<![CDATA[Consumerist: Scams]]> http://cache.gawker.com/assets/base/img/thumbs140x140/consumerist.com.png <![CDATA[Consumerist: Scams]]> http://consumerist.com/tag/scams http://consumerist.com/tag/scams <![CDATA[ Keep Track Of Which Diploma Mills Will Work Out Best For Your Pet ]]> In this job market, anything you can do to give your cat or dog an edge is worth pursuing. That's why you shouldn't enroll your pet in just any diploma mill—you want one that's a proven scam. Boingboing points out that there's a Wikipedia page to keep track of animals with fraudulent diplomas to make it easier to comparison shop for that next fake certificate.

"List of animals with fraudulent diplomas" [Wikipedia via Boingboing] (Thanks to Trai_Dep!)
(Photo: ourdogholly)

]]>
Consumerist-5401451 Tue, 10 Nov 2009 12:50:04 EST Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5401451&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Company Pays Man It Never Employed For More Than 4 Years, Sues To Get Money Back ]]> Anthony accepted a job at New Jersey telemarketing company Avaya Inc. in September 2002 but decided at the last minute not to start working for the company.

Avaya went ahead and kept him on payroll anyway, and for the next several years it pumped a total of $470,000 into his bank account. The company finally caught onto the error in February 2007 and sued Anthony, who pleaded guilty, the AP reports.

Turns out Anthony's free money came at quite a price. He's pleaded guilty to one count of theft and prosecutors are recommending he pay the company back and serve six years in prison.

The takeaway here is that if you're getting checks from a company you don't work for, you'll want to take care of the situation before it gets out of hand.

Man took pay from NJ company he never worked for [AP via San Francisco Chronicle]
(Photo: HCVIII)
(Thanks, Rhys!)

]]>
Consumerist-5390765 Tue, 27 Oct 2009 11:15:28 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5390765&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ MoneyGram Agrees To Pay $18 Million Back To Fraud Victims ]]> MoneyGram International announced today that it would pay $18 million to the FTC to settle charges it allowed wire fraud to happen between 2004 and 2008. MoneyGram's press release notes that they disagree with the FTC's view of the matter, but $18 million is a hell of a lot of money to pay if you don't think you were in the wrong. The press release from the FTC, on the other hand, provides plenty of detail illustrating MoneyGram's negligence, as well as the criminal behavior of some of its employees who were in on the frauds.

First, here's how MoneyGram delicately addresses it:

"While we don't agree with the FTC`s allegations regarding our fraud prevention in the past, we can agree on fraud prevention today and in the future," said Patsley. "We don`t want our customers being victimized by third-party fraud. What we are announcing today with the FTC is our commitment to enhance our already comprehensive efforts to combat fraud and ensure our customers can continue to rely on MoneyGram for safe, reliable money transfer services."

But check out these specific allegations from the FTC's press release, which also came out today (emphasis ours):

The FTC charged that between 2004 and 2008, MoneyGram agents helped fraudulent telemarketers and other con artists who tricked U.S. consumers into wiring more than $84 million within the United States and to Canada – after these consumers were falsely told they had won a lottery, were hired for a secret shopper program, or were guaranteed loans. The $84 million in losses is based on consumer complaints to MoneyGram – actual consumer losses likely are much higher.

The FTC charged that MoneyGram knew that its system was being used to defraud people but did very little about it, and that in some cases its agents in Canada actually participated in these schemes. According to the FTC's complaint, MoneyGram knew, or avoided knowing, that about 131 of its more than 1,200 agents accounted for more than 95 percent of the fraud complaints it received in 2008 regarding money transfers to Canada; a similarly small number of agents was responsible for more than 96 percent of all fraud complaints to the company in 2006.

[...]

According to a recent FTC survey cited in the complaint, at least 79 percent of all MoneyGram transfers of $1,000 or more from the United States to Canada over a four-month period in 2007 were fraud-induced. The Commission's complaint further stated that based on the more than 20,600 fraud complaints MoneyGram itself received, U.S. consumers lost more than $44 million to cross-border money-transfer frauds between 2004 and 2008 alone. When combined with losses reported by U.S. consumers on money transfers within the United States, that number grows to $84 million.

[...]

The FTC's complaint alleges that MoneyGram ignored warnings from law enforcement officials and even its own employees that widespread fraud was being conducted over its network, claiming that proposals to deal with the problem were too costly and were not the company's responsibility. The company even discouraged its employees from enforcing its own fraud prevention policies or taking action against suspicious or corrupt agents. Some employees who raised concerns were disciplined or fired, the FTC charged.

Wow, that sure doesn't sound like MoneyGram gives a hoot about its customers. They say, "Ensuring safe and reliable money transfers for our customers all over the world is at the forefront of all we do." Except for that estimated $84 million, we guess.

"MoneyGram International Reaches Agreement with FTC" [Reuters]
"MoneyGram to Pay $18 Million to Settle FTC Charges That it Allowed its Money Transfer System To Be Used for Fraud" [FTC]

RELATED
"Money Transfers Can Be Risky Business" [FTC]
(Photo: renaissancechambara)

]]>
Consumerist-5386160 Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:47:36 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5386160&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Fortune Teller Arrested For Selling Thousand Dollar Body Wash At The Mall ]]> Fortune tellers are sort of like the con-artist version of the website Significant Objects—the more interesting the story, the higher the price you can fetch for an otherwise cheap piece of crap. Unless, of course, the police arrest you for "fraudulent accosting" at the mall and ruin your con.

According to GazetteOnline, a 22-year-old woman was arrested last Friday in a mall in Lake Grove, New York, for trying to sell a teenager a magic stone and some miraculous body wash for $1,250. The woman had approached the teen a few days before at the mall and offered to read her fortune for $25, which she then upsold to a $100 "in depth" reading. Two days later, she met up with the teen again to warn her that she was cursed and should buy the stone and body wash. The teen paid $600 for the objects and agreed to come back in two days time with the remaining $650.

Instead, the teen went to the police, who arrested the woman and charged her with fraudulent accosting, fortune telling, and attempted grand larceny. Which is weird, because we're fairly sure Axe Shower Kits—which sell for nearly the same amount—use pretty much the same argument to convince teenage boys to hand over their money.

We bet you're wondering what we wondered: holy frak, you can get arrested for pretending to accost someone when you have no intention of following through on it?!! Does that mean you can get arrested for bailing on a handshake and saying "Psyche!"? But no, that's not what it means in New York Penal Law:

A person is guilty of fraudulent accosting when he accosts a person in a public place with intent to defraud him of money or other property by means of a trick, swindle or confidence game.

"Woman at NY mall charged in curse scam; Offered to get rid of it for $1,250" [GazetteOnline] (Thanks to David!)
(Photo: twid)

]]>
Consumerist-5380821 Tue, 13 Oct 2009 16:07:08 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5380821&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Oprah's Dr. Oz Sues Resveratrol Anti-Aging Scam Companies ]]> Amazing pills that will make me look younger and lose weight? And it comes as a free trial, you say? Of course I'll try it! Here's my credit card number. What could possibly go wrong?

Well...a lot. That "free" trial of resveratrol suddenly turns into a recurring charge of $80 or more on customers' credit card bills. The free trial is 19 days, All this is explained, of course: in the fine print, on a separate page that most customers, blinded by the word "free," ignore. Arnold Diaz of New York's Fox 5 spoke to some victims of this particular scheme.

This scheme is remarkably similar to its cousins the "free" credit report and the acai berry free trial. On their sites and on ad banners, resveratrol peddlers often claim that their products were endorsed by Dr. Mehmet Oz, health adviser to Oprah Winfrey's audience. Concerned that consumers are being lured in to buy a product with questionable benefits and even more questionable billing practices using his image, Dr. Oz, along with Oprah's Harpo Productions, are suing many of the peddlers of resveratrol. You can read the suit here as a PDF download. The collection of screen shots is particularly dismaying.

