. The first is that you can download. From California EBT Edge mobile app, which I highly recommend anybody receiving an EBT card to download this mobile app, because you can reset your PIN, your personal identification number, view your transactions, freeze your card if you think it's been ripped off, block transactions, and do that all from the app. What I would say is that every time you make an EBT purchase, check. Back into that app or to the system to make sure your purchase has now been registered and there's no additional purchases with your card that have been done. Now, here's a good one. Change your PIN the day before your benefits become available each month. Often these benefits hit that card at the beginning of each month. If that card's PIN has been ripped off at that point. The fraudsters are going to come in, drain the account before you can get a penny out of it, and when you're sitting in a grocery line, and you hand over your EBT card, and you think there's hundreds of dollars on it, only to find out the balance is now zero, you're going to think to yourself, if I had just changed the PIN, The day before I get this money, they could never have ripped off the card. With respect to actually using the card, most of these cards have chip readers on them. Use the chip reader. Because where they can rip the card off and they have is the magnetic strip. Because they will put a fake EBT reader on top of, for instance, an ATM machine or in a convenience store where you would run the credit card. If you use the chip function, they can't rip it off. At least right now, the chip is a very good device against fraud. You run that magnetic strip, that's where they have actually had success in ripping off the numbers. And the last thing is, if you do have any unauthorized charges, please immediately contact DPSS. And their phone number is 866-613-3777. So, unfortunately, I don't have much to report today. We are in the process of getting information from the police, who at some point either today or tomorrow will most likely present us with their report. Once we get a report, we'll be able to have a lot more of the key facts of speed, alcohol, the sort of, they'll probably break it down into a minute-by-minute analysis of what actually happened. I don't have that today, and so unfortunately I can't indicate one way or the other what charges we intend to bring. In any situation where individuals die at the hands of someone else, is there always a possibility? Sure. But I won't comment one way or the other on whether or not we're going to bring murder charges because what we do when we bring murder charges is we base them steeply into the evidence and the law. Murder charges, you're probably well aware, is one of the most serious charges a DA's office can bring. We don't bring it lightly. So if we do end up bringing a murder charge in this case, it will be because the evidence commands it, and we can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a courtroom. Again, when we get the reports, and we hope to get them either today or tomorrow, we'll have a lot of that evidence, because we'll need that evidence to evaluate what, if any, charges we need to bring in this case. So again, as much as I would love to answer all your questions today, I'm not in a position to do that. With respect to the families of the victims, they are one of the, obviously, Absolutely key people that are involved in our investigation, hearts, prayers, go to those families that have suffered this incredible tragedy in their lives. It's why we want to make sure that when we talk to the families, we base it on the evidence that we can prove in court, because we don't want to give anyone either too much or too little hope on what's going to happen without. Confidence on our end that whatever we say or whatever charges we can bring, we will or could bring, we will be able to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. If charges end up being brought by the end of this week, then yes, the appearance would be most likely early next week. So the Los Angeles Police Department is conducting the investigation. At this point, we are waiting for their report. Any other questions? Thank you very much.