Friday, July 31, 2009

STOLEN ID DATA BASE (CONT)

REPRINTED FROM THE TIMES
AS FAIR USE

The identities of more than four million Britons are being offered for sale on the internet, The Times has learnt.

Highly sensitive financial information, including credit card details, bank account numbers, telephone numbers and even PINs are available to the highest bidder.

At least a quarter of a million British bank and credit card accounts have been hacked into by cybercriminals, exposing consumers to huge financial losses. Most of the personal data has been gathered as a result of “phishing” — a process whereby members of the public are duped into handing over their key details, such as user names, passwords and credit card details.

Unsuspecting victims hand over the information by e-mail to people posing as reputable sources such as banks or online stores. Other data has been stolen after criminals infect a person’s personal computer with viruses and then raid it for information.

They are then sold to the highest bidder on online forums or hacking websites. Individual credit card details have been sold for as little as 30p. The Times has also learnt that the communications and e-mail systems of some of Britain’s biggest public bodies and private companies are open to possible attacks. This is because the corporate e-mails and passwords have been sold to cybercriminals. The details of policemen, doctors and military personnel are also at risk.

The information being traded on the web has been intercepted by a British company and collated into a single database for the first time. The Lucid Intelligence database contains the records of four million Britons, and 40 million people worldwide, mostly Americans. Security experts described the database as the largest of its kind in the world.

The database, which has been seen by The Times, raises important data protection concerns. The Information Commissioner, the data protection watchdog, is monitoring the development of the database. Police in London have also been informed but no action has been taken.

The database is held by Colin Holder, a retired senior Metropolitan police officer, who served on the fraud squad. He has collected the information over the past four years. His sources include law enforcement from around the world, such as British police and the FBI, anti-phishing and hacking campaigners and members of the public. Mr Holder said he had invested £160,000 in the venture so far. He plans to offset the cost by charging members of the public for access to his database to check whether their data security has been breached.

The legality of the database could be put to the test in the coming week. The Information Commissioner’s Office said it could not endorse a commercial service or make a ruling on its validity unless someone made a complaint. But the privacy watchdog said it had “provided advice to help the company comply with the principles of the Data Protection Act”.

A police source, who did not wish to be named, said that he had seen Mr Holder’s information as he passed it on to the relevant authorities, and “it could only have come from phishing or hacking”.

“I’m concerned, but I’m not surprised in the least,” said Mikko Hyppönen, chief research officer at F-Secure, the computer security experts. “We’ve seen this going on for quite a while. There’s a mind-boggling amount of information that’s being sold on the underground forums.”

One man from Clapham whose details are on the database, but who cannot be named for legal reasons, said: “I was appalled to discover personal information about me was being traded. Financial services companies should be more aggressive in pursuing the fraudsters instead of passing on the cost in bank charges.”

Most of the records in the database are considered at “low risk” of identity fraud. However, even big collections of e-mail addresses are useful for those wanting to inundate people with huge amounts of “spam” messages.

Among the places vulnerable to security breaches are banks, financial institutions including the Bank of England and Companies House and multinational defence companies.

All organisations where employees’ e-mails have appeared on the database have been contacted.

DATEBASE OF STOLEN IDs NOW ON LINE

reprinted from boingboing.com

as fair use

British fraud cop quits job, buys huge database of stolen identities, charges fees to people who want to know if their details are in the database

A former British fraud cop has assembled a database of 4,000,000 British identities, including credit card numbers and PINs, seemingly by buying data from hackers and phishers. Now he's selling access to the database to panicked members of the public who want to know if their identities have been stolen.
Highly sensitive financial information, including credit card details, bank account numbers, telephone numbers and even PINs are available to the highest bidder...

The information being traded on the web has been intercepted by a British company and collated into a single database for the first time. The Lucid Intelligence database contains the records of four million Britons, and 40 million people worldwide, mostly Americans. Security experts described the database as the largest of its kind in the world...

The database is held by Colin Holder, a retired senior Metropolitan police officer, who served on the fraud squad. He has collected the information over the past four years. His sources include law enforcement from around the world, such as British police and the FBI, anti-phishing and hacking campaigners and members of the public. Mr Holder said he had invested £160,000 in the venture so far. He plans to offset the cost by charging members of the public for access to his database to check whether their data security has been breached.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

CUOMO PURSUES DEBT COLLECTION FIRMS

reprinted as fair use


NEWSDAY REPORTS ---


New York AG Andrew Cuomo is demanding information from dozens of debt collection law firms throughout the state as part of a civil lawsuit to overturn more than 100,000 faulty default judgments, he announced Wednesday. The suit seeks to vacate all default judgments where the sole evidence that a defendant received service notifying him that he was being sued was an affidavit from American Legal Process. That company's owner was arrested and charged with fraud and other felonies in April.

ECONOMIST REPORTS - FRAUD IN US WAY UP

reprinted as fair use

According to Britain's Economist Magazine ---

Over 730,000 counts of suspected financial wrong doing were recorded in America last year, according to recent data from the Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. Institutions such as banks, insurers and casinos are required by law to report suspicious activities to federal authorities under 20 categories. Financial institutions filed nearly 13% more reports of fraud compared with 2007, accounting for almost half of the increase in total filings. The number of mortgage frauds alone rose by 23% to almost 65,000. But not all categories saw an increase: incidents suspected terrorist financing fell. Just under half of all filings are related to money laundering, a proportion that is little changed in over a decade.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Con Artists Often Prey on the Elderly

reprinted as fair use
from
Louisiana State Department of Insurance


The elderly are the target of a growing number of scams. These scams take a tragic toll on the financial and emotional lives of elderly people with limited means, and many times they involve a drain on insurance resources, for the individual and society.

There are a number of common sense reasons why the elderly are often victimized. They are more likely than others to be at home to answer the phone; they often have health problems that make them vulnerable to false health cures; and they live in older housing.

The con artist preys upon the elderly’s desire to cure their health problems. Money is demanded up front for the miracle cure. The victim is out the money for the cure and may actually have more health problems as a result. In addition to the individual’s loss, the effect of such scams is an additional strain on already overtaxed Medicare and Medicaid health services.

Close to three-fourths of the elderly own their own homes. Many of these homes were built 40 to 50 years ago and have not been well maintained in recent years.

After a hurricane, tornado or other storm has passed through an area, con artists contact the elderly victim, making a convincing argument that the home has storm damage that must be repaired--and paid for--immediately. The victim pays money up front, thinking the claim can be turned in to the insurance company for reimbursement.

The insurance company is then contacted by the victim with a claim for work that is often poorly done, overpriced, and unauthorized by the company. In some cases, the work is never done at all. Meanwhile, the con artist has moved on to victimize others at the scene of the next weather disaster.

The elderly are often distrustful of mass media messages. Individuals they know have the best opportunity to educate them on how to avoid being the victim of the latest telephone or door-to-door scam artist. The insurance agent, the cop on the beat or the local deputy sheriff are just some of the trusted people who can help them understand they are likely targets of fraud.

Below is a list of tips the elderly can be given to help them avoid fraud. The tips will work equally well for the rest of us who often think we are above being conned until it is too late.

