Newest Scam: Law enforcement agencies target unsuspecting motorists with bogus citations
I’ve long suspected that this is happening, but now I’ve been a victim of this exact situation. In the state of the economy, especially here in California, local law enforcement agencies are apparently under the budgetary microscope. As a result, it now appears that law enforcement agencies have now joined the ranks of the scam artists… with one exception, they are legally sanctioned entities. In my case, my car was stated to have been located near an expired parking meter and cited for this parking infraction when it was no where near the location on that date. I do drive near that parking structure. Near yes, but almost never closer than 2-3 miles near it. Close enough that a local cop could have written down my plate number, seen the make, model and color and then used that information to create the scam citation. Yes, I could have contested the ticket, but the main issue is that the citation had nearly every bit of information about my vehicle correct except the body style (which was conveniently absent from the notice to pay). On top of that, the citation was issued so late in the contest process, I basically didn’t have time to contest it. However, the license plate number was correct, plate expiration year correct, make correct, color correct. The only thing that wasn’t correct and, of course, wasn’t written on the notice to pay the citation was the body style… how convenient. The other two things that were conveniently missing from their ‘system’.. the VIN and the month of the plate expiration. Two bits of information that would have conclusively proven my vehicle wasn’t there, but this information was conveniently absent.
Worse, law enforcement agencies can dig through the state’s plate database and simply choose license plates at random, write a citation based on some random vehicle incident, throw the ticket away and collect the money. That is assuming you don’t contest. The issue, though, is that if the officer is thorough enough about the make, color and license specifics, then they have you regardless of what the body style says to be or where you claim to have been at the time. Of course, if you happen to have conclusive proof that your vehicle wasn’t where the officer claims it was on the citation.. like a date stamped photograph of your vehicle at that moment in time (and how likely is that to happen) or some other proof your vehicle was locked up, then you’re likely going to end up paying the scam citation. Even contesting it, you may still end up paying. As long as the vehicle is in your name and the citation is tied to your plate, you’re liable period.
Honestly though, would you actually be able to successfully contest this? I mean, you can, yes. But, is it worth the effort? Sure, you could retain a lawyer, but that would cost you much more than the $45-$90 just to pay the citation. You could do it yourself and go to court. Again, they know this is a hassle and they are apparently exploiting this fact. They know you’ll pay because the amount is too small for all that hassle.
Incidents like these are exactly what government and law enforcement don’t need or want right now. Setting up scams to bring in cash isn’t the answer. But yet, it is happening.. likely every day. Note that in my case and because my car actually wasn’t where the officer claimed it was, I never received an initial citation. The only notice I received was from the collection agency. One officer stated to me when I called about this issue. “It might have just blown away”. Uh-huh.. riiiight. Maybe I didn’t receive it because my vehicle wasn’t actually there. But, that doesn’t matter. As long as the officer is thorough enough to go through the license database or write down your vehicle as you drive around town, they can easily set up scam citations to collect between $45 and $90 for the city, county (or the University in this case). And worse, as long as it’s in your name and the majority of the information is correct, even a judge may still find you liable for the fine.
Government problems just beginning
These issues are the beginning of the end of the government as we know it. When cops are now involved in state legalized racketeering, then there’s really no hope that this government can continue to exist. We are about to head back to the old west of lawlessness. If the police can no longer be trusted not to scam individuals out of their hard earned money, the no one can be trusted. This is the era in which the US and local governments will collapse. It will collapse under its own weight and ungainly methodologies. By unscrupulously taking advantage of its own infrastructure for illicit monetary gain, the end of this government draws near. It’s only a matter of time.
Government was initially designed to serve the people. Unfortunately, now it’s just the opposite. It now looks like people are now forced to serve the government. As long as these scams continue unabated, there is no hope for law enforcement agencies to gain any respect or trust from the people, let alone the government. And then they wonder why people no longer trust cops. Hello? Looks like the lights are on but no one’s home.
