Lionheart Group Scam Prevention Toolkit

Archive for 'Scams'

Regulator Puts an End to Chikita’s Tactics of Online Advertising That Deceived Consumers Who Wanted to "Opt Out" from Targeted Ads

March 14th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Chitika Inc.’s Opt-Out Expired After Only 10 Days The FTC reached a settlement with online advertising company Chitika, Inc. that ends the company’s allegedly deceptive practice of tracking consumers’ online activities even after they have chosen to opt out of online tracking on Chitika’s website. The FTC investigated Chitika as part of its ongoing efforts to protect consumers’ privacy online. Chitika, whose website states that it delivers three billion ad impressions a month, acts as a go-between for websites and advertisers. According to the FTC complaint, Chitika buys ad space on websites and contracts with advertisers to place small text files called cookies on those websites. Chitika also uses a technique known as behavioral advertising – by placing “cookies” on consumers’ computer browsers, the company tracks consumers’ activities on the web, including searches the consumer has conducted and sites the consumer has visited. Based on consumers’ online activities, the company then displays ads to them that correlate to their interests. The FTC alleged that in its privacy policy the company says that it collects data about consumers’ preferences, but allows consumers to opt out of having cookies placed on their browsers and receiving targeted ads. The privacy policy includes an “Opt-Out” button. Consumers who click on it activate a message that states, “You are currently opted out.” According to the FTC complaint, from at least May 2008 through February 2010, Chitika’s opt-out lasted only 10 days. After that time, Chitika placed tracking cookies on browsers of consumers who had opted out and targeted ads to them again. The FTC charged Chitika’s claims about its opt-out mechanism were deceptive and violated federal law. The settlement bars Chitika from making misleading statements about the extent of data collection about consumers and the extent to which consumers can control the collection, use or sharing of their data. It requires that every targeted ad include a hyperlink that takes consumers to a clear opt-out mechanism that allows a consumer to opt out for at least five years. It also requires that Chitika destroy all identifiable user information collected when the defective opt out was in place. In addition, the settlement requires that Chitika alert consumers who previously tried to opt out that their attempt was not effective, and they should opt out again to avoid targeted ads. Source: FTC In the Matter of Chitika, Inc., a corporation FTC File No. 1023087

Guerrilla Guide for Dealing with Bad Companies – Consumer EECB’s and other Fun and Rewarding Tactics

March 12th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

The Guerrilla guide for dealing with bad companies – consumer EECB’s and other fun and rewarding tactics is a concise and definitive guide on how to get bad companies to do the right thing. I like to think of myself as a laid-back, easygoing person. There are few things in life that get my dander up, bad companies that ignore me as a consumer is at the top of the list. Like me, you probably have bought a product or service that did not live up to expectations, or was broken quickly. Most companies will give you a hand and take care of the problem, sometimes even out of warranty. However, there are many companies, large and small, that believe the customer relationship ends after the sale and drag their feet or ignore consumer’s complaints afterwards. This guide shows you how to get satisfaction when all else fails. Available on Kindle and Nook Readers and instant download PDF

Is American Express Violating the Credit Repair Organizations Act Using A Debt Collection Letter?

March 8th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Last month I received and unusual letter from American Express Centurion Bank offering me a chance to repair my credit, by them offering a credit card, if I pay an alleged debt. I do believe this “offer” is an unfair and deceptive act that may violate the Credit Repair Organizations Act by promising to improve my credit. The letter gets even funnier, further down in the letter they use a carefully worded phrase (after offering me a new credit card) that states, “After you pay your balance in full we will send you a pre-qualified application for a new Optima card”.

Man Can Sue for FDCPA Violation – Debt Collector Filed Suit in Wrong Jurisdiction

March 8th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Jonathan Hess of Clay New York won the right to peruse debt collection law firm Cohen & Slamowitz for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Cohen & Slamowitz filed a collection lawsuit against Mr. Hess in an improper jurisdiction. The U.S. Court of Appeals in New York reversed a lower courts ruling which allows Mr. Hess to continue his FDPCA lawsuit against the law firm. “The initial lawsuit against Hess was filed in Syracuse City Court by Woodbury-based Cohen & Slamowitz on behalf of Midland Funding. Hess hired lawyer Anthony Pietrafesa, who challenged the lawsuit on jurisdictional grounds because none of the parties resided in Syracuse or a contiguous town as required by law.” ~ Syracuse.com Debt collectors must file debt lawsuits in the judicial district in which the defendant resides. Failure to properly files in the proper venue and jurisdiction should result in a dismissal of such lawsuits. In my opinion the filing of a lawsuit in an improper jurisdiction could quite possibly be a violation of the FDCPA, as it is false or misleading.

If you paid a "reimbursable repair" for a Dell Inspiron Notebook model 1150, 5100, or 5160, a class action lawsuit may affect your rights.

March 3rd, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

What is this lawsuit about? The Plaintiffs said that Dell acted deceptively in designing, manufacturing, marketing, selling, and servicing the Inspiron 1150, 5100, and 5160. The Plaintiffs also said that at the time it sold these computers, Dell knew they contained three common defects that could cause premature failure: (1) inadequate cooling systems (2) a power supply system that prematurely fails when used as intended and (3) motherboards that prematurely fail when used as intended. Dell denies wrongdoing or liability of any kind associated with the claims brought by the Plaintiffs, and has agreed to settle the case for the sole purpose of avoiding the uncertainties, expenses, and time of further litigation. How do I know if I am part of the Settlement? The Court has decided that everyone who fits this description is a Class Member: All individuals and entities in the United States who own or have owned a Dell Inspiron 1150, 5100, or 5160 notebook computer. How much would my payment be? We do not know how much your payment would be at this time. The amount of your payment will be based on which model laptop you own or owned, whether the repair was a Reimbursable Repair performed by Dell or an ASP (Banctec or QualxServ), and when the repair took place. Can I get out of the Settlement? Yes. If you are a Class Member, you may exclude yourself from this case by sending a letter stating your name and address to the following address by December 6, 2010: Carideo Settlement Claims Administrator, c/o Analytics, Inc., P.O. Box 2009, Chanhassen, MN 55317-2009. Note that your letter must clearly state that you wish to be excluded from the Class. If you exclude yourself from the Class, you will not be eligible to participate in any aspect of the Settlement. How can I get a payment? If you own or have owned a Dell Inspiron 1150, 5100, or 5160 notebook computer that has undergone one of the Reimbursable Repairs described above, you may receive a refund in one of several ways: Dell will use information within its repair databases to determine those who paid for Reimbursable Repairs. The ICA will mail a Notice of Eligibility postcard to people who are entitled to an automatic refund under the Settlement. The Notice of Eligibility postcards will be mailed by December 6, 2010 If you receive such a Notice, you must confirm your mailing address with the ICA within thirty (30) days of receiving the Notice of Eligibility. If you confirm your address on time, you will receive your refund within ninety (90) days of the Notice of Eligibility or the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement, whichever is later. If you do not confirm your address with the ICA, you will not receive a refund. If you do not receive a Notice of Eligibility, it means you do not automatically qualify for a refund based on Dell’s repair databases and you must submit a claim form. Claim forms and instructions regarding submission of claims can be accessed through the Online Claim Submission button on the top of the screen. The claim form will ask you for (1) the Service Tag Number of your Inspiron 1150, 5100 or 5160; (2) an invoice, receipt or other documents showing your Inspiron 1150, 5100 or 5160 was serviced for a Reimbursable Repair by Dell or one of Dell’s ASPs (Banctec or QualxServ), and the amount paid for the Reimbursable Repair; and (3) a declaration under penalty of perjury confirming the truth of the claim. Follow the instructions on the claim form closely. If you no longer have documentation of a Reimbursable Repair and Dell’s database does not contain the necessary information related to such repairs, you may nonetheless submit a claim and Dell will cooperate in attempting to locate the necessary documentation. Under such circumstances you must submit a Claim Form including a written explanation of: (1) whether the relevant repair was performed by Dell or one of its ASPs (Banctec or QualxServ); (2) the date of the repair; (3) the reason for service; (4) a reason for why the proof of repair is not available; and (5) a description of your efforts to find the necessary documentation. Such claims must be made under oath, and are subject to the penalties for perjury. Claim forms may be submitted either online or by U.S. mail. If you have any questions, you may also contact the ICA toll-free by calling 1-866-890-4857 or emailing to carideosettlement@analytics-inc.com. You have until April 5, 2011 to send in a claim form seeking a refund under this Settlement. Claims will not be accepted if submitted online or postmarked after April 5, 2011. When would I get my payment? You will not be paid until after the Court approves the Settlement and there is a Final Order and Judgment in the lawsuit. The Court will hold a hearing on December 17, 2010 to decide whether to approve the Settlement.

Kudos to Attorney David Larson for Targeting Debt Collector Portfolio Recovery

March 1st, 2011. Published under Scams. No Comments.

Portfolio Recovery Associates (stock ticker PRAA)

Stick It Book Reader Gets Portfolio Recovery Debt Collection Lawsuit Dismissed with Prejudice

February 25th, 2011. Published under Scams. No Comments.