Ways to avoid fraud and safeguard your health and home:

1. Don’t be too polite. If a stranger calls you on the telephone or comes to your door with a wonderful offer you must accept right away, don’t believe it. A reputable salesman or contractor will give you time to make a well reasoned decision.

2. Check references. Don’t just ask for identification, which can be faked. Call your Better Business Bureau to check out an unknown person offering a deal on home repairs.

3. Check with the professionals. Don’t assume your insurance company will authorize repairs. Contact your insurance representative as soon as possible.

Even if there has been a terrible storm and the roof is leaking, at least check one more local contractor or other trusted person before allowing strangers to make repairs on your home.

Before agreeing to buy the latest health cure, call your doctor or the local medical society to check out the salesman and the product.

4. Count to 10 and wait. Don’t pay out money or give out any financial information, such as credit card numbers, before checking out the seller and the product.

5. Read before you sign. Even if you are convinced you are dealing with a legitimate person or company, do not sign anything you have not read and understood.

It is a good idea to ask to keep any documents you are asked to sign overnight. This will give you time to read them carefully.

Even when you are dealing with local, established business people, you need to know exactly what you are agreeing to before you sign anything.

Sunday, July 12, 2009

SWISS/UBS BLINK - US AGREES POSTPONEMENT

from Bloomberg.Com

reprinted as fair use



By David Voreacos and Mort Lucoff

The U.S. and Swiss governments agreed with UBS AG to postpone a court hearing in Miami and try to resolve a government lawsuit seeking the identities of 52,000 American account holders suspected of possible tax evasion.

UBS AG, the largest Swiss bank by assets, agreed to reschedule tomorrow’s evidentiary hearing in federal court to discuss a possible settlement of the case, according to a court filing today. The Justice Department sued UBS on Feb. 19, a day after the bank paid $780 million to avoid prosecution for helping wealthy Americans evade taxes.

As part of that deferred-prosecution agreement, UBS also handed over data on more than 250 secret accounts. Switzerland, which supports UBS in the civil litigation, had said the case threatens its sovereignty, and that turning over more names would force the bank to violate Swiss laws protecting bank secrecy.

In a statement today, the Justice Department said any settlement “would necessarily include a provision requiring UBS to provide the Internal Revenue Service information on a significant number of individuals with UBS accounts.”

U.S. District Judge Alan Gold had scheduled a hearing for tomorrow. In a joint filing seeking a stay of the case, UBS and the Justice Department asked Gold to set an evidentiary hearing for Aug. 3 and 4 if they cannot reach a settlement. Gold must still rule on that request.

Ongoing Talks

The postponement request is backed by the Swiss Federal Department of Justice and Federal Department for Foreign Affairs, according to a Swiss statement today. The Swiss declined further comment, citing confidential “ongoing settlement negotiations” between the two governments.

Switzerland had hardened its public posture on the case, saying in a July 7 court hearing it “will use its legal authority to ensure that the bank cannot be pressured to transmit the information illegally, including if necessary by issuing an order taking effective control of the data at UBS.”

On July 8, Gold directed the Justice Department to consult the government’s executive branch, including the State Department, before responding by today to the Swiss threat.

Gold directed the government to say by today “how far it intends to proceed,” including the possibility of seizing UBS assets in the U.S. and imposing a receivership.

‘Cannot Comply’

In a July 9 memo, UBS Chief Executive Officer Oswald Gruebel said: “The core of the dispute turns on a conflict between the Swiss banking confidentiality laws, to which we are bound, and the U.S. objective to collect taxes owed by its citizens. Honoring the IRS summons would require UBS to violate Swiss criminal law, and we simply cannot comply.”

“UBS welcomes the announcement that the U.S. and Swiss governments have agreed to negotiations” to resolve the litigation, UBS said today in a statement.

In a court filing today, the Justice Department said it was “premature” to respond to “the question of whether UBS will be able to comply” with any court order.

“To the best of our knowledge the Swiss government has not yet taken such action, nor has it made clear what it means when it suggests that it will issue an order ‘taking effective control’ of the UBS records,” according to the filing.

“The fact that UBS finds itself in a difficult position is completely the result of its own conduct,” according to the filing. It urged Judge Gold to rule on the merits of the case, not on whether “UBS may or may not comply.”

Tax Havens

As part of its deferred-prosecution agreement, UBS admitted Feb. 18 that from 2000 to 2007 its Swiss private bankers helped Americans evade U.S. taxes through sham offshore companies in tax havens including Panama, Hong Kong and the British Virgin Islands. UBS said it created misleading forms saying those companies, not taxpayers, were the beneficial account owners.

UBS also admitted that its private bankers marketed securities and banking services in the U.S., even though it didn’t have the required license from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Those bankers, UBS admitted, met with clients in the U.S. and communicated with them regularly as they traded securities in their accounts or transferred assets.

The case is U.S. v. UBS AG, 09-cv-20423, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami).

Saturday, July 11, 2009

UBS CLIENTS CAUGHT IN BIG GAMBLE

With the US vs UBS case set to go to court in Miami on Monday, all of those 52,000 American clients --- whose names and tax information form the basis of the suit against the bank --- are caught in a big gamble. Those who have already "fessed" up to some tax avoidance/evasion scheme, are most likely taking advantage of the IRS tax amnesty put in place last March. It expires in September.

But those who haven't come forward, those Americans who are banking on Swiss secrecy to protect them from the IRS, may be taking a huge risk.

The tax amnesty provides for taxpayers who have not yet done to to:

File 6 years of back tax returns showing unreported foreign source income;

Calculate interest each year on unpaid tax;

Apply a 20% accuracy-related penalty or a 25% delinquency penalty;

Apply a 20% penalty based upon the highest balance of the account in the past six years.

In return for coming forward now, the IRS agrees to not pursue charges of criminal tax evasion and other fraud and filing penalties, which include fraud penalties (75% of the unpaid tax); and failure to file a TD F 90-22.1 (Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Report) which carries with it a penalty of $100,000 or 50% of the foreign account balance, whichever is more.

If UBS wins and does not turn over those 52,000 names, then those Americans are safe, at least for the time being. But if UBS settles or loses, the IRS has vowed to pursue everyone on the list, which means that the amnesty will no longer be in play.

It puts the burden on those who have not yet come forward to do so while the amnesty is an option. The upside is a chance to wipe the slate clean. The downside seems to be jailtime.



Friday, July 10, 2009

United States versus UBS

With the US vs UBS case set to go to court in Miami on Monday, reports from Washington say that a deal between the Department of Justice and the Swiss bank --- which would see the bank revealing American account information --- remains elusive. If a deal isn't struck before Monday morning, the Swiss are risking an all out war on their much treausured banking secrecy.

Thursday, July 9, 2009

SWISS THREATEN US IN UBS CASE

from Bloomberg

reprinted as fair use


By David Voreacos, Michael McKee and Mort Lucoff

Switzerland said it would seize UBS AG data to prevent the U.S. Justice Department from pursuing a U.S. court order seeking the identities of 52,000 American account holders in a crackdown on tax evaders.