Our governments were designed to help us (the people). Unfortunately, now government appears to be helping itself more than the people. Of course, this issue is not the beginning. In reality, we can consider sales tax, use taxes, income tax all forms of legalized monetary scams. Ways to part you from your money. Sure, it’s supposed to help us through programs, but the only thing it really does is help government remain in power. If the American people stood up and finally said no to paying government fees, taxes and assessments in mass, it would be all over for government agencies. They simply would not be able to function. But, that’s not going to happen. Too many Americans believe that government is still necessary. But, do we need a government like this? A government that is no better than your average street thug dealing dope?
I’m not saying that government deals in dope, but don’t they? Just look at the FDA. It’s supposed to help protect us. But then, big pharma companies just use the FDA to put their expensive and hazardous drugs onto the market. Some of these drugs make us highly addicted or, worse, the drugs become lethal. Again, it’s another ‘legalized’ form of controlled chaos. I guess it’s all really a point of view at this point. It can only be called protection, though, if people don’t die. When people begin to die because big pharma decides to push the latest pill, then that isn’t any better than the drugs being shipped in from outside the US. So, how is the FDA really any better than a big drug cartel?
Government rethink
I think it’s time to rethink our governmental system. It is now time to realize that what our forefathers put in place is now collapsing under its own weight. Is there a governmental system that could work? Good question. We already know that other governmental forms like socialism and communism don’t really work. A democracy could work, but I think we’ve put so many laws into place that it’s now simply collapsing. I think there’s a point at which there are too many laws and I think we’ve already reached and exceeded that number. Worse, our governments have bastardized the bill of rights to fit the criteria of their point of view instead of what they actually mean. So, for example, you can claim the right to bear arms as long as you’re in a state where it’s legal to do so. Huh? How is that possible? The right to bear arms is a given right and cannot be revoked by any state. Again, as for the fourth amendment, what’s actually considered an ‘unreasonable search and seizure’? Because our forefathers weren’t more specific on this aspect, it is left open to interpretation. Interpretation leads to modification. Modification leads to the law only being valid under specific conditions. These modifications were not sanctioned by the bill of rights. Of course, so when it comes down to whether or not it violates the Bill of Rights, then it has to go in front of the Supreme Court. And, oh yes, this court is appointed by the President. If that is not conflict of interest, I don’t know what is.
Yes, it’s time to consider a new government. One that goes back to our roots. One that doesn’t try to save every business in the US. One that focuses on the people as people, not as a business. Free enterprise and entrepreneurship will survive no matter what. Businesses can fend for themselves. We no longer need businesses putting politicians in their back pockets simply to help keep the revenue flowing. This isn’t a nanny state, yet I believe that’s where we are fast heading, if not already there. Businesses don’t need any government officials ‘on their team’. But, big business will always argue that it does. That’s only because they want laws passed that benefit their ability to continue to make money. Truth is, no one looks out for an individual. Why should any third party look out for a company?
Government has sewn the seeds of its own destruction with situations such as all of the above. It’s now time for us to find another fundamental way to continue our society (and the human species). In the grand scheme of things, the government is probably the least important thing we have today. What’s most important is Earth and ours, the human species. Clearly, where we are today isn’t the answer.
Paypal: Don’t trust them with your checking account!
Paypal has been in business for how many years now? Yet, they still can’t manage to find a way to verify a person without using a bank account? Since day 1 of Paypal, I’ve been sternly opposed to giving my checking account routing information to Paypal. Why? It’s very simple. I don’t trust them. I never have. I never will.
Why you should never give out bank account + routing information to anyone!
Let me first say that when I discuss ‘routing numbers’, this means a combination of both your account and your routing number. Clearly, you wouldn’t just give out only a routing number as that’s not useful. It is only useful when in combination with an account number.
When you give someone a signed check, you implicitly give them your routing information. That’s a danger when you write a check to a company. The protection, of course, is that you’ve given them a physical paper check for a specific amount and you know exactly how much that check was. So, when the check number arrives at the bank and drafts that amount of money from your account, it was expected. They can’t draw more than the amount the check was written.