In addition to using Dr. Oz's image, FOX 5 says resveratrol sellers also set up fake clinical study web sites (with a disclaimer that says the study is "fictional" at the bottom) and fake news report web sites. Ironically, when commercial news sites publish their stories about these schemes online, guess whose ads come up alongside them?

Meanwhile, we'll stick to getting our resveratrol the old-fashioned way.

Free Trial Scam [Fox 5]
RELATED:
Easy Weight Loss And Free Cash: A Dubious Product Online Marketing Empire Revealed
Free Trials Can Be Trojan Horses For Sketchy Companies
This Is Why You Don't Order From Fad Diet & Wellness Sites
Careful, Those Free Acai Products Might Come Attached To A Delicious Scam

]]>
Consumerist-5376878 Thu, 08 Oct 2009 18:17:48 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5376878&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ FBI Charges 100 People In Phishing Investigation ]]> Since 2007, the FBI and authorities in Egypt have been running an investigation they've called "Operation Phish Phry," sigh, and this week it paid off with 53 charges against U.S. defendants and 47 against people in Egypt. Three of the 53 in the U.S. have been arrested, and the FBI are looking for the other 50. To prove you're not one of the remaining 50, please send the FBI your login credentials to your bank. Ha ha, we kid.

According to the FBI, the U.S.-Egypt phishing operation collected personal information from thousands of victims and used that information to defraud U.S. banks. Hackers based in Egypt allegedly captured banking information and other personal details, then supplied that information to associates in the U.S. who then withdrew funds using the stolen credentials and wired back a portion of the proceeds to Egypt.

Information Week notes that "all 53 defendants in the U.S. face charges of conspiracy to commit bank fraud and wire fraud, which carry a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison."

"One Hundred Phishers Charged In Largest Cybercrime Case" [Information Week]
(Photo: adobemac)

]]>
Consumerist-5376463 Wed, 07 Oct 2009 17:59:28 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5376463&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Microsoft Turns A Blind Eye To Phishing Scams On Xbox LIVE ]]> William wrote to us this weekend to point out how little Microsoft does to fight phishing attacks on their hugely popular Xbox LIVE network. It's unfortunate they don't take this sort of crime more seriously, since so many kids—who by all rights should have less experience with phishing—are on Xbox LIVE. Below is what two different Xbox CSRs told William when he contacted them to complain about phishing attacks.

I get messages all the time over Xbox Live from people engaging in phishing scams. Thus far, I've been very annoyed because Microsoft seems completely unconcerned about it and their customer service has been very poor. I think of the people who fall for these scams and wonder why doesn't Microsoft do more.

I spoke with a customer service rep and asked about the phishing scams, and he said to file a complaint on the person in-game, which had absolutely nothing to do with phishing. He suggested I select the option to report them for cheating in-game—does that make sense? I remarked how this was confusing and that there was no option to report phishing and he said that in the next update this fall, the option would be there. I'm pretty certain he was lying. He did say, though, that it was very hard to get an account back once it was stolen, something I don't doubt he was being honest about.

Now today [October 4th, 2009], I got two messages from two different users, which are apparently audio clips of some little kid offering cheats and asking you to send a message back (during which he'll ask for your account info and steal your account). It was strange because I got identical audio from two different accounts, meaning either that these phishers are very sophisticated or that there are a lot more phishers out there than I previously realized, because there's this default phishing audio being spread around and re-used.

In the same time frame, I got another message from a different user with the same type of scam.

Frustrated with all the fraud going on, I called Xbox Live again to complain, to see if I could find some kind of fraud department, because I don't think they take these things seriously. I was a bit belligerent (but respectful) with the customer service rep., but who can blame me? Again, she told me pretty much the same nonsense the guy before told me and more. Like he said, this woman told me the same: File a complaint on their gamertag (that's their username in-game), go to the Xbox forums (where there's no real support — just other gamers like me), and so on. She then said something even more ridiculous: She suggested that I make several accounts with Xbox and use all of them to file a complaint on the same person. As with the other gentleman's remarks, I pointed how this was against the rules. It's gaming the system. She said it wasn't. I asked her why I should need several usernames to file a complaint and I told her I only pay for one account and that what she said didn't make sense. It seemed like gaming the system. I asked if she was being honest with me, because she really didn't seem like she was being honest because of how absurd it was. And then she hung up on me. Oh well.

How can Xbox not be concerned with all the fraud that goes on over their service? I've been thinking of calling Xbox Live and recording the phone conversation, then uploading it to Youtube. If I don't do it, somebody else will... Heck, even you guys over at Consumerist ought to do it because the customer service reps. seem to say the most ridiculous things. They know how the system is being manipulated and instead of fixing it, they are telling other people to just manipulate it too.

If you look on the Xbox forums, you'll see lots and lots of people complaining about "hacked" accounts and lack of support from Microsoft. Many of them either can't afford a lawyer or don't know they need one. So, many people apparently just pay for NEW ACCOUNTS on Xbox and Microsoft seems to be profiting from this phishing, which is... of course... the reason why they ignore it. Why stop people from scamming if it helps the bottom line?

(Photo: AdrianDC)

]]>
Consumerist-5375241 Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:10:35 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5375241&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Don't Donate Money To Public Safety Organizations Over The Phone ]]> The website Consumer Affairs (which is not related to us or our owners in any way) is warning people in Oregon to watch out for calls from people asking for donations on behalf of local police or fire departments. It's a good reminder to everyone that telephone solicitations should be ignored: "At best, the solicitor will probably take the lion's share of your donation. At worst, the caller is an outright fraud," the site reports.

"Oregon Warns Against Bogus 'Public Safety' Solicitors" [Consumer Affairs via LA Times]
(Photo: smudie)

]]>
Consumerist-5374805 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 17:06:19 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5374805&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ CA Residents: Watch Out For Fake LLC Registration Scams ]]> California requires limited liability companies to register with the state every two years. You could do this yourself by filling out a form and paying $20, or you could pay this shady company $239 to do the same thing.

Bob writes:

The state of California requires all LLC companies to file a Statement of Information with them every 2 years and pay a $20.00 filing fee. When I opened my mail yesterday to find the attached solicitation. Normally, I disregard all of them, as I can usually tell just by looking at the unopened envelope. I knew this was a solicitation, but opened it out of curiosity. I found form inside that VERY closely resembles an authentic Secretary of State form that must be filed by every LLC in the state of California. They are trying to scare people into sending them $200+ to file a form that really only costs $20 and that is only IF it must be filed. Even though the form explicitly states that this is not a government agency, I found this very interesting and immediately thought to bring it to the attention of the Consumerist. I am an avid reader of the sites and realize that the average Consumerist will disregard these immediately if they receive one, but I thought it would be nice to mention.

The actual form is viewable here (PDF). Both are posted below. Although they're not identical, they're pretty similar (and would have to be, considering the fake form will be used to complete and file a real statement). The seal in the upper left is an especially sneaky touch.
Real:





Fake:







We're glad Bob read this carefully and wasn't duped into paying way more than he needed to. Have you ever received a faux-official notice or warning like this?

(Photo: ToastyKen)
Thanks, Bob!

]]>
Consumerist-5374639 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 15:00:00 EDT Alex Chasick http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5374639&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Charging You For Things You Don't Buy: Preacquired Account Marketing ]]> Tens of millions of consumers have fallen prey to "free" trial offers and membership clubs offered by preacquired account marketers. These companies insert themselves into your everyday transactions, hoping to trick you into letting them charge your account.

In a soon-to-be published law journal article, University of Minnesota Law School professor Prentiss Cox details how preacquired account schemes work, and says we should get rid of preacquired account marketing (PAM) entirely.

PREACQUIRED ACCOUNT MARKETING: THE MEMBERSHIP CLUB

Most PAM involves a FREE trial membership!!! offer. If you do not cancel within the trial period, you become a paying member (surprise!). The trick is that you never give preacquired account marketers your account number.

They are able to charge your account through arrangements with banks and merchants that partner with them. For example, you may not realize that the "Everyday Values" club offer in your Budget car rental packet is a separate company, Trilegiant. If you cash the $9.25 check from Budget's Everyday Values package, Budget will bill you and send the money to Trilegiant—minus a small fee.