It warms my heart when a

Been Sued by Debt Collector Midland Funding LLC? You May Can Get Paid for Your Troubles

February 21st, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Encore Capital Group Inc (ECPG) that owns and operates Midland Funding LLC a junk debt buyer and collection company. In consumer advocacy and protection groups, Midland Funding is well known for aggressive collection tactics such as filing lawsuits against alleged debtors. In many cases the use of an affidavit of debt or account were submitted as evidence supporting Midland Funding’s complaints. The problem is that these ‘affidavits’ may have been flawed or false documents submitted before the court. Encore Capital Group has just recently agreed to settle all pending class-action lawsuits that allege the company used false or phony affidavits in lawsuits filed against consumers. “In the most prominent case, an Ohio federal judge ruled in 2009 that Encore violated federal and state laws by trying to collect credit-card debt using a fake affidavit. Encore disclosed its settlement of the Ohio suit on Monday in a Securities and Exchange Commission filing. Some regulators and judges have complained that documents submitted to courts by debt collectors as proof of what a borrower owes frequently are sloppy or fraudulent. The accounts bought by debt-collection firms often lack information about the underlying debts, such as contracts or payment histories, according to judges who rule on collection cases. “ ~ MarketWatch In addition, the Texas Attorney General recently ordered Encore Capital to produce documents in an ongoing investigation of the company and its subsidiaries, and its methods of collecting debts. What this means for individuals sued by Midland Funding? It means that consumers may have an option to reopen a case that Midland Funding brought against them and have it dismissed for possible perjury or fraud upon the court. This also means that any default judgment obtained or garnishment orders could be dismissed as well. I suggest that if you have been sued or in the process of being sued you may want to contact a consumer protection attorney or even proceed as a pro se litigant and look into have judgments overturned. While I am not an attorney, Encores business practices of using falsified affidavits may also run afoul of the Fair Debt Collection Practices (Act) for use of false or misleading means to collect a debt. Whatever the case may be, consumers sued by Midland Funding now have a tool in which to have judgments or garnishments overturned and quite possibly a strong FDCPA case against Midland Funding LLC.

Ambit Cap’s budget expectation low, bets on cap goods – Moneycontrol.com

February 21st, 2011. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Ambit Cap's budget expectation low, bets on cap goods Moneycontrol.com One is obviously domestic India and really the newsflow whether it's on the 2G scam or any of the scams, any skeletons coming out of the cover to shot the market, you can't really capture. But if this is worst of it then obviously that is in the market … and more

Business Opportunity Con Artist Surrenders Million-Dollar Las Vegas Home

February 12th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

After trying for years to keep assets he acquired while deceiving consumers with false promotions and bogus business opportunity pitches, a repeat offender has agreed to turn over his Las Vegas home, valued at over $1 million, and give up his appeal of the Federal Trade Commission’s case against him. The settlement announced today wraps up the FTC’s case against Richard C. Neiswonger, who twice has been held in contempt of court at the FTC’s request – first, for deceptively marketing business opportunities in violation of an earlier court order, and second, for failing to turn over assets to pay a multi-million-dollar judgment against him. In April 2007, a federal district court held Neiswonger, his business partner William S. Reed, and their firm, Asset Protection Group, Inc., in civil contempt for violating a 1997 court order that prohibited them from deceptively promoting business opportunities and failing to disclose material facts to consumers. The court banned Neiswonger from selling business opportunities to consumers and telemarketing. The court also entered a $3.2 million judgment against him – the amount of his ill-gotten gains – and required him to transfer the title of his Las Vegas home to a court-appointed receiver within 20 days if he failed to pay the judgment in full. Neiswonger never made the payment, and in September 2009, at the FTC’s request, the district court held him in contempt for a second time and ordered him to turn over the title to the house or face jail time. The court found that he had failed to deliver a marketable title to his home. Under the final settlement order, Neiswonger will surrender the house in Las Vegas, valued at more than $1 million. The order requires his wife, Shannon Neiswonger, and any other people living in the house to move out and turn it over for sale by a court-appointed receiver. It also requires the Neiswongers to dismiss all related appeals and release any claims they may have against the receiver or the FTC, and it directs the receiver to sell the house to help pay the judgment. The FTC previously obtained Neiswonger’s $379,000 retirement account to help pay the judgment as well. As part of the settlement, Shannon Neiswonger, who was not a defendant in the FTC action, will be paid $100,000 from the proceeds of the sale of the house, which she owned jointly with Richard Neiswonger. Source: FTC FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD C. NEISWONGER, individually, d/b/a “MARKETING SYSTEMS,” and as an officer of each corporate defendant; S&K GROUP, INC.; SHAPIRO, KOSSMEYER & FLOM PC d/b/a S&K GROUP, INC. and S&K PC; CARL F. KOSSMEYER, individually and as an officer of S&K Group, Inc., and Shapiro, Kossmeyer & Flom PC; MEDICAL RECOVERY SERVICE, INC. (Joliet, Illinois and Las Vegas, Nevada); NANCY FREEMAN, individually and as an officer of Medical Recovery Service, Inc.; and MARC FREEMAN, individually and as an officer of Medical Recovery Service, Inc., Defendants. (United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri) Civil Action No.: 4:96CV02225 SNL FTC File Nos.: 962 3134; X970012

See more here:
Business Opportunity Con Artist Surrenders Million-Dollar Las Vegas Home

State Warns of Bogus ‘Travel Emergency’ Scams – KTVZ

February 10th, 2011. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

State Warns of Bogus 'Travel Emergency' Scams KTVZ If it is a scam , encourage them to warn their contacts about the phony email. • When sending group emails always “bcc:” (blind carbon copy) your recipients. That way their names and email addresses are not visible after the email is sent. … and more

Vantec SATA / IDE to USB 2.0 Adapter Best 20 Bucks I Ever Spent

February 7th, 2011. Published under Scams. No Comments.

The Vantec SATA / IDE to USB 2.0 Adapter completely surprised me. To be honest I had not heard of Vantech prior to ordering this adapter. This adapter is a computer geeks (or IT guy) dream come true. Many times computer repair can be difficult, especially when we run across a dead computer that still has data on the hard drive. If you are lucky and have a machine close buy that will accept the drive you can often pull the data off. This is a clunky and often frustrating method to do so. The Vantec Adapter takes frustration out of the equation. The ‘kit’ comes with a 3-way interface adapter that supports all SATA hard drives, 3.5 inch IDE drives such as those found in laptops as well as 5.25 inch had drives found in desktop computer systems. The kit also comes with a switchable A/C power supply and adapter cable to power up hard drives.

Debt Collector Portfolio Recovery Associates Sending out Bogus IRS 1099-C’s to Consumers Again?

February 5th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

According to Budd Hibbs, a well-known consumer advocate, Junk debt buyer and debt collection company Portfolio Recovery Associates are sending out IRS form 1099-C’s to consumers. The problem is that Portfolio Recovery Associates (and other junk debt buyers) purchase old debts for a couple of pennies per dollar and then attempt to collect the full face value of the debt, even though they paid much less than face value. In my opinion if Portfolio Recovery is sending 1099-C’s to consumers claiming the full face value of a debt, they may be committing fraud on the consumers involved as well as committing fraud on the Internal Revenue Service. In effect they are writing off the full amount of the ‘forgiven’ debt’ and in reality only paid a small amount for the debt. Two years ago, we went to a Washington Post reporter who contacted the IRS regarding this matter. PRA must be able to produce some type of valid documents that make their claims credible, however based on their record of accomplishment; they likely have little or nothing to back up their claim. We contacted many attorneys and officials about this, we can expect that the Consumer Protection Financial Protection Board currently being set by Professor Elizabeth Warren will finally address the abuse and force PRA to comply with the law. Demand they send you documents that prove their claim or copies of accounts, signatures, goods provided, services rendered and all other information that connects your social security to their alleged loss. IMPORTANT: Once a 1099-C is issued, the law mandates that the debt can no longer be collected. This includes PRA selling it off to another vulture. They MUST show a zero balance on your credit report and are prohibited from extending the seven-year reporting statute. PRA cannot call you or send collection notices after a 1099-C has been issued. ~ Collectors Exposed I can’t for the life of me figure out why the IRS, or the Federal Trade Commission for that matter, allows junk debt buyers to get away with cheating the US government out of taxes that they write off and end up not paying in real taxes. It really does make me wonder about the entire debt collection industry in general. I guess if they have no fear of cheating consumers then they have no fear of cheating our government either. For the full excerpt on Portfolio Recovery Associates and “Bogus” 1099-C mailing click here .

Consumer Beats Debt Collectors Zwicker and Citibank in Court with the ‘Stick It’ Book

February 2nd, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Once again, justice is served for consumers. As I have often stated, most debt collection attorney’s, debt collectors, and junk debt buyers don’t have the proof that is needed to prove a consumer owes a debt. They still file frivolous lawsuits even they don’t have proper proof in the hopes of scaring a consumer into paying or that they are able to obtain a summary or default judgment. The biggest problem is that consumers are not aware of or are afraid of debt lawsuits and collectors. In as high as ninety percent of the cases get a judgment because the consumer did not respond or fight back and the plaintiffs were awarded a judgment. Just this morning I received an email from a read of ‘Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors’ and he said: “I bought your book a few months ago and used the information to fight Zwicker and Associates who was representing Citibank. Today I received a call from a representative at the law firm telling me that they have voluntarily dismissed the case! Thank you for the book and all your help.” ~ J Wright I tell countless consumers every day that in nearly ninety-five of debt lawsuits the plaintiff doesn’t have sufficient proof to get a judgment and that by fighting back (as outlined in my book) and a consumer can win against debt collectors. I receive emails every week from happy and relieved consumers that did fight back using the book and won. The tactics that I use to put debt collectors in place (in court) and the countless consumers I have helped with the book