Routing numbers, on the other hand, are effectively blank checks. When you give a company your routing number, you are handing them a signed blank check. That’s because you’ve agreed to allow them blanket access to your checking account. That company can then debit any amount of money from your account they see fit without so much as a thank you. Because Paypal uses EFT (electronic fund transfers) in the form of ACH (automatic clearing house), they can debit your account up to the maximum amount of funds in your account. This means, they can overdraw your account and completely drain your funds. ACH/EFT offers no liabilities to the consumer whether accidental or intentional. Because you gave that company explicit approval to debit your account at will, there are no liabilities for any inappropriate transactions. That’s left between you and Paypal to resolve. The bank will usually not become involved. When banks do become involved, the best they can do is tell you when it happened. You can try to ask your bank for additional help, but they will most likely point you to Paypal for resolution. The reason is simple, you agreed to give Paypal access to your account up front.
Worse, if the company that overdrafted your account chooses to not give you the money back, then you may be out of luck. At that point, you better seek a lawyer, assuming you have any money left to pay them.
Paypal and Checking Accounts
Paypal does not need a checking account to verify you. They just tell you they do because that’s the way they have always worked it. This verification process can easily be done with a credit card charge that you input later to validate that you receive the bill for the card. Paypal simply wants to have unfettered access to your checking account. Frankly, it’s a huge liability for you. It’s also a huge liability for Paypal to store this information. One hacker in their system and they could have a field day with your money.
Credit Cards and Fraud
Paypal is well aware of the fraud issues with credit cards. They are also well aware of chargebacks, merchant liabilities and fees associated with these processes. To avoid them, they prefer unlimited access to your checking account that hold no such penalties or liabilities. Because the consumer has no recourse over inadvertant transactions, Paypal has the upper hand. This is why Paypal will not verify you with only a credit card. Can they validate based on only a credit card, yes. They simply choose not to.
Credit cards have long established liability rules that prevent fraud occuring from both rip-off artists and from merchants alike. Unfortunately, there are no such rules for ACH.
Consumer Protection from Businesses
Whenever a company asks you to give them routing information from your checking account, tell them, “No!”. Not only should you tell them “no”, you should explain exactly why. Tell them that you don’t trust them with that level of access to your account.
Should you continue to do business with Paypal? That’s entirely up to you. But, I still do not have a verified account with Paypal because I simply will not give them the routing information from my checking or savings account. I simply do not trust ANY company enough with that information. Remember, Paypal is not a bank. Thus, it does not fall under any banking rules, liabilities or any federal insurance. In fact, who knows what insurance Paypal even carries? So, whatever Paypal does, you’re at their mercy to do it right. If they don’t, you have to fight with them to get your money back. The bank won’t help you.
But, I need to give out my routing number…
Here’s another option. It’s not optimal, but it works. Simply, open a second checking account. By setting up a checking account specifically and solely to be used with Paypal and merchants, you can limit your financial liability. You can then link another account to this new account for transferring in money only, but be sure NOT to link the new checking account to any overdraft protection on any other accounts. So, if Paypal overdraws your account inadvertantly, they won’t get any more money than what you have specifically placed in there. If you want to buy a $250 appliance, only transfer in $250 for just that appliance.
The problem with this technique is that banks sometime require minimums to open an account and minimums to keep it open. So, you may have to leave $1000 (or some other arbitrary amount of money) to prevent accrual of monthly fees or account closure. You’ll need to contact your bank for details.
While this does work, it’s not optimal by any stretch. It requires you to be extra cautious with how you use that account. You have to be diligent to place the money in there when you need it. And, you need to remember that transfers of money into the account are not always instanteous. So, you may have to transfer your money in the day before you intend to purchase to ensure the money is there to cover the transaction.
What if I’m a Merchant?
For merchants who want to get paid for products they sell, I understand the issue here with ACH/EFT. Again, in this instance, I would set up a separate checking or savings account solely for Paypal use. Only give this account to Paypal so that when you receive payments, you can transfer them out of that account and to your ‘regular’ account immediately. This way, if Paypal decides to debit you for any reason, the money won’t be there.