MANUFACTURING CONSENT

Consumers who fall victim to PAM are generally unaware they have bought anything from the PAM company. In part, this is because all they have to do is get your "consent" to start the free trial offer. But "consent" here does not mean getting you to say "yes, I would like to purchase this product" or handing over your account number. More often, it just means getting you to say your birth date.

You may notice when that monthly fee appears on your account statement, but if so, you are not the PAM company's victim of choice. Like a good consumer predator, PAM's hope you are the kind of inattentive consumer who will not notice one more monthly—or yearly—fee that shows up a month or more after the "transaction" originally occured.

BAN PREACQUIRED ACCOUNT MARKETING

Because PAM is deceptive by nature, Cox advocates adopting the Uniform Consumer Account Control Act, which prevents anyone from handing out access to your account. Instead, you would get to decide what charges you authorize by explicitly authorizing them yourself.

The Invisible Hand of Preacquired Account Marketing [SSRN]

Sam Glover is a consumer rights lawyer, enemy of shady debt collectors, previous Consumerist contributor, and writes the Caveat Emptor blog. His column appears monthly on Consumerist.

(photo: Celeste)

]]>
Consumerist-5374574 Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:30:34 EDT Sam Glover http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5374574&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Love In The Time Of Internet Fraud ]]> Online dating has resulted in many happy relationships out here in the real world, but also provides a unique opportunity for different kinds of scammers to quickly gain your confidence and manipulate your emotions in order to get past your normal scam-detecting defenses. So how do you protect yourself?

Unsurprisingly, there's now an entire site dedicated to preventing and dealing with the aftermath of this type of scam, which provides lists of warning signs, a database of scammers and their dating profile aliases and photographs, and resources for reporting online dating scams.

What are the most common scams? Other than green card and reshipping fraud, the most common online dating scams involve simple pleas for money or advance fee fraud scams.

Scammers are on dating sites, and social networks setting up fake profiles. Scammers will pose under the disguise of beautiful pictures as either male or female claiming to be from the United States. The scammer weaves a story of a successful business person working over seas, having no family; they present themselves as a thoughtful, caring and loving individual who is looking for their soul mate. The scammers are good at what they do; they ask lots of questions of the victim regarding what they want in their lives.

The scammer then takes the information and turns it into a dream that becomes a reality to the victim. They use words we all like to hear to woo our hearts so they can burn our souls. They use psychology to hold you in their spell. Once they have established a relationship then the scamming begins. In all cases the plea for financial assistance is the key to the scam. ... They are desperate to come to you but need your help with the money to manage that. They were mugged and are in the hospital and need you to pay their hospital bill as they are being held hostage until it is paid.

Romance Scams (via iovation) (Thanks, RandomHookup!)

PREVIOUSLY: Scammers Also Use Dating Services To Look For Easy Marks

(Photo: Romancescams.org)

]]>
Consumerist-5373555 Sat, 03 Oct 2009 14:00:13 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5373555&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Bally Sends Fake Past Due Bills To Ex-Members To Get Them To Rejoin ]]> Reader Jordan writes in to share a past due "bill" that he received from Bally Total Fitness, where he had previously been a member. It turns out that the letter, which specified the amount Jordan owed and threatened to report Jordan to a collection agency if he didn't pay, was actually a sneaky solicitation to get him to renew his contract.

Jordan writes:

Hello,

Writing to let you know about an interesting letter two friends and I received from Bally's. Hope I'm not duplicating something you've seen, although I checked your site and didn't see this.

Put simply: After quitting Bally's and being assured by customer service that we were paid up and no longer obligated, all three of us received "bills" in the mail for $48 about a month later. The bill includes a CURRENT and PAST DUE amount. It includes a PLEASE RESPOND BY date, our Membership Numbers, and a bill voucher on the bottom to mail in.

On the back of the bill, there's a paragraph that reads in part:
Past Due/Adverse Credit Reports: If your account is past due, we have included a message about that on the front of the statement. This is an attempt to collect a debt and any information will be used for that purpose. A negative credit report reflecting on your credit may be submitted to a credit reporting agency if you fail to fulfill the terms of your credit obligations.

Here's the rub: we called and found out this was not a bill. Our account had been closed. Needless to say, any phone call to Bally's is a 30 minute search for the truth. What we assumed was a bill was actually a way to reinstate our membership. I'm a careful reader. My job is to read peer-reviewed science journals for a major research university and turn them into press releases that make sense to the lay public. I don't always succeed, but I always read every word and this Bally's letter is, in my opinion, deliberately made to look like a bill that must be paid. I wonder how many folks, in this recession, are freaked out by any overdue bills and would just send in the money?

After contacting customer support, Jordan received this message:

The offer you received is another type of monthly statement for members who do wish to continue their membership. Therefore, the past due mentioned on this, reflects the amount the member must pay to continue their membership. This does not apply to you, as you don't want to continue your membership.

Yeah, this is pretty sneaky. Jordan said he is sending this to his local representatives, and hopefully it will get their attention, but we'd suggest notifying the FTC and your state's attorney general, too. Also, we're not experts in mail fraud, but this seems like a pretty clear willful misrepresentation in an attempt to deceive Jordan and his friends.

Below are scans of the letter Jordan received. We especially like that Bally, after trying to trick ex-members into rejoining, would also sell their names to junk mailers in the process. Well done!









(Photo: os_las)

]]>
Consumerist-5365192 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:28:03 EDT Alex Chasick http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5365192&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Airport Payphone Charges $20 For 1-Minute Local Call ]]> Billy discovered how it can pay to read Consumerist. He was charged $20 for a pay phone call from an airport, but remembered our post last year about the NCIC credit card system's exorbitant charges.

Since Billy anticipated the problem, he was well-prepared to talk NCIC down to a more reasonable rate. He writes:

Hello. I read an article on The Consumerist regarding pay phones using the Network Communications (NCIC) credit card system. I made a local phone call from the Oakland Airport. They were charging me $20 for a 1 minute local call. I called the customer assistance number listen in your article at this link. I asked to speak to a supervisor and they were able to lower it to $3.75; which is still ridiculous but much more reasonable than the original $20. Thanks for letting people know about this scam.

Truly heartwarming. It's also good to know there are still people out there who have managed to avoid falling into the trap of paying for a cell phone every month, fighting the good fight.

(Photo: u2acro)

]]>
Consumerist-5364880 Tue, 22 Sep 2009 09:55:09 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5364880&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ ATM Ponzi Scheme Was $80 Million Cash Machine For Fraudsters ]]> Every Ponzi scheme has to have a gimmick; something to convince marks that they're investing in a legitimate enterprise, even when they're being bilked of every last cent. For Bernie Madoff, it was an investment fund that offered ridiculously steady returns. For Vance Moore II and Walter Netschi it was ATMs, an incredibly prosaic setup that managed to siphon $80 million from investors who believed they were putting their money into cash machines. The only cash machine, of course, was the fund itself, which Moore and Netschi allegedly operated from 2005 to 2008.

The two men, who were scheduled to appear in court today, told investors that they would be paid out from the fees on ATMs installed in retail spots nationwide. "The phantom revenue came from new investors," said Joseph Demarest of the FBI. "The scheme itself, until discovered, was one giant cash machine."

Investors apparently started getting suspicious when they began looking for ATMs, and couldn't find them. According to Bloomberg, prosecutors said that, "when one investor couldn't find an ATM he purportedly owned in Florida, Moore told him it had been moved."

Of course, if Moore was sharp, he could have just told the investor that the ATM had to be moved because, say, a mouse had built its nest there. Then again, we wouldn't believe that one either.

U.S. Accuses Two Men of $80 Million ATM Ponzi Scheme [Bloomberg]

(Photo: me and the sysop)

]]>
Consumerist-5364585 Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:29:09 EDT Marc Perton http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5364585&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Nigeria Demands Apology For Sony Ad Implying They're A Source Of Scams ]]> Nigeria is mad at Sony for its latest ads that suggesting a lot of scams come from the country. Heaven forfend!