Court Freezes Assets of Massive Internet Enterprise in Alleged Billing Scheme

January 28th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a federal court has frozen the assets of corporations and an individual behind a far-reaching Internet enterprise that allegedly made more than $275 million by luring consumers into deceptive “trial” memberships, and bogus government-grant and money-making schemes. The court froze the assets of 61 corporations (collectively known as “I Works”) and their alleged ringleader, Jeremy Johnson. It placed these defendants’ assets under the control of a court-supervised receiver to help ensure that funds are available for consumer restitution when the case is concluded. In December 2010, the FTC alleged that I Works lured consumers into “trial” memberships for bogus government-grant and money-making schemes, and then repeatedly charged monthly fees for these and other memberships the consumers never ordered. According to the FTC’s complaint, the operation used websites that pitch various money-making programs or tout the availability of government grants to pay personal expenses. The websites offer “free” information at no risk and ask consumers to provide their credit or debit card numbers to pay a small shipping and handling fee such as $1.99. But when consumers provide their billing information, I Works charges them a hefty one-time fee of up to $129.95 and monthly recurring fees of up to $59.95 for the advertised programs, and other monthly fees for unrelated programs. The FTC’s complaint alleges that this scheme has caused more than 500,000 consumers to seek chargebacks – reversals of charges to their credit cards or debits to their bank accounts. The high number of chargebacks landed the defendants in VISA’s and MasterCard’s chargeback monitoring programs, resulted in millions of dollars in fines for excessive chargebacks, and prevented the defendants from getting access to the credit card and debit card billing systems using their own names. To keep the scam going, the defendants tricked banks into giving them continued access to these billing systems by creating 51 shell companies with figurehead officers, and by providing the banks with phony “clean” versions of their websites. According to the FTC, the defendants, which include the 61 corporations, Johnson, and nine other individuals, violated the FTC Act by misrepresenting that government grants are available for paying personal expenses, that consumers are likely to obtain grants by using the defendants’ program, that users of their money-making products will earn substantial income, and that their offers are free or risk-free. The complaint also alleges that they failed to disclose that consumers who pay a nominal shipping and handling fee would be enrolled in expensive plans that charge fees until consumers cancel, and that they charged consumers’ credit cards and debited their bank accounts without their consent. The FTC further alleges that the defendants’ websites featured deceptive positive reviews and deceptive testimonials that misrepresented the benefits of their grant services. The FTC also alleges that they violated the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E by debiting consumers’ bank accounts without their signed written consent and without providing consumers with a copy of the written authorization.

Operator of Deceptive "Scareware" Scheme Will Pay More than $8 Million to Settle Charges

January 27th, 2011. Published under Scams. No Comments.

An operator of an online “scareware” scheme will pay more than $8 million to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that he used deceptive ads to trick consumers into thinking their computers were infected with malicious software, and then sold them software to “fix” their non-existent problem. As part of the FTC’s ongoing efforts to protect consumers from online scams, the agency cracked down on the scareware operation, filing a complaint against seven defendants who allegedly operated the scheme in 2008. The agency charged that the defendants did business using the company names Innovative Marketing, Inc. and ByteHosting Internet Services, LLC, operated using a variety of aliases, and maintained offices in various countries. The defendant whose settlement was announced today will be required to turn over $8 million in ill-gotten gains so it can be used to reimburse victims of the scam and will be barred from the deceptive practices In December 2008, at the request of the FTC, a U.S. district court ordered a halt to the massive scheme. According to the FTC’s complaint, the defendants falsely claimed that scans had detected viruses, spyware, and illegal pornography on consumers’ computers. The FTC alleged that the defendants conned more than one million consumers into buying their software products such as Winfixer, Drive Cleaner and Antivirus XP to remove the malware the bogus scans had supposedly detected. The FTC charged that the defendants used elaborate and technologically sophisticated Internet advertisements that they placed with advertising networks and many popular commercial websites. These ads displayed to consumers a “system scan” that invariably detected a host of malicious or otherwise dangerous files and programs on consumers’ computers. The bogus “scans” would then urge consumers to buy the defendants’ software for $40 to $60 to clean off the malware. Under the proposed settlement order, Marc D’Souza and his father, Maurice D’Souza, will give up $8.2 million in ill-gotten gains. The FTC alleged that Marc D’Souza was one of the key defendants behind the scam. It charged Maurice D’Souza as a relief defendant who did not participate in the scam, but allegedly profited from it. The order bans Marc D’Souza from any involvement with software that interferes with consumers’ computers. It also bars him from: making deceptive claims in connection with computer security software; using domain names registered with false information; and misrepresenting that he is authorized to act on behalf of third parties. The FTC wishes to thank the Canadian Competition Bureau for its invaluable assistance in this matter. Source: FTC Federal Trade Commission v. Innovative Marketing, Inc., also d/b/a Billingnow, BillPlanet PTE Ltd., Globedat, Innovative Marketing Ukraine, Revenue Response, Sunwell, Synergy Software BV, Winpayment Consultancy SPC, Winsecure Solutions, and Winsolutions FZ-LLC; ByteHosting Internet Services, LLC; James Reno, individually, d/b/a Setupahost.net, and as an officer of Bytehosting Internet Services, LLC; Sam Jain, individually, and as an officer of Innovative Marketing, Inc.; Daniel Sundin, individually, d/b/a Vantage Software and Winsoftware, Ltd., and as an officer of Innovative Marketing, Inc.; Marc D’Souza, individually, d/b/a Web Integrated Net Solutions, and as an officer of Innovative Marketing, Inc.; Kristy Ross, individually, and as an officer of Innovative Marketing, Inc., Defendants; and Maurice D’Souza, Relief Defendant (United States District Court for the District of Maryland) Civil Action No.: 08-CV-3233-RDB; FTC File No.: 072-3137

See the article here:
Operator of Deceptive "Scareware" Scheme Will Pay More than $8 Million to Settle Charges

Another Consumer Beats Debt Collector in Court Using The “Book”

January 24th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

I love receiving email from consumers who have purchased and used the information in the “Book”. By book, I am referring to the “’Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors” book. Just this morning I received yet another relieved consumer that battled a debt collection attorney in court, and won. “I have managed to win my motion to dismiss with the help of you book. Thanks! The original creditor’s lawyer showed up but I still won the motion to dismiss.” ~ B. Topol Many consumers are afraid of debt collection lawsuits and in the majority collection cases the consumer never shows up. Not showing up for a debt lawsuit is, in my opinion, worse than losing in court. If a consumer doesn’t show up to fight a collection lawsuit then the collector receive a default judgment and take money from a consumers paycheck, bank accounts or worse. In default judgments lawyers and collectors tend to tack on questionable fees and usurious interest. In nearly ninety-four percent of debt cases file, the consumer never shows up or responds. By far, the single largest issue is that consumers don’t fight back, and collection companies and attorney’s are betting on it. In upwards of ninety percent (90% folks, think about it) the collection company and/or collection attorney cannot prove a debt is owed. Another words, a consumer has nine out of ten chances to beat the collector or attorney. The odds of winning a debt collection lawsuit favors consumers, if they just show up and make the other side prove otherwise. Back before I wrote the book I nearly let debt collectors and their attorney take advantage of me in court. After seeing the questionable tactics they used in court, I became extremely angry and vowed to find a way to fight back and stick it to attorneys that file frivolous court cases. I have spent literally thousands of hours performing legal research and using what I learned in court. Bottom line my legal tactics and precedents work in nearly all collection cases, whether it be an original creditor or junk debt collector. Why should consumers let run roughshod over them and the legal system? They shouldn’t. Consumers can win against collection companies.

Self-Publishing – Glad I Didn’t Join Borders Get Published Bookbrewer – They Can’t Pay Publishers

January 22nd, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

I am self-published and my books can be found at most online bookstores and even in some ‘brick-and-mortar’ bookstores. I also sell my own eBook formats in my company’s store. When Borders announced their ‘Get Published powered by BookBrewer’, I was initially excited, as I wanted my books in the Borders online bookstore. I was initially turned off by the cost of $89.00 to publish an eBook (no print publishing offered). Other eBook retailers such as Amazon, Kobo, LuLu, Barnes & Noble and Smashwords do not charge anything to set up a book or for expanded distribution. If the $89.00 went towards paperback print publication, I might consider such a service. By the way, I use CreateSpace for print publishing, much cheaper and more flexibility, and higher royalty revenues. I received several emails late last year from Borders regarding their eBook publishing. However, the price kept me from exploring their service. I am glad now though that I did hesitate.

Seriously Who In Their Right Mind Would Buy a Windows 7 Phone?

January 18th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Over the years I have quite a bit of experience with Windows on computers and mobile devices. Nearly everyday I deal with hacked / Infected Windows machines. I constantly ask myself why in the world would anyone buy a Windows based phone. Microsoft seems to believe that Windows is a one-size fits all operating system. I myself believe that to be the contrary. While I haven’t personally used a Windows 7 phone, I can draw from previous experiences that the Windows 7 mobile operating system is as lackluster as Windows CE and Mobile. I’ve owned PDA’s with Windows CE, Tablet PC’s with XP Tablet Edition and have worked with web design clients that wanted their website to look the same as it does in a web browser on their Windows based mobile smartphones. Unless Microsoft has completely re-written the mobile browser it won’t hold a candle to other smartphone browsers. Microsoft Windows is the most targeted operating system for hackers and malware, virus, scareware purveyors. Another words Windows 7 phones will become yet another target of nefarious people. You can just about bet on that. I myself am tired of rebooting my computers and servers every month (sometimes several times a month) because of Windows updates and security patches. Why is it that I rarely every re-boot my Mac or Linux machines? Windows freezes up or bluescreens of death (BSOD’s) with almost clockwork regularity. I can just imagine multitudes of Windows 7 phone users having to pull the batteries out of their phones every couple of days to reboot their kitschy phones. Windows 7 mobile has an interesting and inviting interface, I am afraid though that is all it has going for it. Do yourself a favor and avoid anything running Microsoft Windows.

Read this article:
Seriously Who In Their Right Mind Would Buy a Windows 7 Phone?