Overdrawn Accounts
If Paypal overdraws your account for any reason, don’t expect them to pay you back for insufficient fund fees. You will have to deal with these fees on top of the inappropriate debiting from Paypal. You will then have to argue with Paypal to get your money back and your bank fees reimbursed. But, good luck with both of those processes.
Spending Limits
If you choose not to give your routing information to Paypal, Paypal arbitrarily limits how much money you can send to an individual when you buy merchandise. For this silly reason alone, this is enough to tell Paypal to take a hike. There are plenty of ways to buy merchandise from merchants on the Internet. In fact, when a merchant is reputable enough, they will set up their own merchant account with a bank and let you pay the merchant directly. You should also feel comforted knowing that when you send a payment to a merchant, not through Paypal, you have the full card protections behind your transaction. When you purchase through Paypal, your Paypal account agreement may prevent you from using some of your card’s built-in protections… such as a chargeback.
Credit Cards
For all of these reasons above combined with card liability limits, fraud protection and other protections that come built-in with the Visa, Mastercard and Amex logos, credit cards protect a whole lot more than ACH/EFT. Cards limit your exposure to ID theft and they also limit your liability if someone steals your card and then, for example, buys a new car with it.
For payments, Paypal could choose to issue checks instead of requiring ACH/EFT. But, they have never wanted to go this route for payments. Instead, Paypal forces you to verify your Paypal account by giving them a routing number from your checking account. As I have said, this is not necessary and is a huge liability.
If you want to protect your money in your bank account from unauthorized transactions, you should not give Paypal (or any company) access to your checking account via routing numbers. Instead you should insist on the protections that credit cards offer. Credit cards are more than sufficient for anything that Paypal would need (at least for paying for merchandise). For merchants, you will need to determine what works best for you.
[UPDATE: 6/27/2012]
Paypal now has a new wrinkle in its verification process. When attempting to verify a checking account and your bank has a web portal (i.e., Wells Fargo), they will ask for the login and password to your bank’s web portal to do an ‘immediate’ verification. Don’t do it! Don’t give it to them. Paypal says they won’t store the credentials, but with all of the stolen information from various sites, do not trust ANY site with your bank’s web portal login and password. This should really be common sense, but maybe it isn’t. With that said, if you must verify a bank account with Paypal, do it the old fashioned method by letting Paypal make two small sized deposits. First, it makes Paypal give you about 25 cents. Second, you’re not giving out your bank’s web portal password to some random third party.
As much as I rant above about giving out routing numbers and blank checks, it’s far worse to give out your bank’s web portal login and password information. Do not do either if you can help it. However, if you can manage to set up a separate one-sided transfer system into a free savings or checking account for Paypal payments and transfers, then by all means set that up. Do not give Paypal access to your primary checking account with full access your bank account. Also, make sure that you have disabled overdraft protections on any accounts you give Paypal so that if they reach in and grab money out, when the account hits $0 it doesn’t go any further. You don’t want to be mopping up a mess of bad debits and at the same time having to pay interest payments on those bad debits. Paypal is not a bank and they’re not likely to reimburse you for any bad transactions leading to overdraft fees or interest accrued. So, avoid the issue and prevent Paypal from doing this damage in the first place.
73 AIG Execs get over $160 million in Bonus Payouts: Oversight?
Ok, so I know this story has been covered ad nauseaum in the press, but I also have some comments about this issue. My question isn’t that they received these bonuses, it’s about the contracts they cling to that they MUST fulfill.
Contracts and Bonuses
As far as I know, unless AIG is just completely stupid at writing contracts, most bonuses written into contracts and, later, given to employees are issued based on performance. That means, as long as you perform your duties properly, then the company will pay you at least part of the bonus. And note that ‘properly’ could be intentionally left vague or it could be specifically defined through a set of criteria. The criteria is the unknown factor in these employment contracts. If it was intentionally left vague, though, even my argument still applies. Further, to get paid the entire bonus, the employee and the company both have to perform in an outstanding way. I don’t exactly consider bankruptcy outstanding. Next in this debacle, why would you pay out 11 ex-employees? Contracts usually terminate once employment ceases and this should include bonus clauses. Again, stupidly written contract? I don’t think so. Clearly, there are flaws in AIG’s contract arguments.
