infoUSA Marketed Lists Of "Gullible" Seniors To Known Scammers, Wachvoia Processed The Unsigned Checks
Global rings of crooks are stealing the bank accounts of thousands of the elderly, using lists of names and phone numbers sold to them by corporate America, NYT reports.
Pretending to be updating their Social Security and insurance records, the criminals tricked the retirees into giving up the information needed to drain their money dry.
The lists were sold to them by infoUSA, one of the biggest aggregators and resellers of consumer information, with packaged lists that practically put out the shingle for scammers. Internal emails reveal that infoUSA execs were aware that some of these clients had been prosecuted for or were under investigation for telemarketing scams.
The banking data was then used to create unsigned checks to withdraw the money. Wachovia accepted $142 million of these checks, while failing to screen firms, respond to thousands of complaints, or react when 50-60% of the checks bounced. Five other banks were involved, too, but Wachovia was the largest.
The worst part is that many of those bilked were just lonely and appreciated someone to talk to. And the thieves were happy to listen.
Make sure to warn older family members and neighbors about the dangers of giving away personal information, especially bank account and social security numbers, over the phone. Or try actually talking to them so they don't join a sweepstakes just to have a chance with interacting with another human being. — BEN POPKEN
This is a test using rich text formatting and html links. It's the generic "company" ad that should appear on all posts with the Company category if they don't have an ad attached to a specific company.
Post a comment
Comments:
@djanes1: No, they compiled it from a variety of sources and then sliced the data down based on people's purchase decisions.
I think it's time to get the 'executive customer service' going for infoUSA. They wouldn't reply to the NY Times , so maybe they'll reply to a flood of Consumerist readers.
The fact that they actually put the word 'gullible' next to names is a fact meriting the swift jailing of everyone in the company.
Ahh here's an even better one: Vin Gupta, CEO, has a charity. From the website:
"All of the above projects are non-profit.
Vinod Gupta personally absorbs any shortfalls in support.
For more information contact vin@vingupta.com"
http://infousa.com/VinGuptaCharitable.htm
I think we ought to ask Vin how charitable those gullible lists are.
Here's a better link to CEO Vin Gupta's charitable foundation, containing his email address vin@vingupta.com:
I still don't understand why banks permit a third party to withdraw funds from your bank account without your permission.
A similar thing happened to my 85-year-old mother when two different local utilities withdrew funds from her Citibank account. The withdrawals had nothing to do with her utility accounts (she wasn't even a customer of one of them.) Apparently, some nefarious individual got hold of her account number and gave it to the utilities thinking my Mom would never notice. Fortunately, she did. Unfortunately, she had to go through a lot of aggravation with Citibank to get her money back.
Why don't we petition congress to make unauthorized withdrawals illegal?
Though the older you are the wiser you should be, the elderly also tend to be more likely prone to medical conditions such as Alzheimer's or others that make them take medications which can cloud their judgment.
This behavior of preying on these people is something that is unforgivable in my opinion, almost any jury and/or judge will crush these people when convicted.
Glengarry Glen Ross gave a hint at this kind of operation -- you express interest in a land promotion or time share by filling out a form, then behind the scenes you get put on a list which is sold and resold and re-resold. You're hounded by opportunists until your personal info falls off the lists, which is probably never.
The banking data was then used to create unsigned checks to withdraw the money. Wachovia accepted $142 million of these checks, while failing to screen firms, respond to thousands of complaints, or react when 50-60% of the checks bounced. Five other banks were involved, too, but Wachovia was the largest.
Why is it that I have to hand over my driver's license number, multiple phone numbers, address, etc. if I write a check but these banks are cashing checks without so much as a freaking signature?!?!
I'm treated like a criminal if I have to use the last resort of writing a check but the scammers are treated as though they are beyond reproach. "Oh, we don't need a signature from you Mr. Con Artist. We know you around here."








i don't believe in capital punishment, but if there was ever a time to use it, i think this would qualify.