In the ad, a corporate rumor-squasher (read: PR spokesbot) responds to a rumor-mongrel's (read: pudgy gadget blogger) request for comment about a tip he got about a PS3 price-drop. "You can't believe everything you read on the Internet. Otherwise I'd be a Nigerian millionaire by now."

In response to this false, defamatory and confidential claim, Nigeria demanded an immediate recant. "Nigeria also demands an unconditional apology from Sony Corporation for this deliberate negative campaign against the country's image and reputation," said a spokesman for the Nigerian government.

Sony Corporation portrayed Nigeria as home of fraud [Vanguard NR via The Raw Feed]

]]>
Consumerist-5362936 Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:37:31 EDT Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5362936&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ AG Cuomo: Dell To Pay $4 Million For "Defrauding NY Customers" ]]> If you live in New York State and purchased a computer from Dell using a Dell-financed "no interest loan," today may be your lucky day, dude. Based on a settlement with New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, the computer company will pay $4 million "in restitution, penalties and costs to resolve charges of fraudulent and deceptive business practices that scammed consumers across New York State."

The settlement comes after the New York Supreme Court upheld charges by Cuomo that Dell "engaged in fraud, false advertising, deceptive business practices, and abusive debt collection practices" by, among other things, promoting "no interest" financing that later morphed into rates that went over 20%.

"Today's announcement is the final step in ensuring New Yorkers harmed by Dell's deceptive and illegal business practices are fully compensated," said Attorney General Cuomo. "Going forward, this deal means that Dell will have to clearly and fully disclose the terms and conditions of their products and services, to avoid this kind of fraud at the consumer's expense. My office is committed to ensuring a fair and honest marketplace across New York by rooting out these unlawful practices, and we encourage anyone who was ripped off by Dell to come forward and file a claim to get their money back."

New York customers who think they may be entitled to part of the $4 million have until December 15 to file a claim.

Cuomo Announces Dell Will Pay $4 Million For Defrauding New York Consumers [Office of Andrew Cuomo]
Information about filing a Claim for Compensation related to the Dell Settlement [NY Consumer Frauds Bureau]

(Photo: Brent and MariLynn)

]]>
Consumerist-5360268 Tue, 15 Sep 2009 19:02:42 EDT Marc Perton http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5360268&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Bundle Of 'Discounts' Triples Your Odds Of Getting Ripped Off ]]> The are plenty of scams promoted in the backwaters of local radio and late-night TV ads. Most tend to focus on one ripoff at a time; after all, why complicate the message by asking listeners to choose how they want to get fleeced. But a tip from a viewer alerted TV reporter John Matarese to what may be a new trend: Bundling three worthless offers to create one colossally bad deal.

According to the viewer, the radio ad from a company called "Nelson Research" (which apparently chose the name so that listeners would mishear it as "Nielsen") offered $2,000 worth of grocery coupons. A call to the advertiser, however, resulted in a demand for a credit card number, and an admission of a $3 shipping charge — plus more fees down the road. The viewer took a pass, and alerted Matarese, who had a producer sign up. Turns out that shipping charge was just the start of a long list of fees, tied to three separate products.

The grocery coupons came from GrocerySavers.com, and required a $2 shipping fee for each $10 batch of coupons. The other two deals were even better. The "US Patriot" card brought with it a monthly fee of $19, and a second "discount" card, the Liberty Fun Pass, was another $19 a month. Before getting a single discount, cardholders are out $400 a year, unless they cancel during a 14-day trial.

We think Matarese is being a little too kind when he says these offers aren't scams because they hew to the letter of the law. If you really want to save money using grocery coupons, follow the advice of super-shoppers like Kathy Spencer — and stay away from sc*ms like Nelson Research.

Radio Ad for Free Groceries Exposed [WCPO]

(Photo: Editor B)

]]>
Consumerist-5359023 Tue, 15 Sep 2009 08:56:43 EDT Marc Perton http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5359023&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Data Recovery Corp Invents Terms To Convince You Your Hard Drive Is Broken ]]> Fox 11 News in LA went undercover with an intentionally damaged hard drive to find out whether online complaints about Data Recovery Corp, Inc. were true. Can you guess what the result was?




For those who can't watch the video, the hard drive was pre-tested by another company and deliberately messed up with what Fox called a "minor software problem." Then they dropped it off at Data Recovery Corp and paid $100 for a diagnostic review of the drive. Later, they received an email that said the drive had suffered a logical failure due to ELECTRICAL SEVERANCE. Data Recovery said it would cost $1490 to repair the drive.

Fox brought the email to their expert, who read the email and said, "That's gibberish. That doesn't even make sense. They're basically adding words to make it sound technical." That's how you write a solid teleplay for a Star Trek episode, but not a good way to service customers, obviously.

Fox then went back to Data Recovery Corp and asked them to explain those terms. The guy at Data Recovery said he didn't know.

The Fox expert said it would cost about $350 for him to retrieve the data.

"Data Recovery Scam - FOX 11 News Investigation" [YouTube] (Thanks to Jon!)

]]>
Consumerist-5353048 Fri, 04 Sep 2009 18:16:28 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5353048&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Unethical, Annoying, And Ubiquitous Ads: Internet Miracle Cures For Everything ]]> Advertising rates have fallen in all media. This has helped along the implosion of the print media, led to near-saturation of infomercials on TV, and produced the ads for flatter stomachs, whiter teeth, and vanishing stretch marks nearly everywhere you click on the Internet. We know where infomercials come from, but who's behind these banner ads? Who had the brilliant idea, in a recession, to promise ugly duckling-like transformations at the end of a free trial? Slate's The Big Money decided to find out.

Reporter Chadwick Matlin is refreshingly upfront about how these ads have ended up on perfectly respectable web sites such as, well, Slate. He traces the chain of responsibility from the publishers to the ad networks. While someone probably should be responsible for stopping these ads, he finds that no one actually is.

But when I sent [ad network Pulse360 CEO Jann] Janes a link to a weight-loss product feeder site, he clammed up. The site is undeniably sketchy, and I found it on TBM via a Pulse360 ad. It's a site with fake personas and dozens of links to a "free trial" product that actually costs $88.90 a month. I asked over and over again whether this was something that fit under the same ad guidelines that state "text that is not representative of the product/service being offered" is not allowed. Janes would not answer the question with a yes or no. Like a needle stuck on a record, he only repeated that if someone complained, "We have a responsibility to help the consumer and have a conversation with the advertiser about it." He ended the conversation by saying, "The responsibility lies with the advertiser. Our responsibility is to run ads subject to our guidelines and terms and conditions." But he still would not answer whether these ads were in compliance with the terms and conditions. Considering Pulse360 approved the ad, you would think he would say yes and stand behind the site. But no.

We don't begrudge publishers running ads to make money, or ad networks making money in turn, but this is a case where everyone involved knows that these ads are a scam, and still let them proliferate. Hand me my Adblock.

For the Love of God, I Don't Want Whiter Teeth or a Flatter Stomach [The Big Money]

RELATED: Easy Weight Loss And Free Cash: A Dubious Product Online Marketing Empire Revealed

(Photo: Werwin15)

]]>
Consumerist-5351552 Fri, 04 Sep 2009 09:39:55 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5351552&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Scammers String Along 82-Year-Old For Four Years, Leave Him Penniless ]]> foreign lottery scamsHere's another reason to have a sit-down with your elderly relatives and make them promise that if they ever, ever find out they've won some money in a lottery they didn't enter, they should tell family members immediately.

This octogenarian sent $60,000 to scammers in the Dominican Republic while they strung him along with promises of riches.

The promise of foreign lottery winnings, sweepstakes and other riches that arrived by mail proved too tempting for John as they promised him hundreds of thousands - and sometimes millions - of dollars he was sure he was going to receive.

They came with convincing company or corporation titles, such as the Diabetes Association. Upon further investigation by family members, something always proved to be amiss.