Why would you pay out ANY performance bonuses to any executives in a company that came within millimeters of (and is still within) the brink of destruction? Clearly, not one single executive performed properly. Not one. Based on the fact that the company is clearly bankrupt, that the government now owns an 80% stake in it and that it as been bailed out with Government (come Taxpayer) money, it is crystal clear that there is not one single executive in AIG who deserves a performance bonus. Not one.
Check those contracts over
Since the government now owns an 80% stake in AIG, someone in the government needs to sequester their contracts and read them closely. Seriously, why would checking the contracts over not have been the FIRST thing that was done when these bonuses were announced? Someone needs to obtain a copy of each of these 73 employees’ contracts and read through the bonus section. I cannot even fathom that AIG crafted the bonus contractual obligations as 100% payout no matter what happens. If this is true, then AIG deserves to go out of business. If they can’t even write employee contracts correctly, how can they POSSIBLY write insurance policies correctly?
AIG executives need to return the money
I am almost 98% sure that these bonuses were based on performance. Someone would have to read their employment agreements to know for sure.. but, based on the assumption of a performance clause, these execs need to return this money. AIG is clearly stepping beyond the bounds and this issue proves that the executives currently operating AIG need to be terminated. Yes, every last one of them. If nationalization is the key, then that’s what needs to happen. Perhaps it needs temporary nationalization just long enough to clean house and then rehire the positions with executives who can actually run AIG properly.
If AIG did actually write employment contracts with mandatory bonus payouts, then this company is far beyond the help of a bailout. This company has serious internal problems where the only resolution is termination of everyone involved.
Closing AIG and starting over…
At this point, the only real hope is to force other solvent insurers to take exisiting insurance contracts away from AIG. Move as many as possible. For the ones that cannot be moved, force the closure of the contracts by a certain date. For the credit default swaps, too bad. These don’t need to be insured. These are the things that cost AIG its livelyhood. If another insurer is solvent enough and willing to take the risk to support the credit default swaps, those contracts can go there.
Once all of the insurance contracts have been moved, this company needs to be quietly wound down and closed so we can be done with AIG. There have to be other insurance firms that can take the existing insurance contracts from AIG and honor them. In fact, I’m quite sure there are plenty of other insurance groups that would be grateful to have the cash flow. The American public needs to be done with AIG once and for all.
Ticketmaster: Master of nothing, king of fees
If you’ve ever purchased tickets to a music concert, chances are you’ve had to deal with Ticketmaster. You know, the ticket printing company that claims to help you obtain tickets to your favorite concert or event. In reality, this company is nothing but one big scam. Having sold tickets for Ticketmaster in the 80s, I’m well aware of their practices and how they choose to do business.
Scam or Scalper?
The only reason Ticketmaster exists is for convenience of the artists/promoters, not the concert goer. If you’ve ever had to stand in line waiting for tickets at a venue, you can at least count the number of people ahead of you and know about what tickets you will receive. Enter Ticketmaster with their near global presence. Now, you stand in line at a Ticketmaster outlet and you have no idea how many other people are ahead of you or how many tickets they may purchase. Combine this with Ticketmaster’s scam of holding back tickets for later release, random selection of tickets and you get the recipe for failure. Even if you’re the first person in line at an outlet, you may walk away with upper promenade tickets simply because that’s ‘best available’.
Best Available
This notion is Ticketmaster’s way of searching their database and giving you whatever they deem is the ‘best available. Note, however, that most outlets won’t let you specifically search or ask for tickets in other sections even if it doesn’t show to ‘Best Available’. Yet, they may be available. For example, I’ve specifically searched for seats in lower prom sections and found tickets there even when ‘Best Available’ shows to be upper prom. So, whatever algorithm that Ticketmaster has written is completely flawed and doesn’t work (or is intentionally designed to NOT give you best available).