Classic Closeouts LLC Who Illegally Charged Consumers’ Accounts Settles Lawsuit

January 13th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Defendants in an operation that the Federal Trade Commission alleged stole millions of dollars from consumers by making unauthorized charges and debits to their bank accounts have reached settlement agreements with the FTC. In Operation Short Change – a July 2009 crackdown on scammers taking advantage of the economic downturn to bilk vulnerable consumers through a variety of schemes – the FTC announced a complaint against Classic Closeouts LLC, its principal Daniel Greenberg, and several other defendants.

Legal Decisions to Use in FDCPA Lawsuits Against Debt Collectors

January 13th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

You’ve filed a lawsuit against a debt collector or law firm for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA). Chances are, in about 94% of FDCPA cases the defendant will attempt to settle soon after you file. However some collection agencies and law firms will fight you tooth and nail in court. With that being said the plaintiff in a FDCPA lawsuit needs legal precedents (legal decisions) to show the court in fact they have violated the law or to show prior causes for your filing of the FDCPA violation claims. The information below is a portion of Chapter Seven of my upcoming book ‘ Suing Abusive Debt Collectors – Don’t Get Mad, Get Even and Get Paid ’. If you would like to be notified when the book is published you may contact me here . Debt collection harassment comes in many forms: legal threats, physical threats, lack of disclosure, misleading or confusing consumers and many other forms of harassment are happening every day to consumers. Consumers MUST fight back to end debt collector harassment. The more collection agencies that are sued for violating a consumers rights the less likely it will occur in the future. Mind you the below are only the legal precedents, without explanations (detailed explanations will be included in

Settlement Ends "Tested Green" Certifications That Were Neither Tested Nor Green

January 12th, 2011. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

The Federal Trade Commission reached an agreement that will put an end to the deceptive tactics of a company that allegedly sold worthless environmental certifications for hundreds of dollars, and falsely told more than 100 customers that its certifications were endorsed by two independent firms – which it actually owned. The FTC settlement bars Tested Green and its owner Jeremy Ryan Claeys from making misrepresentations when selling any product. “It’s really tough for most people to know whether green or environmental claims are credible,” said David Vladeck, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection. “Legitimate seals and certifications are a useful tool that can help consumers choose where to place their trust and how to spend their money. The FTC will continue to weed out deceptive seals and certifications like the one in this case.” According to the FTC, between February 2009 and April 2010, Tested Green and Claeys advertised, marketed, and sold environmental certifications using both the website www.testedgreen.com and mass e-mails to prospective consumers. The company’s marketing claimed that Tested Green was the “nation’s leading certification program with over 45,000 certifications in the United States.” The FTC complaint alleges, however, that Tested Green never tested any of the companies it provided with environmental certifications, and would “certify” anyone willing pay a fee of either $189.95 for a “Rapid” certification or $549.95 for a “Pro” certification. After customers paid, Tested Green gave them its logo and the link to a “certification verification page” that could be used to advertise their “certified” status. The agency charged that the respondents violated the FTC Act by providing the means to deceive consumers. The FTC also alleges that Tested Green deceived consumers by citing its endorsements from the National Green Business Association and the National Association of Government Contractors – implying that these were independent organizations when, in fact, both are owned and operated by Claeys. The proposed order settles the FTC’s charges against Nonprofit Management LLC and Jeremy Ryan Claeys, both also doing business as Tested Green. It prohibits them from misrepresenting that: an outside party has evaluated a product, service, package, or program based on its environmental attributes; that they have or a third party has the expertise to evaluate the environmental benefits or attributes of a product, service, package, or program; the number of certifications they have issued; and that a product, package, certification, service, package, or program is endorsed by any person or organization. The order also bars Tested Green and Claeys from helping anyone else make false or misleading statements in connection with any of the conduct described above, and bars them from making any representations about a user or endorser unless they clearly and prominently disclose any connection they have with the endorser if one exists. The proposed order also contains reporting obligations and other provisions to ensure compliance with its terms. It will expire in 20 years. Source: FTC In the Matter of Nonprofit Management LLC, a limited liability corporation, also doing business as Tested Green, and Jeremy Ryan Claeys, also doing business as Tested Green, individually and as an officer and member of Nonprofit Management LLC FTC File No. 102 3064

More here:
Settlement Ends "Tested Green" Certifications That Were Neither Tested Nor Green

Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors Book Now Available in ePub, PDF, Kindle and Print

January 8th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors has save many a consumer from the clutches of abusive debt collectors and shady debt collection law firms is now available in ePub, PDF, Kindle format as well as paperback. Since being published last year, readers have given the book high ratings and reviews. Whether you owe a debt or not, this book will give you the tools that you need to get these lawyers off your back.

Questionable Debt Collectors and Consumer Scams in the News

January 6th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

I’ve been slacking a bit with publishing bad debt collector news and headlines. The holiday’s were busy as usual for me. With that Said I bring you the first ‘questionable’ debt collector in the news for the year. Also included in this article are news-worthy scams that consumers are falling for. Education of consumers is needed so that fewer fall for cons and scams, as well a fending

Oh Happy Days – FinallyFast.com Sued and Forced to Refund Consumers

January 5th, 2011. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

You’ve seen their television commercials claiming to scan and return your computer to full performance. Apparently with the “free” scan consumers got more than they bargained for, namely scareware that made consumer scramble to pay fees to FinallyFast.com (owned by Ascentive, which is another long story of consumer complaints). The Washington State Attorney General sued Ascentive LLC for violating the states spyware act, consumer protection act and the commercial electronic mail act for deceptive marketing practices.

Massive Internet Enterprise Charged with Scamming Consumers Out of Millions Billing Month-After-Month for Products and Services They Never Ordered

December 24th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

The Federal Trade Commission is taking legal action against a far-reaching Internet enterprise that allegedly has made millions of dollars by luring consumers into “trial” memberships for bogus government-grant and money-making schemes, and then repeatedly charging them monthly fees for these and other memberships that they never signed up for. The FTC seeks to stop the illegal practices and make the defendants pay redress to consumers and give up their ill-gotten gains. “No consumer should be sucker-punched into making payments for products they don’t know about and don’t want,” said FTC Chairman Jon Leibowitz. The FTC’s complaint alleges that the defendants offer consumers bogus money-making and government-grant opportunities. They claim that the offers are “free” or “risk-free,” and that they will charge customers only a small shipping and handling fee. According to the FTC’s complaint, the operation, doing business under the name I Works and controlled by Jeremy Johnson and nine other individuals, uses websites that tout the availability of government grants to pay personal expenses or pitch various money-making programs. The websites offer “free” information at no risk and ask consumers to provide their credit or debit card numbers to pay for a small shipping and handling fee such as $1.99. When consumers provide their billing information, though, I Works proceeds to charge them hefty one-time fees of up to $129.95 and monthly recurring fees of up to $59.95 for the grant or money-making programs. I Works charges them additional monthly fees for one or more unrelated programs that consumers did not agree to. The FTC’s complaint alleges that this scheme has caused hundreds of thousands of consumers to seek chargebacks – reversals of charges to their credit cards or debits to their banks accounts. The high number of chargebacks has landed the defendants in VISA’s and MasterCard’s chargeback monitoring programs, resulted in millions of dollars in fines for excessive chargebacks, and prevented the defendants from getting access to the credit card and debit card billing systems using their own names. To keep the scam going, the defendants tricked banks into giving them continued access to these billing systems by creating 51shell companies with figurehead officers, and by providing the banks with phony “clean” versions of their websites. The FTC has charged the defendants with violating the FTC Act by misrepresenting that government grants are available for paying personal expenses, that consumers are likely to obtain grants by using the defendants’ program, that users of their money-making products will earn substantial income, and that their offers are free or risk-free. The complaint also alleges that defendants failed to disclose that consumers who pay a nominal shipping and handling fee will be enrolled in expensive plans that charge consumers fees until they cancel, and that the defendants charged consumers’ credit cards and debited their bank accounts without their consent. In addition, the FTC alleges that defendants posted deceptive positive reviews and used deceptive testimonials that misrepresented the benefits of their grant services. Finally, the FTC has charged the defendants with violating the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and Regulation E by debiting consumers’ bank accounts without their signed written consent and without providing consumers with a copy of the written authorization. As alleged in the complaint, the defendants gained access to the Visa and MasterCard systems through many entities. The banks included Wells Fargo, N.A., HSBC Bank USA, First Regional Bank, Harris National Association, and Columbus Bank and Trust Company. The payment processors the defendants used included First Data, ECHO, Global Payment Systems, Litle & Co., Moneris, Payment Tech, Trident, and Vital, as well as independent sales organizations, including CardFlex, RDK Inc., Merchant eSolutions, Pivotal Payments, PowerPay, and Swipe Merchant Solutions. The FTC complaint names 10 individuals, 10 corporations, and 51 shell companies as defendants. As alleged in the complaint, the lynchpin of the enterprise is Jeremy Johnson, the sole owner and officer of I Works Inc., which has done business under numerous names. The FTC’s complaint names Johnson and nine other individual defendants: Duane Fielding; Andy Johnson; Loyd Johnston; Scott Leavitt; Scott Muir; Bryce Payne; Kevin Pilon; Ryan Riddle; and Terrason Spinks. In addition, the 10 corporate defendants are: I Works Inc.; Anthon Holdings Corp.; Cloud Nine Marketing Inc.; CPA Upsell Inc.; Elite Debit Inc.; Employee Plus Inc.; Internet Economy Inc.; Market Funding Solutions Inc.; Network Agenda LLC; and Success Marketing Inc. The 51 shell companies named in the complaint are Big Bucks Pro Inc., Blue Net Progress Inc., Blue Streak Processing Inc., Bolt Marketing Inc., Bottom Dollar Inc., doing business as BadCustomer.com, Bumble Marketing Inc., Business First Inc., Business Loan Success Inc., Cold Bay Media Inc., Costnet Discounts Inc., CS Processing Inc., Cutting Edge Processing Inc., Diamond J. Media Inc., Ebusiness First Inc., Ebusiness Success Inc., Ecom Success Inc., Excess Net Success Inc., Fiscal Fidelity Inc., Fitness Processing Inc., Funding Search Success Inc., Funding Success Inc., GG Processing Inc., GGL Rewards Inc., Highlight Marketing Inc., Hooper Processing Inc., Internet Business Source Inc., Internet Fitness Inc., Jet Processing Inc., JRB Media Inc., Lifestyles For Fitness Inc., Mist Marketing Inc., Money Harvest Inc., Monroe Processing Inc., Net Business Success Inc., Net Commerce Inc., Net Discounts Inc., Net Fit Trends Inc., Optimum Assistance Inc., Power Processing Inc., Premier Performance Inc., Pro Internet Services Inc., Razor Processing Inc., Rebate Deals Inc., Revive Marketing Inc., Simcor Marketing Inc., Summit Processing Inc., The Net Success Inc., Tranfirst Inc., Tran Voyage Inc., Unlimited Processing Inc., and Xcel Processing Inc. The Commission vote to file the complaint was 5-0. The complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada. Source: Federal Trade Commission Federal Trade Commission v. Jeremy Johnson, individually, as officer of Defendants I Works, Inc., Cloud Nine, Inc., CPA Upsell, Inc., Elite Debit, Inc., Internet Economy, Inc., Market Funding Solutions, Inc., and Success Marketing Inc.; as a member of Defendant Network Agenda, LLC; and as the de facto principal of numerous Defendant Shell Companies identified below; Duane Fielding, individually and as an officer of Anthon Holdings, Inc., and as a member of Defendant Network Agenda LLC; Andy Johnson, individually and as a manager of I Works, Inc., and as titular principal of numerous Defendant Shell Companies identified below; Loyd Johnston; Scott Leavitt; Scott Muir; Bryce Payne; Kevin Pilon; Ryan Riddle; Terrason Spinks; I Works, Inc.; Anthon Holdings Corp.; Cloud Nine Marketing, Inc.; CPA Upsell, Inc.; Elite Debit, Inc.; Employee Plus, Inc.; Market Funding Solutions, Inc.; Network Agenda, LLC; Success Marketing, Inc.; Big Bucks Pro, Inc.; Blue Net Progress, Inc.; Blue Streak Processing, Inc.; Bolt Marketing, Inc.; Bottom Dollar, Inc., d/b/a BadCustomer.com; Bumble Marketing, Inc.; Business First, Inc.; Business Loan Success, Inc.; Cold Bay Media, Inc.; Costnet Discounts, Inc.; CS Processing, Inc.; Cutting Edge Processing, Inc.; Diamond J Media, Inc.; EBusiness First, Inc.; EBusiness Success, Inc.; ECom Success, Inc.; Excess Net Success, Inc.; Fiscal Fidelity, Inc.; Fitness Processing, Inc.; Funding Search Success, Inc.; Funding Success, Inc.; GG Processing, Inc.; GGL Rewards, Inc.; Highlight Marketing, Inc.; Hooper Processing, Inc.; Internet Business Source, Inc.; Internet Fitness, Inc.; Jet Processing, Inc.; JRB Media, Inc.; Lifestyles for Fitness, Inc.; Mist Marketing, Inc.; Money Harvest, Inc.; Monroe Processing, Inc.; Net Business Success, Inc.; Net Commerce, Inc.; Net Discounts, Inc.; Net Fit Trends, Inc.; Optimum Assistance, Inc.; Power Processing, Inc.; Premier Performance, Inc.; Pro Internet Services, Inc.; Razor Processing, Inc.; Rebate Deals, Inc.; Revive Marketing, Inc.; Simcor Marketing, Inc.; Summit Processing, Inc.; The Net Success, Inc.; Tranfirst, Inc.; Tran Voyage, Inc.; Unlimited Processing, Inc.; Xcel Processing, Inc., Defendants. (United States District Court for the District of Nevada) Case No. 2:10-cv-02203 FTC File No. 102 3015