The assertion came in court papers yesterday in federal court in Miami, where the Justice Department sued UBS on Feb. 19, a day after the bank avoided U.S. prosecution for helping wealthy Americans evade taxes. The U.S. effort to enforce a summons seeking the names would force UBS to violate Swiss laws barring disclosure of such data, the filing said.

The Swiss government “will use its legal authority to ensure that the bank cannot be pressured to transmit the information illegally, including if necessary by issuing an order taking effective control of the data at UBS that is the subject of the summons,” according to the filing.

In an order today, U.S. District Judge Alan Gold told the Justice Department to respond by July 12 to the Swiss filing. Gold said the U.S. should explain “how far it intends to proceed by way of request for enforcement, up through and including receivership and/or seizure of UBS’ assets within the United States” if he grants the petition and the Swiss “prevent or otherwise prohibit UBS from complying.”

UBS agreed Feb. 18 to pay $780 million in penalties, admitted it helped taxpayers hide money in Swiss accounts and gave the Internal Revenue Service more than 250 clients’ names. The bank and Switzerland have since argued that the U.S. lawsuit represents a threat to Swiss sovereignty. Gold will hold a July 13 evidentiary hearing on the case.

‘Extraordinary Action’

“It is hoped that it will be unnecessary for the Government of Switzerland to take the extraordinary action of issuing an order to seize the information at issue, but such an action should be expected if the IRS continues to pressure UBS to violate Swiss law,” according to the filing.

Switzerland helped the Justice Department in the prosecution of UBS “in a manner consistent with Swiss law and which avoided a conflict of sovereignty,” according to the filing. “The IRS now inappropriately seeks to provoke international conflict through this civil proceeding.”

The Swiss minister of economic affairs, Doris Leuthard, said her country has not resolved how to act.

“It’s not decided so far that we would enact this blocking order, it’s just an announcement that we would consider this if we don’t find a solution beforehand,” Leuthard told reporters today in New York.

The U.S. seeks to force UBS to violate Swiss law, she said.

‘We Can’t Accept’

“We can’t accept the American authorities coming and saying ‘OK, give me 50,000 names,’” Leuthard said.

“We don’t know how many of these clients have illegally a fortune in Switzerland,” she said. “Maybe it’s 1,000, maybe it’s only 100. I don’t know. The American authorities don’t know it. Therefore the existing laws can be applied in a concrete case, when you have the name of the bank and indicators.”

Leuthard cited the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., which filed the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history, as a warning not to push UBS to the brink.

“When banks of this size have severe problems, this violates financial stability massively,” she said. “This can’t be in the interests of the United States. We learned in the last year that financial stability is the first priority, and this must be considered.”

Two Guilty Pleas

Two UBS clients in the U.S. have pleaded guilty to tax crimes since the bank entered its deferred-prosecution agreement on Feb. 18. Prosecutors have said criminal charges against more UBS clients are likely. The IRS is encouraging others to avoid charges by disclosing UBS accounts voluntarily.

Judge Gold yesterday denied a UBS motion seeking the number of accounts identified to the IRS through voluntary disclosures. UBS had said such data presents an alternative method to gain the information sought in the lawsuit.

In his order, Gold said that such data is not “an adequate alternative” for the U.S. to seek the information it requests in “a timely and comprehensive fashion.”

As part of its deferred-prosecution agreement, UBS admitted Feb. 18 that from 2000 to 2007 its Swiss private bankers helped Americans evade U.S. taxes through sham offshore companies in tax havens including Panama, Hong Kong and the British Virgin Islands. UBS said it created misleading forms saying those companies, not taxpayers, were the beneficial account owners.

UBS also admitted that its private bankers marketed securities and banking services in the U.S., even though it didn’t have the required license from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Those bankers, UBS admitted, met with clients in the U.S. and communicated with them regularly as they traded securities in their accounts or transferred assets.

The case is U.S. v. UBS AG, 09-cv-20423, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida (Miami).

FBI MORTGAGE FRAUD - SCAMS EXPLAINED

FROM THE FBI ANNUAL MORTGAGE FRAUD REPORT:

Industry experts concur that there is a strong correlation between increased fraud and distressed real estate markets. The 2008 current housing market, suffering from an increase in inventory, lack of sales, and a high foreclosure rate, provided an attractive environment for mortgage fraud perpetrators who discovered methods to circumvent loopholes and gaps in the mortgage lending market. Lenders, builders, sellers, borrowers, and other market participants employed and modified old schemes such as property flipping, builder-bailouts, seller assistance, short sales, air loans, foreclosure rescues, and identity theft; and adopted new schemes, including reverse mortgage fraud, credit enhancements, condo conversion, loan modifications, pump and pay—each of which are surfaced in response to tighter lending practices. Emerging fraud trends are draining lender, law enforcement, regulatory, and consumer resources.

Reverse Mortgage Fraud Schemes

Unscrupulous loan officers, mortgage companies, investors, loan counselors, appraisers, builders, developers, and real estate agents are exploiting Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECMs)—also known as reverse mortgages—to defraud senior citizens. They recruit seniors through local churches, investment seminars, television, radio, billboard, and mailer advertisements, to commit the fraud primarily through equity theft, foreclosure rescue, and investment schemes.33 Equity theft schemes are the most common method used by mortgage fraud perpetrators to exploit HECMs. Perpetrators, often with the aid of straw buyers, execute a scheme designed to withdraw false equity from properties. They typically identify foreclosed, distressed, or abandoned properties (or buyers) using information contained within county deed records. Perpetrators purchase the properties using straw buyers who commit occupancy fraud by fraudulently stating they will be using them as their primary residence. They recruit seniors to "purchase" the properties from the straw buyers. This is generally accomplished by the perpetrator transferring the deed to the property to the senior with no exchange of money. After the senior is living in the home for at least 60 days, the perpetrators arrange for the seniors to obtain HECMs, with the aid of a fraudulently inflated appraisal, and encourage the seniors to request a lump sum disbursement of the equity. The perpetrators, often in collusion with the settlement attorney, abscond with all of the equity at closing. They facilitate appraisal fraud by arranging for minor cosmetic repairs, or falsely documenting repairs, that were never performed to inflate the appraisal. They also fraudulently create fictitious loans and liens that enable them to distribute the loan proceeds to themselves, the straw buyer, and others at closing. As more members of the “baby boomer” generation turn 65, their vast and expanding real estate holdings make reverse mortgage fraud an increasingly attractive scam for perpetrators.

Credit Enhancement Schemes

Credit enhancement schemes may take various forms. In the most basic scheme, a loan officer and home builders are taking measures to encourage borrowers to have their names added to the bank accounts of friends or family members temporarily to circumvent the underwriting process to show that they have sufficient deposits on hand. Additionally, some originators and homebuilders are depositing money into the accounts of loan applicants who are in the process of trying to qualify for a mortgage to be used as an asset. Once the underwriting process qualifies the loan and it closes, the builder withdraws the money and uses it for the next potential borrower. According to Fannie Mae, perpetrators are also filing amended tax returns and paying "back taxes" on unreported income for previous years to aid in the verification of income process for a new loan application.