Released Tickets
Granted, some promotors do hold back sections of seats for their own use. Some may be reserved for other purposes and some may be reserved for the venue to sell directly. When these seats aren’t sold, given away or whatever, they are then released to Ticketmaster. These seats (some front row seats) can appear even just hours before the event! I have found front row seating for several events the day of the concert simply just poking around looking for tickets in Ticketmaster’s computer. Granted, when you find them, you have to be willing to purchase them immediately because any of the other thousands of outlets could also be looking for them too. For example, I had found front row seats for Neil Diamond (back during his heyday) and front row lower prom for Stevie Nicks (back in her heyday) within one or two days of the event.
Fees and more fees
Ticketmaster now charges $12-$20 per ticket convenience charge. Ticketmaster might as well be considered scalpers. In 1979, tickets to concerts COST $15.00. The cost of Ticketmaster’s convenience charge is now close to or more than the event ticket cost in 1979! For example, with Britney Spear’s 2009 tour tickets, why would you give Ticketmaster $18.75 for you to go to the web, search for ‘Best Available’ and then issue and print your own tickets? It doesn’t cost $18.75 to print two paper tickets and mail them. The cost for that process is perhaps no more than $2. $1 total for the ticket paper, ink and envelope and $1 for postage. Ok, so there might be a small fee incurred in hand carrying the envlope to the post… So maybe $3. Paying $18.75 for $3 worth of materials is outrageous. If you choose to print your own tickets from your printer, they STILL charge you! Yet, you paid for the paper and ink.
Online Ticketmaster
Now that Ticketmaster has moved to the web, their searching process has not changed. But now, you have no control over what they find for you and you have no idea how many other people are out there doing the same thing. They also do not give you the ability to actually search for tickets in specific seactions. You take what they find for you even if they aren’t the best. Worse, Ticketmaster still charges you the $18.75 convenience fee for you to do the work. Other than their print and mail process, which is probably automated anyway, this fee is now completely outrageous and unnecessary.
No Ticketmaster concerts for me
Ticketmaster is part of the problem. For the reasons above (price, fees, bad business practices), I do not trust Ticketmaster. As a result of that lack of trust combined with outrageous ticket prices by the artists, I do not go to concerts. When concerts cost no more than $20 to get in, I’m game. When they get to $80, that’s when it’s no longer worth it. After combining Ticketmaster’s outrageous and unnecessary fees with the cost of the event and the venue fees, I don’t understand why anyone continues to use Ticketmaster for purchase of tickets. You’re just paying to ensure Ticketmaster’s continued existence. Sure, it’s convenient, but it’s also a complete rip-off. Insist on buying your tickets directly from the venue directly without the need for Ticketmaster. If the venue sells you a ticket with a convenience fee, insist on not paying it as there is no such thing when you’re purchasing it directly from the venue.
Unless concert promoters wake-up realize that Ticketmaster is not the answer for selling tickets, they are likely excluding a lot of people, like myself, who would go to more events but simply will not use Ticketmaster, but still want a web based ticket purchase. Promoters: Ticketmaster is not helping you fill the arena.
Competition is healthy
Visit your artist’s web sites and let them know that you don’t want to pay Ticketmaster’s gouging fees to obtain tickets to their event and encourage them to use other ticket distributors such as BandsInTown. We desperately need competition in the ticket selling space to force Ticketmaster to rethink their outrageous fees.
Note that buying your tickets from a scalper is not the answer. nor is that competition. Not only are you now paying Ticketmaster’s fees, you’re paying the scalper’s outrageous upcharge. Again, scalpers are not competition to Ticketmaster, they are just there to mark up Ticketmaster’s already scalped prices.
America’s Recession: loans and scams
Economic Downturn & The Fed
Unless you’ve been hiding in a cave, you’re probably aware that we’re going through a fairly deep recession. Recessions are cyclical, but in this case it probably could have been either avoided or lessened IF the banks and lenders had not been offering creative financing techniques. It also could likely have been avoided if our current pro-business govt. administration hadn’t chosen to look the other way while bad mortgages were being doled out. The problem with all of the creative financing is that it tended to lead some people into believing they could afford a mortgage they could not afford. When the loan reset after the promotional period, the realization quickly set in. Worse, the situation was compounded by property investors who sank huge amounts of loaned money into properties that would eventually become valued less than the loan.