My Personal Battle With Google Books

December 22nd, 2010. Published under Scams. No Comments.

When Google first announced that indie publishers (such as our company) could include books for sale in Google Books I was quite excited. After getting one into the Google Book system, I ended up with quite a few misgivings of the system. It is not such much the idea of having my books in Google Books as it was the way Google presents them and the fact that many options I was not aware of were hard to find or change. I have several titles published and they can be found in many online booksellers and in ‘brick and mortar’ bookstores. Initially I thought that Google Books would be a great marketing tool for my titles. In a way it is, with that said though there is a lot wrong with Google Books in my opinion. I do not mind having a preview of a portion of my books, however Google Books, even when set to the lowest level (20%), exposed too much of the content of my books. I would have to say that Amazon does a much better job of print book previews. On Amazon, they only show portions of the beginning of the book and not portions throughout the book. My books are of the “how-to’” genre of books and much of the previews that Google displayed as previews were the “meat” of my books. Thus allowing browsers to see things that might encourage them not to buy the books because the information was in the previews. Which of course would mean less book royalties for my company and me. I suppose if my books were of fiction or non-fiction novel genres it would matter as much. Another item that disturbed me was several options in Google Books that I discovered by digging around such as allow libraries to display the entire contents of the books. While I do not mind people reading a portion of my book before buying I just cannot, financially speaking, afford to have the entire contents available. I finally was able to obtain the Google Books URL to have books removed (you must log in to Google Services to do so). My first attempt at using the removal form resulting in a boilerplate response that no more than 20 percent of my book was viewable, despite the fact that I asked the book to be removed in its entirety. My second attempt of requesting the book to be removed (I ended up saying the author (myself of course) requested the book to be removed) was successful. My experience with Google Books was at the very least frustrating and for the most part quite aggravating. If you are considering adding your book titles to Google Books, you may want to explore all of the options before doing so. A warning though, many options you may not like or want will not show up until the book is live and previewable in the Google Books catalog.

So You Want to Expand Your Small Georgia Business?

December 21st, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

With today’s worsening economy many small business owners in Georgia and across the united states are struggling to make ends meet. Business expansion and aggressive marketing are seemingly the only viable options at the moment. It seems that paring down overhead actually reduced revenues in many cases. I know from experience. As we cut costs, we also saw revenues drop accordingly. Many consumers are not spending as they have in the past and this has been causing many business owners to struggle. I do believe that expanding businesses into more areas of retail and services is the only long-term hope for many business to survive. That and more aggressive marketing such as advertising are the only options that small business owners have at the moment. It’s either that or close up shop and walk away. Several times in the past year we had considered shutting everything down and walking away. However, we aren’t quitters and began to brainstorm on how best to beat the economic downturn. The problem is having access to working capital and having a budget for advertising and marketing. Let’s face it, the days of disposable consumer income has dwindled to a trickle. So exactly how does a small business owner expand or marketing their business with less money? I’ve been researching this very matter and have come to several conclusions on how to gain additional financing that won’t send us into the poorhouse or bankruptcy. Most banks in our area are holding onto their money so hard that when they do had it out, there are corners missing form the

Stay with the leaders, trade with confidence – Economic Times

December 20th, 2010. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Stay with the leaders, trade with confidence Economic Times If you are looking to add mid- cap stocks to your portfolio, IIFL suggested Escorts, Yes Bank and Petronet LNG . Mr Gujral was more upbeat. “ Scams are a mere …

Go here to see the original:
Stay with the leaders, trade with confidence – Economic Times

The Serial Scamster Is Indicted For A Second Time – Forbes (blog)

December 16th, 2010. Published under Money Order Scams, Scams. No Comments.

The Serial Scamster Is Indicted For A Second Time Forbes (blog) His serial scamming started in 2004, when he pleaded guilty to forgery in a money order scam foisted on Neiman Marcus, court records show, but he got off … and more

New Credit Card Offer Fine Print – Higher Interest Rates and Annual Fees

December 15th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

It seems that credit card companies are becoming more aggressive in credit card marketing by sending out more offers than in they had in the previous three years. They are again marketing to consumers with lower credit scores (higher risk cardholders). The recently enacted CARD ACT prevents card issuers from raising interest rates if a consumer misses a payment, so they are now adding “sneaky” items in their card agreements such as higher APR interest rates (18% and higher) and often adding an annual fee to the cards. On the outside, higher risk consumers with low scores have an opportunity to get credit cards once again. This is a dangerous precedent though as historically speaking these consumers are often the ones that overextend themselves financially and end up defaulting on credit card balances. For the credit card companies though this is a win-win situation as they will sell off any default accounts and write the loss of on their taxes. If the consumer doesn’t default the card companies make money off the higher interest rates and annual fees they are now charging. In my opinion they entire credit card industry is nothing more than gross usury. What ever happened to fairness in the banking industry has ended when it comes to credit cards. Credit cards are a financial crutch at best and at worst a debt trap for struggling consumers. This is coming from a person that knows. I had financial problems and credit cards only made everything worse. I ended up “robbing Peter to Pay Paul” as the saying goes. I found that credit cards are a convenience, not a necessity as many people believe. I haven’t used a credit card in nearly five years. I pay with cash, check or debt card. Even in business I found that I have no need to use credit cards and can do anything that another does with a credit card. I have no credit card payments (or interest) because of this, and have become more financially well off by not using credit cards. “To stem losses, lenders halted new card offers to all but their most affluent customers. At the same time, more than eight million consumers stopped using their credit cards, in a sign of the nationwide belt-tightening, according to TransUnion, the credit bureau. Millions more borrowers who still have cards have been compelled to pay down their balances, or are more often choosing to use cash.”