Perpetrators are also using credit enhancement schemes to circumvent tightened lending practices established by Fair Isaac Credit Organization (FICO) 08. The schemes include purchasing credit privacy numbers (CPNs) and seasoned trade-line accounts, creating fraudulent retailer financial relationships, and staging credit-washing schemes with the intent to strengthen a perpetrator's credit history and ability to apply for new loans. These schemes are facilitating both mortgage fraud activity and illicit credit representation practices.

Builder-Bailout Schemes

Builders are employing builder-bailout schemes to offset losses, and circumvent excessive debt and potential bankruptcy, as home sales suffer from escalating foreclosures, rising inventory, and declining demand. Builder-bailout schemes are common in any distressed real estate market and typically consist of builders offering excessive incentives to buyers, which are not disclosed on the mortgage loan documents. Builder-bailout schemes often occur when a builder or developer experiences difficulty selling their inventory and uses fraudulent means to unload it. In a common scenario, the builder has difficulty selling property and offers an incentive of a mortgage with no down payment. For example, a builder wishes to sell a property for $200,000. He inflates the value of the property to $240,000 and finds a buyer. The lender funds a mortgage loan of $200,000 believing that $40,000 was paid to the builder, thus creating home equity. However, the lender is actually funding 100 percent of the home’s value. The builder acquires $200,000 from the sale of the home, pays off his building costs, forgives the buyer’s $40,000 down payment, and keeps any profits. If the home forecloses, the lender has no equity in the home and must pay foreclosure expenses.

Builder-bailout schemes continue to be problematic in the current distressed market in which builder inventory is increasing while demand is decreasing. These schemes typically consist of builders offering excessive incentives to buyers, which are not disclosed on the mortgage loan documents. Recent modifications to this scheme involve
condominium-conversion, and “pump and pay” scheme.

Builder-Bailout - Condominium Conversion

Individuals are participating in builder-bailout and property flipping schemes using apartment complexes that were converted into condominium developments. During the housing boom, many apartment complexes were purchased by developers and contractors and converted into condominiums. When the housing market began to decline, developers had excess inventory of units that they could not sell. They began to offer incentives such as cash-back at closing and paid condominium association dues to encourage investors to purchase units within the newly established developments. Since the buyers purchased the condos as investment properties, they were not owner-occupied. The developers and contractors claimed that they would find people to rent the condos, would oversee the management of the complex, and would collect rent from the tenants. These schemes often target investors interested in low to no-risk investment properties. Perpetrators of these schemes typically inflate the value of the condominium to obtain a larger sales price to offset the cost of the incentives.

Builder-Bailout - Pump and Pay

Builders in Florida, North Carolina, California, Texas, and various other locations throughout the United States are working with co-conspirators to inflate the appraised value of their properties. This false equity is distributed to the perpetrators and disguised as set-asides for future maintenance, insurances, and tax payments on the property.

Foreclosure Rescue Schemes

Foreclosure rescue schemes are often used in association with advance fee/loan modification program schemes. The perpetrators convince homeowners that they can save their homes from foreclosure through deed transfers and the payment of up-front fees. This “foreclosure rescue” often involves a manipulated deed process that results in the preparation of forged deeds. In extreme instances, perpetrators may sell the home or secure a second loan without the homeowners’ knowledge, stripping the property’s equity for personal enrichment.

Foreclosure rescue schemes continue to be problematic, especially in the current distressed market in which more than 2.3 million properties were in foreclosure in 2008. These schemes typically consist of perpetrators soliciting homeowners in foreclosure and offering to “rescue” them from losing their home for a fee. Recent modifications to this scheme involve arson/insurance fraud, bankruptcy schemes, and loan modification program schemes.

Foreclosure Rescue - Arson

Homeowners, property flippers, and investors are committing arson to avoid real estate foreclosure. The insurance policy holder files a false insurance claim following the arson to extract illicit proceeds from the property to avoid foreclosure.

Foreclosure Rescue - Bankruptcy

Perpetrators are exploiting US Bankruptcy courts to defraud homeowners who are facing foreclosure.40 They are targeting distressed homeowners through Internet advertisements, newspapers, flyers, and through publicly available county foreclosure notices. They offer to provide the homeowner with assistance designed to prevent them from losing their home. They charge the homeowner an up-front fee, typically ranging from $200 to $1,000. In many instances, the perpetrators convince the homeowner to continue to make their monthly mortgage payment, but to direct the payment to the perpetrator. They also misguide the homeowner to cease any communication with the lender. The perpetrators direct the homeowner to complete the necessary paperwork which includes signing a bankruptcy petition. The perpetrator subsequently files the bankruptcy petition in the homeowner's name with either the signed petition or a forged petition.

The bankruptcy petition invokes the automatic stay, resulting in the imminent foreclosure being postponed, and the homeowner stops receiving collection calls and letters. Frequently, homeowners are unaware of the bankruptcy petition and believe that the perpetrators have fulfilled their obligation to prevent them from losing their home. The perpetrators further misinform the homeowners to ignore any court notices to appear at the bankruptcy hearing. However, when no one appears at the bankruptcy hearing, the foreclosure process begins again.

In a variation of this scheme, the perpetrators convince the homeowner to “quit-claim” the property to the perpetrator or to sell the property for a nominal fee, usually $1. The perpetrators charge the homeowner rent until the mortgage problems are resolved. After which, the homeowner is able to repurchase the property or share the profits if the perpetrator sells the property. In some property transfers, the homeowner is instructed to transfer only a fractional interest in the property to the perpetrator who then transfers that interest to another individual or entity (often fictitious). Often, the fractional interest is transferred numerous times as the automatic stays are lifted, which delays foreclosure for months and generates additional proceeds for the perpetrators. According to the Executive Office of US Trustees, one residential property was linked to 24 different bankruptcy cases.

Foreclosure Rescue - Loan Modification Program Schemes

Loan modification schemes, typically in the form or an advance-fee/foreclosure rescue scheme, are emerging as recent vulnerabilities in HERA and EESA legislation becomes apparent. Lenders are mandated by recent legislation to work with homeowners to assist them in keeping their homes out of foreclosure; however, individuals are perpetrating advance-fee schemes to generate income from victim homeowners. Perpetrators solicit homeowners with mail flyers offering to help them stop the foreclosure process on their homes. Homeowners are falsely told that their mortgages would be renegotiated, their monthly payments would be reduced, and delinquent loan amounts would be renegotiated to the principle. Perpetrators require an up-front fee ranging from $1,500 to $5,000 from homeowners to participate in the loan-modification program. Perpetrators often request that the victim homeowners stop payments and communication with their lender. When victims receive delinquency and foreclosure notices, the perpetrators convince them that the loan was renegotiated, but that the lender needs a good faith payment to secure the new account.

Serial Property Flipping

Illegal property flipping continues to be a significant scam identified by both industry and law enforcement agencies. Perpetrators are taking advantage of the distressed housing market and repeatedly flipping the same property numerous times.