But John wouldn't heed their warnings that he was being taken.

And there always was that catch, that small amount of money he would need to send to secure his winnings.

At one point, the scammers managed to get John to check himself out of a hospital in order to show up for a fake meeting at a Walmart parking lot. Another time, they sent him to a Bank of America branch to inquire about an account in his name; no account had been set up.

We suggest you bookmark the article for future reference. Better yet, print it out or copy & paste it, and then give it to your relatives (of all ages) with the warning that nobody EVER wins money from foreign lotteries. EVER. That may or may not be true, but we'd rather they err on the side of financial self-sufficiency than be left homeless and penniless from chasing a phantom lottery that seems to grow in value the more desperate they get.

Check out the tips and references on this post for more info on how to protect your loved ones from foreign lottery scams. You can also show them this video clip:




"Scammers leave 82-year-old Sun Citian homeless, penniless" [YourWestValley.com] (Thanks to Tiffany!)

RELATED
"How To Protect Susceptible Relatives From Scams"

(Photo: http://www.flickr.com/photos/autumn_bliss/ / CC BY-SA 2.0)
]]>
Consumerist-5349833 Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:27:25 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5349833&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Highlights From The Consumerist's Junk Mail Folder ]]> One of the (dis)advantages of having your e-mail address posted on the open interweb is spam, spam, spam, and more spam. This does, however, mean that some very entertaining messages slip through our filters over at tips@consumerist.com, and we'd be remiss in not sharing them.

Good Day,

My name is Jim White, a member of the U.S. ARMY 3rd Infantry Division in
Iraq. I would like to share some highly classified information about my personal experience and the role which I played in the pursuit of my career serving in the U.S. ARMY. However, I would like to hold back certain information for security reasons until you have the time to visit the BBC website stated below. This will enable you to have insight as to what I'm intending to share with you. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2988455.stm
Please get back to me after visiting the above referenced website to enable us to discuss the matter more. I'm uncomfortable sending this message to you without knowing if you are indeed with me or you decide to go public.

Sincerely,

Jim

Oh, well, by all means, send that highly classified information to my Gmail account.

The news story that "Sgt. White" wanted us to read, of course, was a BBC story from 2003 about a huge cache of currency ($100 million and €90 million) discovered in a Baghdad residential neighborhood. Ah, see what the scammers did there? By using an actual news story, if one that's six years old, it almost lends his story some credibility once he finally gets around to asking you to wire him your life savings.

Then, apparently someone used the Benin United Parcel Service to send me a package worth $1.5 million. Gee, I didn't think I had any relatives in Benin, let alone any who left me a big inheritance.

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE BENIN
ATTENTION ,Customer,
WE RECEIVED YOUR PARCEL IN OUR CUSTODY VALUED $1.5 MILLION TO BE SENT YOU AS SOON AS WE RECEIVED YOUR INTERNATIONAL INSURANCE FEES OF $350.00, KINDLY LET US KNOW AS SOON AS YOU ARE READY TO SEND YOUR INSURANCE FEES TO ENABLE US OBTAIN YOUR INSURANCE AND DELIVER YOUR PARCE TO YOU,
YOUR'S FAITHFULLY
MR. Daniel John.
TEL: 229-96340519
Respond to my direct email,upsexpresscourier@eze.co.za

Only $350 for insurance on a package worth several times as much as my house? SWEET.

(Photo: Fuzzy Gerdes)

]]>
Consumerist-5346617 Thu, 27 Aug 2009 07:30:38 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5346617&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Don't Bother Visiting The Grand Canyon Skywalk ]]> Grand Canyon Skywalk is a ripoffUpdate: We asked the Skywalk to confirm that they have a "no-refunds" policy. Their answer is at the bottom of this post.

Unless you want to spend a minimum of $75 per person, plus another $29 per "official" photo (no cameras are allowed), and risk missing out entirely with no refund a partial refund if the attraction is closed due to weather (which happens suddenly and frequently), you should avoid the Grand Canyon Skywalk. According to Travel On The Dollar, which just got back from visiting the Skywalk in person, you can't even walk on the glass floor, and instead have to stand on a carpeted section and look through the other half.


Follow Up:

We contacted the Grand Canyon Skywalk and asked them if it was true that there was carpet on the glass floor, and whether they provided refunds in the event the attraction was closed. Their director of customer service, Gloria, responded,

For safety reasons, we do lay down the carpet, but still allow you to see through the glass bridge.

If you are not able to see the Skywalk due to weather conditions, your ticket is completely refunded. We only close down the Skywalk due to inclement weather, such as electrical rain storms, and lightning.

Note that this refund covers the cost of entrance to the Skywalk, not the separate entrance fee to Grand Canyon West where it's located—in other words, you'll get back $30 of the $75 total required to visit. The other attractions still available to you, according to Gloria, are "Guano Point [where you can] enjoy a bird's eye view of the Canyon, and the Hualapai Ranch, a taste of Western Adventure."

"Grand Canyon Skywalk is a sham!" [Travel On The Dollar] (Thanks to Parind!)
(Photo: slideshow bob)

]]>
Consumerist-5346428 Wed, 26 Aug 2009 20:11:20 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5346428&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Beware Scammers Installing City-Mandated "Whole House Water Systems" ]]> A city in Florida has just warned its residents of a weird scam: someone's been hanging pink notices on doors around town that say, "Due to the water quality in this area, we will be installing whole-house water treatment systems." You're supposed to fill out the back of the notice and leave it out for further contact. Remember, don't let anyone remodel your home on behalf of the city. It probably goes without saying, but still.

"Volusia city: Our water is fine; beware of impostors" [Orlando Sentinel] (Thanks to Ed!)
(Photo: darkpatator)

]]>
Consumerist-5345523 Tue, 25 Aug 2009 19:00:35 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5345523&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Beware Fake Gift Card Balance Websites ]]> myapplegiftcard.com and mybestbuygiftcard.com are scam websitesA reader just ran into a gift card scam while trying to unload an Apple gift card via CraigsList. If you're directed to a website that asks you to put in your gift card information in order to show the balance as "proof" that you're legit, you're being conned.

Sean writes:

I was recently trying to sell an Apple gift card on CraigsList and received a bite from a "buyer" who claimed they wanted the card but wanted me to take a screen shot of the balance from myapplegiftcard.com.

Having been scammed before on gift card BS, I was very wary esp since I didn't want to scratch off the pin for someone who may or may not buy the card. Especially since the woman didn't want to give out any info and pulled the old "you seem sketchy since you won't do this" card to try to put me on the defensive.

I left it alone and relisted my card and got another email from her with the same hey we want it but please take a screen shot, problem this time she screwed up and put mybestbuygiftcard.com. Now I knew something was wrong.

I actually had a gift card from apple that had like $.50 or something on it so I went back to the myapplegiftcard.com site and put it in. Of course it says "this service is not available right now" and tells you to call the number. Pretty much validating spoof status.

On the mybestbuygiftcard.com site they actually just take the full Best Buy balance inquiry page and copy it. I called both Best Buy and Apple and told them of the sites and got the whole "Oh we will look into this."

I just wanted to get the word out ASAP.

Scam sites:
myapplegiftcard.com
mybestbuygiftcard.com

UPDATE: Another reader, Richard, sent in the following tip on how to find even more of these sites:

Try this search on Google using "my*giftcard.com". Way too many suspicious sites pop up.

(Photo: ARTS)

]]>
Consumerist-5341850 Thu, 20 Aug 2009 13:36:08 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5341850&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Scammers Get Over-Ambitious With Fake FBI Letter ]]> I AM FBI DIRECTOR GIVE ME YOUR BANK NUMBERWe guess if you're gonna create a failure pile, make it a big one. This email that pretends to be from FBI director Robert S. Mueller has the typical scammy touches: strange grammatical issues, unexpected shifts between formal and casual voices, a complete lack of understanding of how US government offices actually work, and an "official" gmail address. We were ready to send our information to them until we got to the end, where the letter threatens you with arrest if you don't play along. Now they're just getting silly.