How I Saved a Ton Of Money By Dumping Georgia Farm Bureau Insurance

December 14th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

I’ll start off by saying that if you have Georgia Farm Bureau Insurance for your car or home you can getting better insurance for less money. I found this out the hard way. Up until a couple of months ago, I thought my Georgia Farm Bureau insurance rates were the best I could get. Little did I know that Georgia Farm Bureau was in so many words, screwing me hard and heavy on my insurance premiums. What’s so funny is that Farm Bureau instigated their own undoing, causing me to switch my home owner and vehicle insurance over to Brinson and Dixon Insurance of Statesboro Georgia. In late summer my good friend and next door neighbor Prince Preston’s home was hit by lightning. He and I both at the time had Georgia Farm Bureau insurance. Neither one of of had ever filed a home owners insurance claim since having insurance with them. As a side not, until October we had Georgia Farm Bureau insurance for more than ten years. Back to the story. Roughly five years ago I had all of the towering pines in my yard cut down (about 28 trees) because I was worried about damage to my home and the trees were getting old and cankered. In a way it probably saved my home from being hit by lightning and there are no tall trees around our house for lightning to strike. After Prince’s house got hit by lightning he had the hardest time to get Farm Bureau to do anything in regards to repairs or the claim he filed. Shortly after the lightning episode a guy shows up at my home wanting to have a look at my home. The guy snapped a few pictures, said everything was fine and left. At the time I thought nothing more about it. Several weeks later I receive a letter from Georgia Farm Bureau that stated to the effect that they weren’t going to renew my home owners policy (Hear that Georgia Insurance Commission?), due to the “condition” of the roof on my home. I admit the roof looks rough, primarily due to the stains on it from the pine trees that are no longer on my property. Structurally the roof is sound, cosmetically it is stained from the pine trees needles that used to cover it. I had been talking with Prince and he mentioned he was moving his insurance to Brinson and Dixon insurance . I know David Brinson as he was a member of my church at the time. So I called David as well to get quotes on my home owner and auto insurance. I am glad I did. Between the new home and auto insurance, my wife and I have saved somewhere around five hundred dollars a year on the combined insurance policies. To add insult to injury with a bit of irony thrown in our new insurance gave us a roof discount, because the roof is indeed in good condition. So suck on that one Georgia Farm Bureau. I am so glad that I moved my insurance from Georgia Farm Bureau, their practices of delay with their customers show what kind of business they truly are. If you have Georgia Farm Bureau insurance I encourage you to get quote son your insurance form other companies (I do suggest giving Brinson & Dixon insurance a call though). I bet you find that you can get better rates, and of course by switching you’ll no longer have to pay that that dratted and annoying Georgia Farm Bureau “membership” fee. ABOUT ALLEN HARKLEROAD Allen Harkleroad, better known as the “ most dangerous consumer in America ”, is the author of the book “ Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors ”. This book has saved many a consumer from the clutches of abusive debt collectors and shady debt collection law firms. Allen also has a new book nearly ready for publishing titled, “ Suing Abusive Debt Collectors, Don’t Get Mad Get Even ”, that shows consumers how easy it is to sue debt collectors for illegal debt collection tactics and violations of consumer rights. Allen Harkleroad is a veteran when it comes to beating bad debt collections, whether it defending himself in court or suing collectors for violating the law. Allen is an avid and judicious consumer advocate who enjoys helping others. In addition to consumer advocacy he enjoys writing and blogging on various technology and business subjects.

See more here:
How I Saved a Ton Of Money By Dumping Georgia Farm Bureau Insurance

Scams send Sensex reeling – Hindu Business Line

December 9th, 2010. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Hindu Business Line Scams send Sensex reeling Hindu Business Line Many small and mid- cap scrips hit their lower circuits. In the Sensex pack, 27 scrips closed in the red. Every sectoral index too ended in the red. … and more

The House Energy and Commerce Committee Have Lost Their Collective Minds

December 8th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

It is official ACA International and other

Consumers Must Fight Back – 94 Percent of Debt Lawsuits Become Default Judgments

December 8th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Scams. No Comments.

For whatever reason, upwards of ninety-four percent (94%) credit card / debt lawsuits are not responded to by consumers. Most often the reasons are that consumers/debtors cannot afford an attorney, or are afraid of the legal system or possibly not aware that a suit was filed against them for a debt. Consumer need to understand that if a civil debt lawsuit is filed and they do not respond, the plaintiff may obtain a default judgment against them. Once a default judgment is obtained, the plaintiff may opt to garnished wages, bank accounts, or possibly file liens on property to satisfy the judgment. Default judgments are extremely difficult for a consumer to fight after the fact. In the case of being afraid of court, there is nothing to fear. Civil lawsuits are mostly paperwork filed by both sides and rarely does the matter end up with all parties being in front of a judge. Even then half the battle of beating debt lawsuits (default judgments) is showing up or responding to the lawsuit. Consumers that cannot afford an attorney can many times beat debt collection lawsuits, especially third party (junk debt or Debt Buyer) lawsuits. Debt collection companies and collection attorneys have been exploiting the legal system for years and the exploitation is becoming more and more common. They know that in nearly nine out of ten cases the consumer won’t respond. Default judgments are “easy” money for them. And in a large number (upwards of 96%) of junk debt lawsuits filed the collection company cannot even prove a debt is owed. Consumers must fight back or risk further financial hardships. Consumers should not be afraid of the legal system. Until such time that the majority of consumers to do fight debt lawsuits in some manner then the collection industry will continue to exploit the tax payer funded legal system. According to attorney Sergei Lemberg, and the Wall Street Journal: Encore Capital Group, parent of Midland Funding, filed 245,000 lawsuits last year, and that approximately 94% of lawsuits result in default judgments. Debt buyers purchased $100 billion worth of debt last year, and often turn to the courts first… ~ Sergei Lemberg Once Encore sues, it is virtually assured a win, says Mr. Black, the company’s CEO. Roughly 94% of collection cases filed against borrowers result in default judgments in favor of the debt buyer, according to industry estimates. The majority of borrowers don’t have a lawyer, some don’t know they are even being sued, and others don’t appear in court, say judges. A growing number of cases brought by debt buyers are plagued by sloppy, incomplete or even false documentation of debts, according to the 20 judges around the country interviewed by the Journal. ~ Wall Street Journal Consumers must be educated on how to deal with debt lawsuits. While many think that courtrooms and judges are scary, in truth it isn’t much worse than sitting down at the bank with a loan officer. Responding to debt lawsuits are mostly paperwork and the consumers personal time to respond. If you are having financial difficulties or are being sued by collection companies, it is time to take a stand and fight back. After all what do you have to lose but forcing collection companies to prove the debt and avoid a default judgment.

Robocallers JPM Accelerated Services and IXE Accelerated Financial Centers Shut Down by Federal Trade Commission

December 7th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

At the Federal Trade Commission’s request, a U.S. district court has approved a settlement shutting down two groups of Florida-based telemarketers that allegedly flooded consumers with misleading pre-recorded robocalls falsely promising to reduce their credit card interest rates. The agency reached a settlement that permanently bans the two related operations from making robocalls and selling debt relief services. The settlement orders are the latest in a series of enforcement actions the FTC has taken to rein in robocallers, especially those who try to take advantage of consumers affected by the economic downturn. According to the FTC, JPM Accelerated Services and related defendants made thousands of illegal pre-recorded robocalls to consumers, identifying themselves only as “card services” and offering lower credit card interest rates. Consumers who pressed “1″ after hearing the automated pitch were transferred to live telemarketers who falsely told consumers that JPM’s services would allow them to dramatically lower their credit card interest rates. The complaint alleged that the telemarketers charged an up-front fee typically ranging from $495 to $995, and promised consumers they would save thousands of dollars in a short period of time as a result of the lower interest rates, and that they would be able to pay off their debts faster. The defendants also falsely stated that if consumers did not save thousands of dollars from lowered interest rates, they would receive a full refund of the up-front fee. After collecting the fee from consumers, however, JPM allegedly failed to deliver the promised interest rate reductions and savings, and routinely refused to honor its money-back guarantee. The FTC complaint also charged the defendants with violating the Telemarketing Sales Rule by calling consumers on the Do Not Call Registry, blocking or “spoofing” caller ID, and making unlawful robocalls. The settlement orders also impose judgments of $5.9 million against defendants associated with JPM, and $3.2 million against six individual defendants associated with an affiliated operation called IXE Accelerated Financial Centers, LLC. The judgments represent the amount of money consumers lost through these robocall schemes. The judgments are suspended, based on the defendants’ inability to pay, but will become due if the defendants are found to have misrepresented their financial condition. Two of the defendants in the IXE operation, Ivan X. Estrella and Jaime Hawley, also are liable for an unsatisfied $75,000 judgment recently entered against them in a case brought by the Florida Attorney General. The Commission vote authorizing the consent orders settling the court action against the individual defendants was 5-0. The orders were filed in the U.S. District Court for Middle District of Florida, Orlando Division on November 9, 2010, against: 1) Ivan X. Estrella, Jamie M. Hawley, and Kimberly Nelson; and 2) Jeanie B. Robertson, Brooke Robertson, Alexander J. Dent, Micha S. Romano, Paul Pietrzak, and Ashley M. Westbrook. Estrella, Hawley, and Nelson worked with the IXE corporate defendants listed below. The rest of the individual defendants worked with the JPM corporate defendants. At the FTC’s request, the court also has dismissed the charges against Paige Dent. The court is reviewing the FTC’s request for a default judgment against the corporate defendants in this case, including the IXE corporate defendants (IXE Accelerated Financial Centers, LLC; and IXE Accelerated Services Inc.), and the JPM corporate defendants (JPM Accelerated Services Inc.; IXE Accelerated Service Centers Inc.; MGA Accelerated Services Inc.; World Class Savings Inc.; Accelerated Savings Inc.; and B&C Financial Group Inc.). The proposed default judgment includes monetary judgments of $3.2 million against the IXE corporations, based in Orlando, Florida, and $5.9 million against the JPM corporations, based in Melbourne, Florida. International Cooperation The FTC brought this action with valuable assistance from other law enforcement agencies in the U.S. and Canada, including: the U.S. Postal Inspection Service; the Attorney General of Florida; the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Affairs; the Canadian Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission; and the Toronto Strategic Partnership, which includes as member agencies the Competition Bureau Canada; the Toronto Police Service Fraud Squad – Mass Marketing Section; the Ontario Provincial Police Anti-Rackets Section; the Ontario Ministry of Consumer Services; the Royal Canadian Mounted Police; and the United Kingdom’s Office of Fair Trading. Valuable assistance also was provided by the Better Business Bureau of Central Florida. Source: FTC Federal Trade Commission v. JPM Accelerated Services Inc., a Florida corporation, IXE Accelerated Financial Centers, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, IXE Accelerated Services Inc., a Florida corporation, IXE Accelerated Service Centers Inc., a Florida corporation, MGA Accelerated Services Inc., a Florida corporation, World Class Savings Inc., a Florida corporation, Accelerated Savings Inc., a Florida corporation, B&C Financial Group Inc., a Florida corporation, Jeanie B. Robertson, Brook Robertson, Ivan X. Estrella, Jamie M. Hawley, Kimberly Nelson, Paige Dent, Alexander J. Dent, Micha S. Romano, and Ashley M. Westbrook. (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida Orlando Division) Civil Action No. 09-CV-2021 FTC File No. 092 3190