Short-Sale Schemes

Short-sale schemes are desirable to mortgage fraud perpetrators because they do not have to competitively bid on the properties they purchase, as they do for foreclosure sales. Perpetrators also use short sales to recycle properties for future mortgage fraud schemes. Short-sale fraud schemes are difficult to detect since the lender agrees to the transaction, and the incident is not reported to internal bank investigators or the authorities. As such, the extent of short sale fraud nationwide is unknown. A real estate short sale is a type of pre-foreclosure sale in which the lender agrees to sell a property for less than the mortgage owed. In a typical short sale scheme, the perpetrator uses a straw buyer to purchase a home for the purpose of defaulting on the mortgage. The mortgage is secured with fraudulent documentation and information regarding the straw buyer. Payments are not made on the property loan causing the mortgage to default. Prior to the foreclosure sale, the perpetrator offers to purchase the property from the lender in a short-sale agreement. The lender agrees without knowing that the short sale was premeditated. The mortgage owed on the property often equals or exceeds 100 percent of the property’s equity.

Short sale fraud schemes continue to be used in combination with foreclosure rescue schemes in an effort to victimize homeowners and financial institutions. Perpetrators across the country are recruiting real estate agents and paying them referral fees for locating and soliciting homeowners undergoing foreclosure. Homeowners are entering into agreements with perpetrators deeding their property to them in the form of a land trust. The homeowner is listed as the beneficiary of the trust and the real estate agent is listed as the trustor. The perpetrators then negotiate a short sale with the lender. After the short sale, the real estate agent sells the property for a profit to another previously identified buyer, but the lender and the homeowner do not know this. In effect, the perpetrator sells the property for less than the mortgage and re-sells the property, often the next day, for a profit.


FBI REPORT - MORTGAGE FRAUD

The FBI issued its annual report on mortgage fraud, named Los Angeles the mortgage fraud capital of the US, with Miami coming in second. Chicago had been number one.

The report explained that mortgage fraud in 2008 reflected the overall downturn in the US economy, with the industry noting spikes in foreclosures and defaults, while financial markets continued to contract. That served to diminish credit to financial institutions, businesses, and homeowners.

"These combined factors," the report explained, "uncovered and fueled a rampant mortgage fraud climate fraught with opportunistic participants desperate to maintain or increase their current standard of living. Industry employees sought to maintain the high standard of living they enjoyed during the boom years of the real estate market and over-extended mortgage holders were often desperate to reduce or eliminate their bloated mortgage payments."

Monday, July 6, 2009

MORTGAGE FRAUD - HOW TO AVOID IT

from

The Newark Star Ledger

reprinted as fair use


by Lisa Fleisher

GLOSSARY

mortgage: Loan used to buy a home.

mortgage-backed security: Financial instrument that allows investors to buy shares in a fund that combines many mortgages into one pool.

straw buyer: Person named on mortgage documents but who is not really the intended homebuyer; often used when the actual buyer does not have good enough credit or high enough income.

equity: Money built up in the house by paying into the mortgage. For example, a person who made $100,000 in mortgage payments on a $300,000 loan has $100,000 in equity in the house.

shell company: Company set up for a single purpose. In our context, fraud.


WHY I SHOULD CARE

Mortgage fraud deflates property values across the board, destabilizes banks and
can ultimately put greater stress on our social safety nets by leaving victims destitute. Fraud often results in foreclosure, which pushes down neighboring home prices, can chip away at the town's tax base and strains municipal resources.


TYPES OF MORTGAGE FRAUD

INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT FRAUD

Method: Perhaps the most prevalent, either homeowners lie about their income or loan brokers coerce or flat-out falsify documents to get a loan approved.

Result: Homeowners end up with loans they can't afford.


REVERSE MORTGAGE FRAUD

Method: Elderly people who might have lost retirement funds sometimes turn to a reverse mortgage, which allows them to take a new mortgage out on a house they've already paid off. While this is sometimes a helpful tool, industry watchers and government officials warn about people charging sky-high fees.

Result: Elderly people are either cheated by high fees or, in worst-case scenarios, lose their house because they signed documents they did not understand.


PHANTOM HELP

Method: A type of foreclosure rescue scam in which a fraudster collects an upfront fee from homeowners trying to save their homes from foreclosure -- and then disappears.

Result: Criminals do nothing and pocket the fee.


MORTGAGE-RELATED IDENTITY THEFT

Method: Perpetrators use stolen identities to buy properties outright or take out mortgages.

Result: Victims find out they are on the hook for mortgages and loans.


SHORT SALE FRAUD

Method: A buyer colludes with real estate agents or others to give faulty appraisals to banks and convinces them a property is worth less than it is.

Result: Banks are defrauded and surrounding property values can drop.


BAIT AND BUMP

Method: Lenders or brokers dangle attractive loans in front of desperate homeowners. But when it comes time to close, buyers are told it's too late to switch.

Result: New homeowners are left with mortgages they can't pay or end up signing away their homes.


EQUITY STRIPPING OR SKIMMING

Method: There are several definitions for this, one of which is synonymous with lease buy-back (see below). Another iteration is when a fraudster convinces people to invest in or buy properties, using their credit to get loans for inflated property values, but walks away.

Result: Investor or group of investors is left with properties, which often have been neglected and have gone into foreclosure.


LEASE BUY-BACK

Method: Homeowners facing foreclosure sign over the deed to a company or individual who promises to sell it back after a year, during which the homeowners can get their finances in order. In the meantime, they are told they will be allowed to rent the house.

Result: The scammer evicts the original homeowner-turned-renter and keeps or sells the property.


HOW DO I AVOID BECOMING A VICTIM?

• Be skeptical of people who make unsolicited contact.

• Don't hesitate to ask as many questions as you need until you understand what you are signing.

• Don't sign blank forms.

• Check to make sure your name is correct on documents and matches your identification.

• Check mortgage agent, real estate agent and lawyer's certifications through state agencies.

• Review the value of the home by comparing it with others nearby, and go over the sales history of the home to see whether the value has been inflated through multiple sales.

• Remember, if it's too good to be true, it probably is.


SEC HAD BEEN WARNED ON MADOFF

from

The Washington Post

reprinted as fair use



Lawyer Raised Alarm, Then Was Pointed Elsewhere

By Zachary A. Goldfarb

An investigator at the Securities and Exchange Commission warned superiors as far back as 2004 about irregularities at Bernard L. Madoff's financial management firm, but she was told to focus on an unrelated matter, according to agency documents and sources familiar with the investigation.

Genevievette Walker-Lightfoot, a lawyer in the SEC's Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations, sent e-mails to a supervisor, saying information provided by Madoff during her review didn't add up and suggesting a set of questions to ask his firm, documents show. Several of these questions directly challenged Madoff activities that much later turned out to be elements of his massive fraud.

But with the agency under pressure to look for wrongdoing in the mutual fund industry, she wasn't able to continue pursuing Madoff, according to documents and two people familiar with the investigation, and her team soon concluded its work on the probe.

Walker-Lightfoot's supervisors on the case were Mark Donohue, then a branch chief in her department, and his boss, Eric Swanson, an assistant director of the department, said two people familiar with the investigation. Swanson later married Madoff's niece, and their relationship is now under review by the agency's inspector general, who is examining the SEC's handling of the Madoff case.