For your late night amusement, here is the full text of the email that was sent to Taylor earlier this evening (never mind the strange date that indicates this email won't exist until either this September or December):

[Washington Field Office Banner with FBI Seal linking to FBI Home]
Anti-Terrorist and Monitary Crimes Division.
FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION.
J. EDGAR. HOOVER BUILDING WASHINGTON D.C
12/09/2009

ATTENTION: beneficiaries,

We received an email, Just to let you know that the said fund has been confirmed in your name, the funds are right now in our custody in your name waiting to be release to you, we have verified and investigated that you are the right beneficiary to claim the funds, all we need from you is verification and proof due to the amount involved.

As a biggest security company here in Washington D.C we are to serve and to protect our citizen. The only advice we can give to you as at this time is to try your best to comply with the required document so that your funds will be release to you in your favor, this funds are rightfully yours. You can obtain the document from our branch Office in New Jersey.

We have done our verification on your FBI Identification Record with our Social Security Number, the only document remaining now is the Diplomatic Immunity Seal Of Transfer(DIST) Which should be issued to you from our branch Office in New Jersey, you are to contact the Federal Bureau Of Investigation (FBI) New Jersey to obtain the above required document, find bellow their contact email address: ( fbi.vision2020@gmail.com) Contact this people immediately to obtain the document.

Furthermore, be advice that according to the United State Law and also the FBI rules and regulations, you are to obtain the document from the FBI in New Jersey where the fund was transferred to. Also Note that you are to take care of the Document to be issued to you right away, because due to how important and secured the document is, it is not issued just like that. You are to take care of the document by sending to the FBI New Jersey right away,That is the only way the FBI New Jersey will issue you the document, because they are going to issue you the Authentic/Original copy of the document.

You are here by advice to Contact them through the email address above to acquire from them on how you are going to send the fee to them. Note that you are to do this immediately if you really want your fund to be credited to your account and also if you don't want any action to be before you. We have already informed the New Jersey FBI about the present situation, so go ahead and contact them immediately. Your fund is now on our custody and will only be release to you with the confirmation of the required document. After that the fund will be release to you immediately without any delay.

NOTE: We have asked for the above documents to make available the most complete and up-to date records possible for no criminal justice purposes.

WARNING: Do not fail to produce the above requirement in the next 72 hours, legal action will be taken immediately by arresting and detaining you, justificated and if found guilty, you will be jailed. As terrorism, drug trafficking and money laundering is a serious problem in our community today. The F.B.I will not stop at any length in tracking down and persecuting any criminal who indulge in this criminal act.

Faithfully Yours,
FBI Director
Robert S. Mueller, III

(Photo: faeryboots)

]]>
Consumerist-5331137 Thu, 20 Aug 2009 00:15:21 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5331137&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Man Tries To Sell Tarted Up Oven Door As $100 HDTV ]]> This $100 flat-screen TV this random dude is selling out of his car in a Walmart parking lot is a steal! Specifically, he is stealing your money by substituting a sticker-covered oven door for a TV.

We have to give this guy credit for going the extra mile and trying to make a realistic decoy-the report says he even included cables in the box-but we wonder if the materials, effort, and risk are really worth $100. If they were HDMI cables from a big box retailer, probably not.

We were going to use this story as a reminder to readers to not buy electronics from the back of a car or van, lest you end up with a box of junk. Then we remembered where most of these stories occur.

37-inch flat screen TV for $100 is really an oven door [The Oakland Tribune]

Thanks, dk!

UPDATE: As a commenter points out, the man was arrested for driving with a suspended license, not for trying to commit fraud. The police did confiscate his oven door/TV, though.

]]>
Consumerist-5341124 Wed, 19 Aug 2009 16:30:27 EDT Alex Chasick http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5341124&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Are You Hiring? Look Out For Fake Job Reference Agencies ]]> Are you looking for a job? Do you need positive references, but don't have anyone left from your old employer who would say nice things about you after the incident with the office bagel tray, shaving cream, and a box of gerbils? Don't worry. You can take care of that with a few hundred dollars.

Yes, Alibi HQ, a company better known for providing fake invitations, conference programs, and phone screening to give people plausible cover stories, also provides employment services. They provide fake references and employment verification services. From their page:

If you're in need of Fake Job Reference services, we'll provide a local or toll free number for your previous employer or employers. We'll answer all incoming calls as the fictitious company and confirm your dates of employment, indicate that you are eligible to be rehired.

The reader who shared this with us is looking at the situation from a hiring perspective. As should you. This is why it's a good idea to double-check numbers provided to you. Reverse lookup is your friend. If there's no Yellow Pages listing for a number that your prospective renter or employee claims is a law firm....big red flag, right there.

FAKE JOB REFERENCES [Alibi HQ]

(Photo: matt512)

]]>
Consumerist-5340588 Wed, 19 Aug 2009 07:45:42 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5340588&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ The Conman Who Loved Me: Madoff Mistress Tells All ]]> Sheryl Weinstein, Bernie Madoff's mistress, is making the rounds with her steamy, tell-all account of Bernie Madoff the love machine called "Madoff's Other Secret: Love, Money, Bernie, and Me" (the title beat out "Bernie Madoff Robbed and Sexed Me and All I Got was This Stupid Book Contract").

It's all about Madoff putting on the moves and making sweet, sweet love on the way to romancing the money out of Weinstein's bank account.

The New York Daily News quotes a couple intriguing passages from the book:

"... This man was not well-endowed," said Weinstein, who was once a top executive with the Jewish women's group Hadassah and lost her life savings with Madoff.

Despite the initial shock and disappointment, Weinstein said, billionaire Bernie turned her on in bed.

"When we made love, I was on fire," she said.

Finally, proof positive that size doesn't matter. That's a reference to investors being duped by the colossal size of Madoff's enterprise, nothing sexual. Get your minds out of the gutter.

Bernie Madoff wooed, then robbed me blind, ex-mistress Sheryl Weinstein claims in steamy book [New York Daily News]

]]>
Consumerist-5339766 Tue, 18 Aug 2009 10:00:43 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5339766&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ New Jersey Man Sues Allerca For Non-Delivery Of Amazing Hypoallergenic Cat ]]> Allerca's elusive hypoallergenic kittens remain elusive. A few months ago, we posted about Allerca and their amazing genetically engineered allergy-safe felines. "Lifestyle Pets" charged thousands of dollars for the kittens, but failed to actually deliver any. We featured one scammed reader's story, and now another kittenless customer is suing the company.

Andrew Reale paid $5,950 for his kitten and $1,950 for a spot at the top of the waiting list, and was promised a kitten in mid-September 2008. Then October. Then December. Then January. You can guess where this is going.

When the kitten was not delivered in January, Allerca sent another e-mail on Feb. 4, saying the feline would be delivered as soon as possible. A month later, on March 6, Allerca said the delivery scheduled had been affected by "decreased kitten production,'' according to the lawsuit.

[Andrew] Reale, who has not received the kitten, is seeking the return of his money, the suit states.

Good luck to him.

Warren man wants $7,900 back for 'hypoallergenic kitten' [MyCentralJersey.com]

PREVIOUSLY:
Allerca, Where's My $4,000 Hypoallergenic Cat?

]]>
Consumerist-5338554 Sun, 16 Aug 2009 18:00:59 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5338554&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ ATM Skimmer Ring Hits Chicago Suburbs ]]> Reader Kellie reports being the victim of an ATM skimming scam in the Chicago area. Mostly, she was amazed that the thefts weren't reported in the local media, and she asked bank employees why. Here's what they told her.

I live in Park Ridge, a suburb of Chicago, and I was recently the victim of ATM skimming. My ATM/debit card was skimmed at the Charter One branch in Park Ridge during the weekend of July 25-26. Withdrawals totaling $2,000 were made from my checking account on August 5 and 6. Fortunately, the bank reimbursed me for the funds stolen, but this incident caused me a lot of unnecessary hassle and worry.