Originally posted here:
Robocallers JPM Accelerated Services and IXE Accelerated Financial Centers Shut Down by Federal Trade Commission

Free Legal Forms to Fight Debt Collection Lawsuits

December 6th, 2010. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

The forms below are pleading form templates for filing your credit card debt Answer and Affirmative Defenses, Sworn Denial, Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Strike Affidavit of Debt. These forms should work in most courts. For full information on what to include in the below forms I encourage you to purchase the book “ Stick it To Sue Happy Debt Collectors ”, the book contains strategies for beating debt collection and collection attorneys at their own game in court. The book is available in eBook (PDF), Print, Kindle and Nook eReader formats. Download Answer and Affirmative Defenses, includes Verification and Certificate of Service Forms . Zip file in .doc format. Includes a editable/selectable PDF file. Download Sworn Denial . Zip file in .doc format. Includes a editable/selectable PDF file. Download Motion to Dismiss, includes Order For Dismissal, Verification and Certificate of Service . Zip file in .doc format. Includes a editable/selectable PDF file. Download Motion to Strike Affidavit of Debt, includes Order For Dismissal, Verification and Certificate of Service . Zip file in .doc format. Includes a editable/selectable PDF file.

Financial Freedom of America, Debt Consultants of America, Debt Professionals of America Charged With Misleading Claims

December 5th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

According to the FTC’s two complaints, the defendants made deceptive claims that consumers who enrolled in their programs could eliminate 30 to 60 percent of their credit card debt and be out of debt in 18 to 36 months. The defendants marketed their services via websites and TV and radio ads that urged consumers to call toll-free numbers for a free consultation and to enroll in their debt relief programs. One operation claimed to use “secret programs most credit card companies won’t tell you about.” The other operation touted its “established relationships” with creditors and claimed that its program would “save you literally thousands of dollars.” The defendants charged consumers up-front administrative fees, monthly maintenance fees, negotiation fees, and in some instances, a cancellation fee. The FTC’s complaints charge that few consumers received the promised results. Many consumers canceled or dropped out of the programs before their debt was reduced because they couldn’t afford to pay the defendants’‘ sizable advance fees and accumulate money to pay off their debts. Consumers looking for help with credit card debt should be wary of anyone who tells them to stop paying their bills, to pay someone other than their creditors, or to stop talking to their creditors. Consumers should also be careful about paying for financial assistance before they receive it. The FTC recently announced changes to the Telemarketing Sales Rule that prohibit companies that sell debt relief services over the telephone from charging fees before they settle or reduce a customers’ credit card or other unsecured debt. This ban on advance fees protects all consumers who enroll in a debt relief service after October 27, 2010, and specifies that fees for debt relief services may not be collected until: the debt relief service successfully settles or changes the terms of at least one of the consumer’s debts; there is a settlement agreement, debt management plan, or other agreement between the consumer and the creditor that the consumers has agreed to; and the consumer has made at least one payment to the creditor as a result of the agreement negotiated by the debt relief provider. The new provisions of the Rule also prevent debt relief providers from front-loading their fees if a consumer has enrolled multiple debts in one debt relief program. Click here for more information about the advance-fee ban. In addition, the Rule requires debt relief providers to make truthful and substantiated claims about their services. The FTC will actively enforce the Rule and these new provisions, as will the states, which also have enforcement authority under the Telemarketing Sales Rule. The defendants in one of the two cases announced today are Financial Freedom of America, Inc., now known as Financial Freedom Processing Inc., Corey Butcher, and Brent Butcher. The second case names Debt Consultants of America Inc., Debt Professionals of America Inc., Robert Creel, Corey Butcher, and Nikki Creel, also known as Nikki Vrla. The Commission vote to file the complaints was 5-0. The complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. Source: FTC Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff v. Financial Freedom Processing, Inc., formerly known as Financial Freedom of America, Inc., a corporation; Corey Butcher, individually and as an officer of the corporation; and Brent Butcher, individually and as an officer of the corporation, Defendants. (United District Court for the Northern District of Texas) Case No. 3:10-cv-02446 FTC File No.

Get to the root of the scams – Economic Times

December 2nd, 2010. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

Get to the root of the scams Economic Times One, political expenditure must shrink; and two, all funding above a smallish cap must be by cheque or electronic transfer. The state could consider …

Continued here:
Get to the root of the scams – Economic Times

9 hot credit card scams to watch out for – CreditCards.com

December 1st, 2010. Published under Political Scams, Scams. No Comments.

9 hot credit card scams to watch out for CreditCards.com Chances are it's one of a couple of scams , says Nadine Samter, an attorney with the Federal Trade Commission. The catch is buried in the fine print, … and more

The Four Best Places to Grab Deals For Your Holiday Shopping

November 28th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Online deal aggregators and deal websites are “the places” to be to grab the best deals for holiday shopping whether it is for Black Friday, Cyber Monday or regular holiday shopping. I’ll keep this short and sweet so you can get the best deals for your hard earned dollars.

More Consumers Are Winning In Court With Stick It To Sue Happy Debt Collectors Book

November 21st, 2010. Published under Scams. No Comments.

It is heartwarming to see more and more consumers fighting back against questionable debt collector lawsuits in court and winning. As I have always said half the battle in winning collection lawsuits is showing up and questioning the lack of evidence or proof of a debt. I had previously written about consumers fighting back against collection lawsuits and sticking it back to the attorney’s and collection agencies filing frivolous lawsuits . It seems that more and more readers of “ Stick it to Sue Happy Debt Collectors ” are prevailing in court against collection agencies. Here

Fake Courtroom Debt Collector Unicredit America Inc Probe Expanded

November 16th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Last week I reported on Unicredit America Inc for allegedly running a fake courtroom complete with fake deputies, judge and attorneys ( read it here ). According to a Michigan newspaper the probe has been expanded and also resulted in a judge ordering the debt collection operation shuttered and at least one client of Unicredit intends to file suit for breach of contract and fraud. It also appears that the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) may also be interested in Unicredit America Inc. Attorney General Tom Corbett called Unicredit tactics “an unconscionable attempt to use fake court proceedings to deceive, mislead or frighten consumers into making payments.”

Debt Collection Class Action Lawsuit Encore Capital Group (aka Midland Funding, Midland Credit Management)

November 15th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

I sincerely hope this is the first of many class-action and individual lawsuits filed against debt collection companies and their holding companies that fraudulently submit affidavits to courts in order to get a judgment. It is also up to judges to questions these affidavits and to force affiants to show proper documentation that would show if the affidavit is fraudulent or not. The sad news is most judges allow these sorts of worthless documents to be used in court without question. I imagine that this is happening in just one state, but in all states. On November 10, 2010 in a Washington State U.S. District court a class-action lawsuit was filed naming Encore Capitol Group Inc, Isaac Hammer, Jane Doe Suttell, Jane Doe Case, John Doe Gurule and others. Lauber et al v. Encore Capitol Group Inc et al, civil filing number: 2:2010cv05132 According to Courthouse News Service, “A Bellevue law firm works with collection agencies to mislead courts and consumers by using “robo-signers” in Minnesota who sign up to 400 affidavits a day, falsely swearing they have “personal knowledge” of cases in Washington state, to secure speedy default judgments, according to a federal class action. The class claims that Encore Capital Group, Midland Funding, and Midland Credit Management work with the Suttell & Hammer law firm, faxing a boilerplate form to a “legal specialist” in Minnesota, who signs the affidavit before any supporting documents are attached. “Encore Capitol Group (‘Encore Capitol’) has developed a proprietary, sophisticated, ‘system driven’ collection process based on the ‘predictive behavior’ of consumers (and state courts). In conjunction with its subsidiaries and ‘franchisee’ law firms (including the Suttell Law Firm) it engages in computer automated, high volume, state court litigation in the collection of distressed debt (purchased at pennies on the dollar).”