Madoff confessed in December to running "a giant Ponzi scheme" worth potentially $50 billion, and he was sentenced Monday to 150 years in prison after victims told a judge about how Madoff had destroyed their lives. Authorities are continuing to investigate other people and firms that might have abetted the fraud.

The SEC's inability to detect Madoff's fraud was a high-profile embarrassment for the agency, which was already under scrutiny for the collapse of investment banks under its watch, helping fuel the financial crisis. SEC Chairman Mary L. Schapiro, who took over shortly after the Madoff case came to light, has acknowledged that the agency's performance was a failure, saying the SEC needed to improve enforcement and its surveillance of financial markets.

At least five times over nearly 20 years, the SEC has investigated Madoff's business, but it never discovered the tremendous fraud. In 2007, for instance, the agency reviewed his activities after warnings from a one-time rival, Harry Markopolos, that Madoff was probably running a Ponzi scheme.

Three years before, in early 2004, Walker-Lightfoot was assigned to examine Madoff's relationship with various hedge funds. The SEC suspected that Madoff may have been allowing the funds to trade ahead of his own trades, which would give them an unfair advantage.

The agency asked Madoff to turn over reams of information -- accounting statements, trade confirmations and other documents -- and told him to detail his strategy, called "split-strike conversion." Madoff told the SEC that he used sophisticated trading practices to buy and sell stocks, employing stock options as hedges to limit losses. He told investors he never lost money.

Walker-Lightfoot, a staff lawyer, had previously worked at the American Stock Exchange, where she developed an expertise in specialized trading strategies. When she reviewed the paper documents and electronic data supplied by Madoff, she found it full of inconsistencies, according to documents, a former SEC official and another person knowledgeable about the 2004 investigation.

For example, the standard industry practice was that a firm buying a security must pay for it -- or "settle" -- within three days. But Madoff's settlements were erratic. Sometimes he settled only a day later after the purchase, sometimes seven days later.

She was also focused on his claim that he was using the same strategy for all his investors, which would involve trading stocks and hedges at the same time. On review, he seemed to be following different approaches on different accounts.

Her concerns would later prove to be on the mark. Earlier this year, the Justice Department accused Madoff of fabricating his strategy, generating false account statements and trade confirmations, and lying to investigators.

In early March 2004, Walker-Lightfoot shared her concerns with her supervisors, said a former SEC official and another person aware of the conversation.

Donohue, who still works for the SEC, was not available to comment for this article, an agency spokesman said. Swanson, no longer with the agency, declined to comment.

In response to Walker-Lightfoot's concerns, Donohue asked her to describe what additional information she wanted from Madoff, a person familiar with the discussion said.

So she sent Donohue an e-mail with nine follow-up questions she wanted to ask Madoff's firm, documents show. Several focused on the unusual trading patterns she had noticed. Others touched more broadly on questions about how Madoff ran his business.

"Do you hold any other form of brokerage account statements or accounting documents for these accounts?" Walker-Lightfoot asked. "Do you have the prime brokerage or custodial banking agreements for these accounts?"

If pursued, these questions may have led to discovery of the fraud. That's because Madoff was in fact maintaining personal custody of investors' assets, unlike the practice followed by many investment companies. These firms use a third-party custodian to hold investors' funds, and that helps assure investors that their funds are where the companies say they are.

In a separate e-mail to Donohue later in March, Walker-Lightfoot put some of her suspicions in writing.

For instance, documents show, she detailed her findings on two accounts at Madoff's firm. One belonged to a hedge fund called Tremont and the other to a smaller hedge fund called Sway.

Madoff had told the SEC that all his accounts traded based on the same specific conditions. But in her e-mail, which she copied to colleague Jacqueline Wood, Walker-Lightfoot noted "significant differences between the Tremont and Sway account transactions." The variation in the dates of trades seemed to contradict a key part of his strategy and "does not make sense," she wrote.

She also flagged other doubts about Madoff's strategy. He was supposed to buy and sell stocks and then trade options as a hedge against any loss. But his financial records suggested that he often completed trades without the corresponding hedges or hedged without completing the corresponding trades. As she wrote, "the corresponding equity activity/or hedge restructuring" didn't occur. In reality, the later criminal complaint said, many of the trades never happened at all.

One month after Walker-Lightfoot raised her concerns, Donohue told her to focus on a separate probe into mutual funds, documents show. At the time, there was intense pressure to investigate this industry. The press and other regulators, such as then-New York Attorney General Eliot L. Spitzer, were challenging industry practices. About a dozen of her colleagues were already assigned to pursue the issue.

Walker-Lightfoot e-mailed Donohue, saying she was "not sure what you want [J]acqui [Wood] and I to do concerning Madoff, but I'm focusing on the mutual fund project, as requested." She asked, "Should we just focus on mutual funds and return to Madoff when we're done?"

The next morning, Donohue responded: "Concentrate on mutual funds for the time being."

A few weeks later, Donohue told Walker-Lightfoot to turn over her work on Madoff to Wood, according to a person familiar with the matter. Not long after that, the material was boxed by Wood for transfer, this person said.

Many of the people interviewed for this story, including current and former SEC officials, spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the agency's ongoing investigation into its handling of the Madoff case.

A spokesman at the law firm where Wood now works said she would be unavailable to comment.

Walker-Lightfoot's lawyer, Julie Grohovsky of Wheat Wu, declined to comment, except to say her client had been "a dedicated and exemplary SEC employee who had been uniquely qualified to work on the investigations conducted by the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations." Walker-Lightfoot left the SEC in 2006 after filing a complaint with the agency alleging that she'd been subjected to a hostile workplace. A person familiar with the complaint said it was settled in Walker-Lightfoot's favor.

SEC spokesman John Nester declined to comment, citing an ongoing investigation by the agency's inspector general, H. David Kotz.

Kotz said he is reviewing "all the circumstances surrounding the SEC's various examinations of Mr. Madoff, including the 2004 examination" and said he is interviewing more than 100 former and current SEC officials. He said he has reviewed Walker-Lightfoot's story. "While we are considering all information provided, it would be incorrect to assume that the OIG's final report or analysis of any particular examination or personnel decision will be based on the input of any single source," he said.

The investigation includes a review of Swanson's relationship with Madoff's niece, Shana. Kotz said earlier this year that he was looking into "allegations of conflicts of interest regarding relationships between any SEC officials and members of the Madoff family and whether such relationships in any way affected the manner in which the SEC conducted its regulatory oversight of Bernard Madoff."

Swanson married Shana Madoff in 2007. The SEC has said he worked on reviews related to Madoff in 1999 and 2004 but he never did while he was involved with his future wife. SEC officials are not permitted to work on matters that involve people with whom they're romantically linked.

Madoff boasted at a business roundtable discussion about his close relationship with SEC regulators, saying "my niece just married one."

In a letter this week to a congressional committee, Kotz recommended several steps to avoid a repeat of the Madoff debacle, including better oversight of auditors, independent custodians and bounty programs to encourage whistleblowers to come forward.