What I wanted to share with you is some information I got from a bank employee I'm friendly with. She told me that the scammers who did this are an Eastern European gang who have already skimmed numerous other ATMs in the Chicago area. They got over 50 people's card and PIN information from the Park Ridge ATM alone. According to her, the FBI and bank investigators have been chasing this gang for six months. She said that they started out in the city and are now working their way out into the suburbs.

What's amazing to me is that to the best of my knowledge there has been not one single story about this in the local media. Do a Google news search for "ATM skimming Chicago" and you won't find anything. If these guys have been in the area for six months, they must have already scammed hundreds if not thousands of people. You would think that might warrant a story in the Trib or something. It wasn't even mentioned in the police blotter of the local Park Ridge paper.

Very interesting. To prevent something similar from happening to you, familiarize yourself with how to recognize an ATM skimmer, try to stick to a few familiar-looking ATMs when possible, and be generally alert.

RELATED:
Here's What A Card Skimmer Looks Like On An ATM
Reader Finds Another Card Skimmer On ATM
ID An ATM Skimmer

]]>
Consumerist-5338213 Sat, 15 Aug 2009 14:00:32 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5338213&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Explain Phishing To Your Grandma ]]> Next time you find yourself struggling to explain how phishing works to the less than techno-savvy people in your life, perhaps just fire up this charming little video that explains it in plain English and engaging pieces of cut-out paper.

Phishing Scams in Plain English [Common Craft] (Thanks to Angela!)

]]>
Consumerist-5335267 Tue, 11 Aug 2009 18:19:11 EDT Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5335267&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ BoA Strands Customer In Siberia With No Money ]]> Bank of America has cut off Shannon's debit card and says she has to get a new one. This would otherwise be a minor inconvenience except for the fact that Shannon is in Irkutsk, Russia on a 2-week Trans-Siberian trek.

A place where the postal systems are so unreliable that "many Russian offices have their mail sent to Finland, where it is then privately couriered to Russia." Shannon attempted an EECB on Bank of America and had her mother, who is listed on the account, call BoA as well, to no avail. Anyone know how to say "I haven't yet booked a stay at your hostel but would like to have a package sent there, can you hold it for me" in Russian?

Here's her letters:

"Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

To Whom it may concern:

Bank of America on July 28, soon after I arrived in Irkutsk, Russia, for a 2-week trans-Siberian vacation, deactivated my debit card after I withdrew about $400 from an Irkutsk ATM. This was quite unexpected since I had called Bank of America before my vacation to inform them that I would be in Russia. My boyfriend, who banks with Citibank, used every ATM I did and experienced no problems. I am very thankful that he is a Citibank customer and had access to his money, because Bank of America literally stranded me in the middle of Siberia with no access to cash and a limited window of time to get out of the country before my visa expired and I became subject to enormous fines.

Being in Irkutsk, Russia (I have included a map for your convenience) and having had trouble communicating to hostel management that I needed to call Bank of America's toll-free number, I e-mailed my mother, Valerie O., to ask that she call BoA and have my debit card reactivated. My mother, who spent several hours on the phone with various representatives, was told that my account was "compromised," and the only option for me was to have Bank of America mail a new ATM card to a hostel in Russia where we were staying. At this point it became glaringly apparent to me that Bank of America does not often do business in Russia. The Russian postal system is famously unreliable, as are courier services there. In fact, many Russian offices have their mail sent to Finland, where it is then privately couriered to
Russia. Also, we had not booked many of our hostels and hotels in advance, and explaining the situation to a hostel or hotel over the phone with my 30 words of Russian would have proven frustrating indeed.

In closing, I would like to know why I should continue to bank with Bank of America after it has proven completely incompetent at handling my affairs while I am abroad. This is not the kind of account "protection" I signed up for. I would like to be compensated for my extreme inconvenience, and the inconvenience my distraught mother went through while futilely attempting to right the situation on the phone. If Bank of America does not rectify the situation to my satisfaction
within two weeks, I will close all three of my accounts and move my money to Citibank, and urge my parents to do the same.

Sincerely,
Shannon O."

2nd email:

"Mon, Aug 10, 2009 at 5:13 PM

Hello, I spoke with Max White concerning the incident below, in which I was literally stranded in the middle of Siberia with no cash flow because Bank of America did not heed my notification that I would be abroad for two weeks. Ms. White informed me that there was nothing Bank of America could do for me because I myself was in error for not contacting Bank of America from Russia, upon receiving an e-mail notifying me of my account being frozen. This despite the fact that my mother, whose name is on my account, called to try to rectify the problem from the U.S. I was told that because my mother had called, the situation had actually become *more* suspicious; apparently Bank of America thinks my own mother was trying to defraud me.

I insist that my complaint can be escalated further, because I am quite outraged over being stranded in Siberia with no money and for the rude treatment I received upon escalating my complaint. How was Bank of America supposed to help me even if I had reached them from Russia? More offers to send me a new card through the infallible Russian postal service? I was told repeatedly throughout the episode that the card in my possession *must* be closed.

Sincerely,
Shannon O."

Bank of America has used super-science security technology and policy-making to determine the following: not reactivating a card used in Russia prevents fraud, but sending a new debit card to an unverified address is A-OK! Luckily it turns out that Shannon has a backup credit card she can use. But what if she hadn't? Future international travelers take heed of this tale and protect yourself accordingly.

]]>
Consumerist-5334890 Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:40:43 EDT Ben Popken http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5334890&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Madoff's Former Finance Chief Could Expose Co-Conspirators ]]> As convenient as it is to crucify Bernie Madoff and even his wife for the investment fraud that screwed billions out of investors, it's foolish to believe he acted anywhere close to alone. That's why prosecutors are giddy that former finance chief Frank DiPascali is pleading guilty and believed to be cooperating with investigators to build cases against the other culprits.

Bloomberg has the story:

"I believe he's cooperating," said John J. Fahy, a former federal prosecutor not involved in the case. "He would be very valuable to the government because he has been close to Madoff for so many years and had to have seen some of the fraudulent transactions that went on. From what we know of Madoff, he trusted very few people."

DiPascali is aiming for a reduced prison term. Whatever he gets it most likely won't be worse than Madoff's 150 years.

Ex-Madoff Finance Chief Could Point U.S. to Other Accomplices [Bloomberg]
(Photo: Kevin Dean)

]]>
Consumerist-5333690 Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:15:02 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5333690&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Beware Pay-Per-Call Phone Scams ]]> Scammers on Craigslist are ordering tough-to-identify pay-per-call phone numbers, then list them on ads, baiting people to call and pay exorbitant fees. Common area codes for pay lines are 976, 940, 915, 556, 554, and 550.

Reader Ho Ko spotted the chicanery:

Ordinary looking phone numbers, like (908-554-2787) that are pay-per-call, often for $10 a call. The latest scam is to call people with Craigslist ads, asking them to call back at one of these numbers. The caller is charged $10 to leave a message on an answering machine.

Ho Ko pointed out that Verizon's customer service site has a listing of numbers to watch out for, and Fat Wallet has a thread about the scam.

(Photo: nadbasher)

]]>
Consumerist-5330440 Wed, 05 Aug 2009 10:00:03 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5330440&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Wave Of Fake Debt Collectors Hints At Possible Data Breach ]]> The Better Business Bureau has released a warning to be aware of scammers calling to threaten people with arrest "within the hour" for defaulting on payday loans. What makes them stand out from normal debt collecting scammers is these callers have huge amounts of personal info on their victims, including Social Security and drivers license numbers; old bank account numbers; names of employers, relatives, and friends; and home addresses.

"Because the scammers have so much information about potential victims, BBB is concerned that this may be the result of a data breach," said Steve Cox, BBB spokesperson. "Thousands of people may have had their personal information compromised, and given the scammers' tactics, it appears that those who have previously used payday loan services could be particularly at risk."