It’s not as if the handwriting wasn’t on the wall several years ago when the fed dropped the rate to 1 percent. Now, we are back in this exact situation again with the fed dropping the rate to an unprecedented 1/2 percent. The feds are, again, trying to spur the economy like they did 2-3 years ago. But, this time, the banks don’t have money to lend. So, the 1/2 percent may not trickle down into the mortgage market like it did several years ago.
But, our economy is still likely being set up for yet another financial failure. The banks that do have money to lend are still advertising on the radio claiming extremely low interest rates. The problem isn’t the rate, but the loan you’ll be getting. If it’s a standard fixed rate loan, that’s fine. But, it’s the fine print you need to read. Don’t get locked into an adjustable rate mortgage or a limited time interest only loan. Once these creative loans reset in a couple of years, you may end up deep under water.
The Fed, therefore, needs to be extra careful when cutting the rates this low again to avoid the same mortgage problems all over again.
Scams in a down economy
With the economy being so depressed, it’s also a good idea to watch your money closely. As money gets tighter and tighter, the scammers will come out of the woodwork (and they already are). I’ve already noticed a drastic increase in spam and phishing emails since the economy has taken a turn. It’s going to get worse before it gets better.
There are many scams out there from the Nigerian 419 scam that claims to give you a ton of money only to rip you off of thousands of dollars before you realize it, to sending you what look like official invoices that only turn out to be scams in themselves. Don’t fall for them. The easiest way to avoid scams is to not give out any personal information to anyone who approaches you claiming to be from a legit company. This means, if you receive a call asking you to make a payment and they request for you to give a credit card over the phone, don’t. Make sure you know who this company is first and make sure you are a customer. Then, tell the company that you will call them back through their official channels and make a payment that way. As long as you are the person making the call to the official number, you should be safe. With incoming calls, you have no idea who is really calling you no matter what the CallerID says. Always, always call companies back from official numbers located on a trusted bill or from the back of your credit card.
TV advertisements that offer products or services usually employ people who are not paid very well. So, be wary when you give your credit card number out to TV commercial based purchases. Not only are some of these companies impossible to get refunds, your card number could be enrolled in a club or, worse, stolen by one of the telephone operators in an independent scam. You should always Google the product you are thinking of purchasing to 1) find out if you can find it cheaper online and 2) find out if people have had issues with either the product or the companies refund polices.
Get rich schemes are basically another form of scam. Yes, they do make someone rich… the person who created the scheme, but not you. Get rich schemes are usually designed to part you from your money. So, in a down economy, you should avoid get rich schemes (placing classified ads, setting up ecommerce sites that sell Amway products, or Multi Level Marketing – MLM schemes). Note that MLMs only make the top most people money. If you’re anywhere near the bottom, you will be parted from your money.
Craigslist and even eBay are a haven for scammers. Be careful when you work with people selling or renting things. Never buy or rent anything sight unseen and never give money out as a ‘deposit’ or to ‘hold’ something unless you truly trust the individual. Chances are, if the person you are thinking of doing business is presently outside of the US, you should immediately stop the transaction unless you know for sure that what they are selling/renting is legit.
If you are selling a car or renting out an apartment, watch out for scams here too. There are some people who are outside of the US who will claim to give you an excessive sum of money in the form of a check. They may even send you what looks like an official check.. the problem is that it will bounce causing you fees and other associated problems (and may let them get access to your account number). Don’t cash any checks like this.
The bottom line is that in this weak economy, you should be extra careful with your money as there are lots of desperate unemployed people willing to do anything to make a buck (or a thousand). Always make sure to do your homework before buying anything or giving out personal information to someone you don’t know. If you suspect a scam, you should alert your bank or credit card company immediately.
Random Thoughts - Randocity! 
1 comment