After Walker-Lightfoot's inquiry concluded, the Madoff investigation was transferred to the SEC's New York office, and the documents collected by the Washington office were shipped there. The Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations in Washington was too busy working on mutual funds and other cases deemed to be of higher priority, according to agency officials.

A New York team, building on the work done in Washington, then began looking into Madoff's firm, reporting in 2005 that it had found three violations of minor rules, officials said. The probe found no evidence of fraud. Madoff received a private deficiency letter from the agency, warning him to improve certain practices.

According to a person familiar with the matter, Walker-Lightfoot never was consulted on the case again.

Crackdown on Medicare fraud


from

Cabinet officials commenting on this week's trio of Medicare fraud crackdowns in Miami and other cities pushed an emerging two-pronged approach, focusing on fraud prevention as well as prosecutions.

The latest indictments -- exposing almost $200 million in Medicare scams involving HIV treatments, physical therapy and diabetic services -- follow a recently announced partnership between the Justice and Health and Human Services departments.

The agencies have expanded criminal ''strike forces'' that existed under the Bush administration, most recently to Detroit, but also have committed about half a billion dollars to fraud prevention efforts this year. They are working on sharing suspicious billing information with Medicare -- an agency notorious for paying claims fast without verifying them -- to help stop fraud and waste.

Experts estimate the huge entitlement program loses at least $60 billion to fraud every year, with Miami-Dade County at the center of the national crisis.

''The Obama administration is committed to turning up the heat on Medicare fraud and employing all the weapons in the federal government's arsenal to target those who are defrauding the American taxpayer,'' HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said during a news conference at the Justice Department with Attorney General Eric Holder.

''But our joint efforts don't just stop at the jailhouse door,'' she said. ``Every dollar we can save by stopping fraud can be used to strengthen the long-term fiscal health of Medicare, bring down costs and deliver better service to Medicare beneficiaries.''

The government's job will be anything but easy.

During the past five years, thousands of Medicare fraud offenders have shown that they can outsmart the vulnerable healthcare system for the elderly and disabled. Their weapons: cash kickbacks to Medicare patients, manipulation of medical records to justify bogus charges, and use of different billing codes to get around Medicare's technology to block false claims.

Consider the series of eye-opening criminal cases this week.

On Friday, FBI agents arrested eight Miami-Dade residents on charges of bilking Medicare for $22 million by charging for nurses to treat mostly homebound diabetic patients -- many of whom didn't have the disease or didn't receive the services.

FBI and HHS agents raided the suspects' two Miami-Dade businesses, ABC Home Health Care and Florida Home Health Care Providers, while prosecutors froze their bank accounts.

The prosecutions follow Medicare's suspension of billing privileges for 10 Miami-Dade home healthcare agencies that charged more than $100 million for suspicious services to treat homebound diabetic patients -- including false claims for nurses injecting their insulin shots twice a day.

Medicare issued the suspensions in October after finding that $1 of every $15 it spends on home healthcare nationwide is spent in one county: Miami-Dade. Medicare's total budget: $16.5 billion.

The situation in Miami-Dade has spun so out of control that Medicare's cost per home healthcare patient runs as high as $19,230, according to agency records. That's 30 times the average cost per homebound patient in Chicago: $635.

According to the indictment unsealed Friday, Gladys Zambrana, Enrique Perez and Alejandro Hernandez Quiros operated ABC Home Health Care, 8360 W. Flagler St., listing Javier Zambrana as the owner.

They submitted false claims for $17 million from January 2006 until December, with Medicare paying them $11.3 million -- mostly for treating homebound diabetic patients, authorities said.

Gladys Zambrana and Carlos Castaneda also operated Florida Home Health Care Providers, 4150 NW Seventh St., listing Vicenta Tellechea as the owner. They filed bogus charges for $5.5 million from October 2007 until March, authorities said. Medicare paid them $4 million -- again, mostly for homebound diabetic services.

The alleged racket ''would provide cash kickbacks to Medicare beneficiaries in exchange for [their] signing documents stating that they had received the home healthcare services,'' according to the indictment.

The indictment further alleges one medical assistant, Modesto Hidalgo, ``falsified blood tests and medical records to make it appear that legitimate home healthcare services were being provided.''

The eighth defendant, Vanessa Estrada, handled billing for the group's two home care agencies.

Earlier in the week, federal agents took down 53 Medicare fraud suspects in Miami, Detroit and other cities in a roundup of doctors, clinic owners and patients on charges of conspiring to defraud the government program of $56 million.

Multiple indictments, returned by a federal grand jury in Michigan, spotlighted HIV infusion and physical therapy that have been widespread in Miami and were transported to Detroit, the latest Medicare fraud hot spot.

The severity of the problem in Detroit prompted Holder, Sebelius and FBI Director Robert Mueller to hold the news conference Wednesday at the Justice Department.

And the previous day, agents broke up a Miami-based ring that allegedly schemed to defraud Medicare of $100 million by filing false claims for obsolete HIV therapy across five states. Two of the eight suspects have fled to Cuba.

The organization, which was paid $30 million by the federal health insurance program, exported a fraudulent local business enterprise to Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina and South Carolina by using empty storefronts and post office boxes, authorities said.

The alleged conspiracy exploited not only Medicare but also private insurers that administered the federal program under the Medicare Advantage plan.

''We will strike back against those whose fraudulent schemes not only undermine a program upon which 45 million aged and disabled Americans depend, but which also contribute directly to rising healthcare costs that all Americans must bear,'' Holder said.

Friday, July 3, 2009

ANOTHER SCAM EMAIL - FROM THE FBI?

A scam email, purporting to be from the FBI is making the rounds. And while it's difficult to imagine that anyone who speaks native English would fall for anything as obvious as this, it apparently works. So... a word to the wise ---


To: Undisclosed recipients:
Subject: Anti-Terrorist and Monitory Crimes Division.

Anti-Terrorist and Monitory Crimes Division.
Federal Bureau Of Investigation.
J. Edgar. Hoover Building, Washington D.C
Telephone Number: 202 324-3001

ATTN: BENEFICIARY.

This is to Officially inform you that it has come to our notice and we have thoroughly completed an Investigated with the help of our Intelligence Monitoring Network System that you are having an illegal transaction with Impostors claiming to be Prof. Charles C. Soludo of the Central Bank Of Nigeria,Mr. Patrick Aziza, none officials of Oceanic Bank, none officials of Zenith Bank and some impostors claiming to be the Federal Bureau Of Investigation agents.During our Investigation, it came to our notice that the reason why you have not received your payment is because you have not fulfilled your Financial Obligation given to you in respect of your Contract/Inheritance Payment.

So therefore, we have contacted the Federal Ministry Of Finance on your behalf and they have brought a solution to your problem by coordinating your payment in the total amount of $800.000.00 USD which will be deposited into an ATM CARD which you will use to withdraw funds anywhere of the world. You now have the lawful right to claim your funds which have been deposited into the ATM CARD.

Since the Federal Bureau of Investigation has been involved in this transaction, you are now to be rest assured that this transaction is legitimate and completely risk-free as it is our duty to Protect and Serve citizens of the United States Of America.