According to reports received by BBB and posted online, the scammers accuse the victim of defaulting on a payday loan and claim they are being sued. The phony debt collector threatens that, if the victim doesn't pay as much as $1,000 immediately via wire or by providing bank account or credit card numbers, he or she will be arrested and extradited to California within the hour to stand trial.

As always with debt collectors, know your rights and be prepared to make some demands of the caller before you cooperate with anything they request. Here are three great places to start:

"Debunking The Debt Collectors' Spin Doctors"
Consumerist tag search: "debt collection"
Consumerist tag search: "debt collectors"

"Widespread Harassment from Phony Debt Collectors Raises Concerns of Mass Data Breach" [BetterBusinessBureau]
(Photo: _FXR)

]]>
Consumerist-5329260 Tue, 04 Aug 2009 12:09:13 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5329260&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Apple Bans Bushel Of Spam Apps ]]> Apple has shaken the App Store tree until several hundred questionable, over-priced apps that drew customer complaints have fallen off the branches.

The apps were all from Khalid Shaikh. Several were rip-offs or news aggregators that didn't work properly. MobileCrunch has the story:

Khalid's apps were of questionable value and quality. He has told us over the phone that he is not concerned about creating particularly valuable apps. Instead, he says, he's going for "less product value" and "more monetization." So, instead of developing one or two apps and charging $0.99, Khalid prefers to create hundreds of apps and charge $4.99. The vast majority of his apps simply provide topic-specific news on a given subject. Apps such as "US Army News" and "Skin Care Updates" cost $5, and aggregate articles from various internet sources. He has mastered SEO on the App Store, and uses the App Store's search as a way to target users (or victims, depending on how you look at it). Many have questioned the value of the apps he produces, and there's a small contingent of developers who are absolutely furious about his business. Rightfully so, it seems: a review of an app titled "WWE Updates" reveals that the user isn't just getting updates of World Wrestling Entertainment; he's also getting breaking news about Michael Jackson.

Those who yearned to have Michael Jackson news interspersed with their John Cena exploits must be devastated by the news.

Apple bans App Store's 3rd-most prolific developerMobileCrunch, via [via IntoMobile]
(Photo: Scott_Wallace)

]]>
Consumerist-5329407 Tue, 04 Aug 2009 10:00:22 EDT Phil Villarreal http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5329407&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Sorry, This Wendy's Coupon Is Not Redeemable For Anything ]]> This coupon here, the one promising a free cheeseburger and drink? It's fake. It didn't come from Wendy's, and it certainly isn't a special offer for Allstate customers. If you try to redeem it, you will either leave hungry or short a few dollars.

Snopes adds:

In fact, this same fraudulent coupon has been circulated via e-mail in previous years; someone has merely updated the expiration date and logo and once again sent it winging through inboxes everywhere.

Wendy's Coupon [Snopes]

]]>
Consumerist-5327296 Sat, 01 Aug 2009 18:00:51 EDT Carey Alexander http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5327296&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Madoff Gives First Prison Interview To Victims' Lawyers ]]> Bernie Madoff has given his first prison interview...to attorneys representing his victims. Highlights: He's quite candid now (what has he got to lose?), he can't believe that he got away with running an epic Ponzi scheme for as long as he did, and apparently he's been working out.

[Attorney Joseph] Cotchett said Madoff was "very articulate, very direct" and did not appear to hold back anything. "He talked about how he pulled it off, how many years he got away with it," the lawyer said.

"I was surprised at how candid he was," Cotchett told ABCNews.com after the session, the first time Madoff has talked with outside lawyers. Madoff refused to cooperate with the FBI after his initial, largely untruthful confession last December.

Cotchett said Madoff "did not dodge" any of the questions he asked and that Madoff's lawyer did not object to any of the questions.

The victims' attorneys have not yet decided whether to go after other members of the Madoff family. Confidential to Ruth Madoff: There's always money in the banana stand.

First Madoff Interview: Can't Believe I Got Away with It [ABC News]

]]>
Consumerist-5325265 Wed, 29 Jul 2009 08:00:22 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5325265&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Victim Of Mystery Shopper Scam Arrested, Spends Night In Jail ]]> Kelly McGheeHere's one more reason to avoid mystery shopping scams: you could be the one who ends up in jail. A woman in Minnesota answered a "mystery shopper" email (that she found in her spam folder, sigh) and signed up. It turned out to be the old check fraud scam—they sent her a $2700 check and told her to deposit it and keep $300 a payment, then use the rest to make mystery shopper purchases. She took the check to her bank, and her bank called the police.

McGhee went to the bank to cash the check. Then the police showed up and she couldn't understand why she was under arrest.

Bremer Bank said that if they suspect a check is fraudulent, they will contact the police.

McGhee spent a night in jail before she could return home to her three kids.

Although there are legitimate mystery shopping gigs, you should be cautious of anything that requires you to pay money before you earn any, and run in the opposite direction from any person/company that sends you a check to cash and return funds from. Here are some handy posts to help you find out more:

"12 Signs Of A Mystery Shopping Scam"
"Mystery Shopper Scam Now Comes Bundled With Check Fraud Scam!"
"Here's What A Mystery Shopper Scam Looks Like"
"Mystery Shopping Company Wants Me To Test A Wire Service By Sending Them Money"

And if you want more info on how to find a legitimate mystery shopper job, start here:

"FTC - The Secrets of Mystery Shopping Revealed"

"'Mystery Shopper' Scam Victim Spends Night In Jail" [WCCO]

]]>
Consumerist-5323703 Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:58:02 EDT Chris Walters http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5323703&view=rss&microfeed=true
<![CDATA[ Amazonfraudcheck.com Is Amazon Fraud ]]> No, Amazon is not contacting its members and performing regular fraud checks. Jason received this e-mail, which is associated with a rather convincing Amazon phishing site.

Here's the exact message that he received:

From: Amazon Fraud Check
Date: Sun, Jul 26, 2009 at 1:39 PM
Subject: Account Closure: please read
To: Subscriber

Greetings from Amazonfraudcheck.com.

Please take the time to read this message - it contains important
information about your Amazon.com account.

At Amazonfraudcheck.com, we routinely perform reviews of orders and customer
accounts to protect our customers. After careful review of your
account, we believe it may have been accessed and used by a
third-party to make purchases without your permission, but it appears
they did not use your credit card to make these purchases. It seems
that someone obtained your personal account and/or financial
information elsewhere, and used it on Amazon.com to access your
account.

We have closed your account effective immediately because of this
possible unauthorized account activity. If this recent account
activity (new shipping address) was authorized by you, please click the link
below to verify your account information, after that we will
reactivate your account.
Reference* http://www.amazonfraudcheck.com

It is important to know that Amazon.com accounts can only be accessed
by those who know personal, specific information about you and your
account — such as your email address, Amazon.com password, physical
address, credit card information, and other details. As mentioned
above, it appears someone obtained some of your personal account
and/or financial information elsewhere and used it on Amazon.com to
access your account.

In the future, you can protect your Amazon.com password and account by
following some of these safety tips:

—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—

1. Choose a good password: Use at least 8 characters and a combination
of letters and numbers. Do not use single dictionary words, your name
or other personal info that can be easily obtained, or a password that
contains part of your email address.

2. Password protection: Avoid using the same password at multiple
sites or for your email account. Do not share your password with
others.

—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—-—

Please know you will need to open a new account when you place future
orders with us. We strongly suggest that you follow the safety tips
listed above for increased password and account protection.

Please accept our most sincere apologies for any resulting
inconveniences, and feel free to contact us if you have any further
questions or concerns by writing to account-alert@amazonfraudcheck.com.

Sincerely,

Abdul Hakeem
Account Specialist
Amazon.com
http://www.amazonfraudcheck.com
=========================

Under the guise of fraud prevention and repair, they're committing Amazon fraud. Slick, huh?

If you receive a similar e-mail, forward it to spoof@amazon.comso Amazon can deal with the phishy impostors.

]]>
Consumerist-5323460 Mon, 27 Jul 2009 07:30:05 EDT Laura Northrup http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&postId=5323460&view=rss&microfeed=true