Court Shutters International Credit Card Interest Rate Scam Robocall Operation

November 15th, 2010. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a federal district court in Chicago has shut down an international robocall ring that allegedly conned consumers out of $995 each with false promises that it would reduce their credit card interest rates, but provided little or nothing in return. As part of its crackdown on frauds that seek to take advantage of consumers hurt by the recent economic downturn, the FTC charged that the robocall ring made bogus promises that it would provide refunds to consumers if they did not save at least $2,500. When consumers called to complain, however, the robocallers simply disappeared, the FTC charged. The FTC alleges that this company has defrauded nearly 13,000 consumers out of almost $13 million from this scheme. The agency has brought several other cases in the past year against the marketers of worthless credit card interest rate reduction services. According to the FTC, since at least 2007, the defendants allegedly used at least 10 different company names, including AFL Financial Services, when pitching the service. The defendants, who are in Toronto, Canada, and the Rochester, New York, area, operated two telemarketing boiler rooms in Orlando, Florida. They employed illegal robocalls to contact consumers, and then claimed that for $995 they would substantially reduce credit card interest rates and enable consumers to get out of debt three to five times faster. They also falsely suggested that the savings from the lower interest rates would pay for the service. In reality, the defendants failed to lower consumers’ interest rates, and consumers did not save the $2,500 promised by the defendants or receive refunds, the FTC alleges. The FTC complaint charges that the misrepresentations violated the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule and the FTC Act. It also charges that the defendants called consumers whose numbers are on the National Do Not Call Registry and made illegal robocalls. The Commission vote authorizing the staff to file the complaint was 5-0. It was filed under seal in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, against Direct Financial Management Inc.; 2194673 Ontario Inc., doing business as (d/b/a) The Elite Financial Group; F&F Payment Processing Inc.; Bajada Management Group Inc.; David D. Richards; Baird B. Fisher; Jacqueline M. Fisher; and Joseph B. Foley. On November 8, 2010, Judge Joan H. Lefkow entered a temporary restraining order with an asset freeze, halting the defendants’ operations pending trial and appointing a receiver over the two United States corporate defendants. In filing its complaint, the FTC is seeking to stop permanently the defendants’ allegedly illegal conduct and return their ill-gotten gains to defrauded consumers. The FTC brought this case in cooperation with the Ministry of the Attorney General of Ontario, Civil Remedies for Illicit Activities Office. The Ministry simultaneously filed a separate lawsuit in Ontario seeking assets for consumer redress to victims in the United States and Canada. The FTC also worked cooperatively with the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, and the Toronto Strategic Partnership in bringing this case. The Toronto Strategic Partnership members include the Competition Bureau Canada, the Toronto Police Service Fraud Squad – Mass Marketing Section, the Ontario Provincial Police Anti-Rackets Section, the Ontario Ministry of Consumer Services, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and the United Kingdom’s Office of Fair Trading. Source: Federal Trade Commission

More:
Court Shutters International Credit Card Interest Rate Scam Robocall Operation

Hey GOP, Congress and FTC Stop Listening to Lobbyists and Groups Like ACA International

November 11th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

The lobbying and trade groups that comprise the accounts receivables industry (aka debt collection industry) are constantly clouding issues to dissuade Congress, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP)

Hero – West Virginia AG Recovers 1.25 Million from Three Debt Collection Companies

November 9th, 2010. Published under Business Scams, Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

It is good to see that several state Attorney General’s like West Virginia’s Darrell McGraw aggressively pursue debt collectors that bend the law to collect debts. Today’s news is a win for consumers in West Virginia. It appears that three debt collection firms, Trailhead Capital, LLC, , Hollis Cobb Assoc., Inc., Trailhead’s affiliated collection agency in Norcross, GA; and Troy Capital, LLC, a debt buyer based in Las Vegas, NV violated West Virginia law by collecting debts without a license or bonding. West Virginia Attorney General Darrell McGraw today announced settlement agreements with three unlicensed collection agencies that will result in $1,277,648.33 in cancelled debts for 161 West Virginia consumers and $15,337.50 in cash refunds Records also showed that the debts the companies were attempting to collect were primarily charged-off credit card accounts originally owed to Chase, Wells Fargo Bank, and GE Capital. In West Virginia, businesses that purchase defaulted debts for collection, as Trailhead and Troy Capital did, cannot avoid being licensed and bonded by hiring other agencies to assist them in collecting the debts. Rather than working with consumers to develop plans that might enable them to pay their debt over time, banks increasingly sell defaulted credit card debt for pennies on the dollar to collection agencies called debt buyers,” McGraw continued. “Debt buyers often take overly aggressive collection actions that include the filing of lawsuits – even when they have little proof of the debts they seek to collect from consumers.

Debt Collectors Threatening To Sue? Freeze Your Credit Right Now

November 6th, 2010. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

Having financial problems? Are the debt collectors hounding you? If the collection attempts are fairly recent (3-6 months) then you should freeze your credit files with all three major credit reporting agencies. When you freeze your credit your original creditors can still access your credit reports. However, third parties such a collection companies and attorneys generally cannot. The last thing you need while enduring financial difficulties is being served with a civil lawsuit over a debt. If you never heed any of my advice, do this one thing immediately. It may save you a lot of future grief of having to respond to a debt lawsuit. From my own personal experience, several law firms have “dipped” into my credit reports, and subsequently filed civil lawsuits (I beat them all to date in court though). Since freezing my credit back in 2009 the lawsuits stopped. I truly believe that law firms access consumers credit reports to determine if a consumer is worth suing (lawsuit fishing expeditions). While it is difficult to prove that a law firm has accessed your credit reports for litigation, it might be worth pursing to put them on notice that you will fight back. The Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) doesn’t not allow accessing a consumers credit reports for litigation purposes as it is not a business to consumer transaction. If a law firm other entity access your credit reports after you freeze them, it may mean you can sue them and the credit reporting agency. Of course this doesn’t apply to original creditors that you have obtained credit from in the past. In most states you can voluntarily freeze your credit with the three major reporting agencies Equifax – https://www.freeze.equifax.com/Freeze/jsp/SFF_PersonalIDInfo.jsp Experian – https://www.experian.com/consumer/cac/InvalidateSession.do?code=FREEZE TransUnion – http://www.transunion.com/corporate/personal/fraudIdentityTheft/fraudPrevention/securityFreeze.page Be careful with the TransUnion website, they will try to enroll you in other services like mostly useless monthly credit monitoring. Another good reason to freeze your credit whether you are having financial difficulties or not is that it will reduce the chances of identity theft and is much cheaper than paying a company every month to “monitor” your credit. You can always temporarily thaw your credit report so you can apply for credit. Not sure what’s on your credit or who has accessed your credit reports? Visit the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) website to access your reports for free via AnnualCreditReports.com . (Again be watchful when accessing your TransUnion website, they will try to sell you services even though the report is 100% free). Be smart and freeze your credit today.

See more here:
Debt Collectors Threatening To Sue? Freeze Your Credit Right Now

$3.6 Million Judgment Against Companies that Allegedly Debited Money from Consumers’ Bank Accounts

November 5th, 2010. Published under Scams. No Comments.

At the request of the Federal Trade Commission, a federal court has entered a judgment of more than $3.6 million against a payment processor and its subsidiary that allegedly debited consumers’ bank accounts illegally on behalf of deceptive telemarketers. According to a 2007 complaint filed by the FTC and seven states, Your Money Access, LLC and its subsidiary, YMA Company, LLC, processed unauthorized debits on behalf of deceptive telemarketers and Internet-based schemes that were violating the FTC’s Telemarketing Sales Rule and state consumer protection laws. The companies played a critical role in these schemes by providing access to the banking system and the means to extract money from consumers’ bank accounts. The FTC alleged that in many instances the merchants either failed to deliver the promised products or services or sent consumers relatively worthless items. A default judgment entered in October 2008 barred Your Money Access and YMA Company from payment processing for any client whose business practices are deceptive, unfair, or abusive within the meaning of the FTC Act , the Telemarketing Sales Rule , and state consumer protection laws. The states joining the FTC’s complaint were Illinois, Iowa, Nevada, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, and Vermont. Source: FTC

Follow this link:
$3.6 Million Judgment Against Companies that Allegedly Debited Money from Consumers’ Bank Accounts

Vocus Inc aka PR-OutOut.com You’ve Been Blacklisted For PR Spam–Just Freaking Go Away

November 1st, 2010. Published under Fraud, Scams. No Comments.

I am up to my eyeballs sick with Vocus Inc’s public relations (PR) spam. I’ve tried to be nice and unsubscribe our company from hundreds of PR release that Vocus sends us. We’ve never asked for or requested to receive any press releases from Vocus Inc (aka PR-OptOut.com). Yet I and others continuously receive release about freaking window blinds, software we have no interest in and countless other PR pitches. If I were a client of Vocus I would be asking some hard questions at just who exactly signed up to get releases. I wouldn’t doubt for one minute that Vocus buys email lists from questionable companies that harvest email addresses from the Internet (aka Spam harvesters). It seems to get worse every week. It is almost as if we’ve been added to ever blasted PR list that Vocus blasts out to unsuspecting recipients. Well I’ve had it. Vocus and PR-OptOut.com emails are now auto-deleted as soon as they come in. If by chance any future emails get through I will consider litigation as my next step to put a stop to the crap Vocus keeps trying to cram into our inboxes. In fact any future PR crud from Vocus or PR-OptOut.com gets through we will start publically humiliating the client involved as well as Vocus. So bring it on you clueless spamming PR hacks, I have something for you and your clients. If you ever send another press release to anyone at Designer Today Magazine, Statesboro Business Magazine, FMD Consumer, Smarterotti or any other website we own, you’ll be the laughing stock of the PR industry, of that I guarantee. Signed, Allen Harkleroad – Owner, Publisher and PR Nightmare Generator

May 2012
M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Apr
	1	2	3	4	5	6
7	8	9	10	11	12	13
14	15	16	17	18	19	20
21	22	23	24	25	26	27
28	29	30	31

Archive for 'Scams'

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Popular Searches

Search

Categories

Recent Posts