All you have to do is immediately contact the ATM CARD CENTER via E-mail for instructions on how to procure your Approval Slip which contains details on how to receive and activate your ATM CARD for immediate use to withdraw funds being paid to you. We have confirmed that the amount required to procure the Approval Slip will cost you a total of $296 USD which will be paid directly to the ATM CARD CENTER agent via Western Union Money Transfer /MoneyGram Money Transfer.

Below, you shall find contact details of the Agent whom will process your transaction from Federal Minister of Finance:

CONTACT INFORMATION FEDERAL MINISTER OF FINANCE.
ATM CARD CENTRE
NAME: MR. PAUL SMITH
EMAIL: federalministryoffinancefmf@ymail.com

Immediately contact Mr. Paul Smith of the ATM Card Centre with the following information:
Full Name:............................................................................ ......................................
Address: ............................................................................ .........................................
City: ............................................................................ ...............................................
State: ............................................................................ ............................................
Zip Code: ............................................................................ ......................................
Direct Phone Number: ............................................................................ ..................
Current Occupation: ............................................................................ .....................
Annual Income: ............................................................................ ...........................

Once you have sent the required information to Mr. Paul Smith he will contact you with instructions on how to make the payment of $296 USD for the Approval Slip after which he will proceed towards delivery of the ATM CARD without any further delay. You have hereby been authorized/guaranteed by the Federal Bureau Of Investigation to commence towards completing this transaction, as there shall be NO delay once payment for the Approval Slip has been made to the authorized agent. Once you have completed payment of $296 to the agent in charge of this transaction, immediately contact us back for more investigation for conformation of your ATM card. Should in case you need any more informations in regards to this notification, feel free to get back to us so that we can brief you more as we are here to guide you during and after this project has been completely perfected and you have received your ATM CARD. Thank you very much for your anticipated co-operation in advance as we earnestly await your urgent response to this matter.
Federal Bureau Investigation
Robert S. Mueller Director, FBI
Telephone Number: ( 202 ) 324-3001
Contact us at: rm.usafbi@gmail.com

$231 million set for Madoff fraud victims

The court appointed trustee acting in the Bernard Madoff affair, Irving Picard, says he has set aside $231 million to compensate victims. He also says he has only processed 543 claims --- out of a total of 10,000 --- brought by former Madoff clients, who are owed almost $3 billion. The announced $231 million is the maximum that can be covered through the Securities Investors Protection Corp (SIPC) which guarantees brokerage accounts for a maximum $500,000.

DAVIS TO PLEAD GUILTY-STRIKES DEAL WITH PROSECUTORS

from The Houston Chronicle

reprinted as fair use

Former Stanford CFO to plead guilty


By KRISTEN HAYS

The first guilty plea in the Stanford Financial Group scandal will come from the company’s No. 2 man.

Former finance chief James Davis, 60, has struck a deal with the government to plead guilty to the three fraud and conspiracy counts pending against him and help prosecutors build cases against R. Allen Stanford, chairman and sole shareholder of the fallen empire, and five others accused of helping run a $7 billion fraud.

David Finn, Davis’ lawyer, confirmed the plea agreement Wednesday. It was expected, since Finn had said for months his client was cooperating with investigators.

He said Davis will likely plead not guilty at his first appearance before a U.S. magistrate July 13 for procedural reasons, such as allowing prosecutors time to inform victims of their right to be heard at the plea hearing before senior U.S. District Judge David Hittner.

“But when we appear in district court, we will accept responsibility and change the plea,” Finn said. “We continue to cooperate as of this moment.”

Finn said in March that his client was “devastated” and felt “very badly” for people hurt by alleged fraud at the crumbled firm.

But while the plea deal wasn’t a surprise, the move likely severs any ties that were left between Stanford and Davis, whose relationship dates back decades. According to the Securities and Exchange Commission, they were roommates at Baylor University in the early 1970s, and later joined in business.

Case dates to February

The SEC filed a civil fraud complaint in February against Stanford, Davis and former chief investment officer Laura Pendergest-Holt.

In an interview with the Houston Chronicle in April, Stanford vehemently disputed the government’s allegation that Stanford Financial Group was essentially the front for a massive Ponzi scheme operated through certificates of deposit at Stanford International Bank in the Caribbean island nation of Antigua and Barbuda.

He insisted he didn’t know details of how his company handled billions in investor money but that Davis oversaw investment decisions for the largest portion of the portfolio — the part prosecutors say lay at the center of the alleged fraud.

Dick DeGuerin, Stanford’s lawyer, said Wednesday that Davis was a trusted officer at Stanford’s global firm, with broad authority to act on behalf of various companies within.

“If Mr. Davis committed crimes, it was without the knowledge or approval of Allen Stanford, and Mr. Davis will have to answer for those crimes,” DeGuerin said. “It is human nature for a criminal to try to shift the blame for his own conduct in order to make a deal with the prosecution for a lesser sentence and to escape full responsibility for his crimes.”

Victim feels no comfort

Angie Shaw, a member of the Stanford Victims Coalition, said Wednesday that she and others gain scant comfort from the criminal proceedings. A quicker response to red flags years ago could have saved much financial heartache to investors reeling at the loss of savings they thought were safe, she said.

Stanford is the only defendant in jail. Hittner this week revoked a magistrate’s order allowing Stanford’s release on bail, deeming him a flight risk. Stanford is housed at the Joe Corley Detention Center in Conroe, a private federal lockup. DeGuerin plans to appeal to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Hittner’s decision denying bail.

Also named in the Houston indictment, which alleges multiple counts of fraud and conspiracy, are Pendergest-Holt, the firm’s chief investment officer; Gilberto Lopez, chief accounting officer; Mark Kuhrt, global controller; and Leroy King, the former top financial services regulator in Antigua, who is accused of taking bribes for limiting scrutiny of the bank.

Bruce Perraud, former global security specialist, was indicted in Miami on charges of shredding records.

Davis was named in a separate criminal information filed in Houston rather than an indictment.

Pendergest-Holt was initially charged in February with obstructing an SEC proceeding for allegedly lying to investigators about what she knew about Stanford’s investment portfolio. Her attorney, Dan Cogdell, said she will be exonerated if Davis tells the truth, and if he doesn’t, her lawyers will “happily” seek the truth when allowed to question him under oath.

kristen.hays@chron.com

Wednesday, July 1, 2009

INDICTMENTS IN MASSIVE PR TAX FRAUD SCAM

Indictments have now been handed down against 11 defendants in a massive ID/tax fraud scam run out of Puerto Rico.

According to the US government: "From approximately 2006 through 2008, the defendants engaged in a scheme to file false and fraudulent federal and state tax returns seeking tax refunds, using identification information of residents of Puerto Rico. Residents of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico typically do not file tax returns with the IRS because such filing is not required as long as all of the Puerto Rico resident’s income is derived from sources in Puerto Rico. By using Social Security numbers assigned to residents of Puerto Rico, participants in the scheme, among other things, minimized the risk that a legitimate federal tax return will already have been filed by the person whose identity has been stolen. Over the course of the scheme, more than $18 million in fraudulent federal and state tax refunds were sought from the IRS, NYSDTF, and other state tax authorities."