Category: Fight Back

Pension Scammers Caught

Four scammers who conned pension savers out of £13.7 million have been banned from the industry and banned from being company directors or trustees. The Pensions Regulator has launched a criminal investigation as these people need to be jailed for swindling so many out of their life savings.

David Austin was the leader of the group and he and his family took most of the proceeds.

The money was spent on lavish living – and only £3.2M of the cash taken was actually invested in anything and that was a risky venture.

David Austin is a former bankrupt with no experience running an investment business, but conned people into investing with him.

The scam starts with cold calling and websites set up to lure pension investors. The scammers created a series of bogus investments including one about growing truffle trees and one about a Caribbean holiday site.

The victims were told their pensions would be reinvested and they would be paid an upfront cash lump sum for making the transfer. They were also lied to that their funds would be put into assets, bonds and HMRC-compliant investments to meet the target return of 5% growth a year.

False documents were used to trick staff at the schemes where the victims had their pensions – into believing that the pension holders worked for companies linked to the scam schemes. This meant the staff were persuaded to allow £13.7 million of funds to be transferred to the scam schemes.

David Austin installed fellow criminals Alan Barratt, Susan Dalton and Julian Hanson as the trustees for the scam schemes and they were then paid to act on his instructions, allowing the scheme monies to be used at Austin’s will. Barratt and Dalton also acted as salesmen for Austin’s Spain-based business, Select Pension Investments, persuading victims to transfer their pension pots into the schemes.

A small proportion of the funds – between 10% and 25% of the amounts transferred – were given back to the victims as their “rebate”, although many victims were assured that this payment was coming from the investment provider not out of their pension pots. More than £1 million was paid to “introducers” or “agents” who used cold-calling to encourage pension members to transfer over their funds.

More than £10.3 million was transferred to businesses owned or controlled by Austin,

A whistle-blower contacted The Pensions Regulator about the scam in November 2014 who then took control of the schemes to prevent further money being removed.

If you have any experiences with scammers, spammers or time-waster do let me know, by email.

Fightback Ninja Signature

Unexplained Wealth Orders

New powers under the Criminal Finances Act 2017 came into force on 31 January 2018 relating to unexplained wealth orders (UWOs).

The purpose of such an order is to require the designated person to account for the origin of their assets.

This new power has been designed to target suspected corrupt foreign officials who have potentially laundered stolen money through the UK.

Investigators from the National Crime Agency believe there are billions of pounds of dirty money invested in British property – but it is almost impossible to charge the owners with a crime or seize the assets because of a lack of evidence.

Only the High Court can issue an Unexplained Wealth Order when it is satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe that the respondent is a “politically exposed person” who has been involved in serious crime or that a person connected with the respondent is, or has been, involved in serious crime.

A “politically exposed person” means an individual whose prominent position in public life may make them vulnerable to corruption. This category includes heads of state, heads of government, members of parliament and members of the boards of central banks.

The enforcement agencies with the power to apply for these orders are the Financial Conduct Authority, Serious Fraud Office, the National Crime Agency , HM Revenue and Customs, and the Crown Prosecution Service.

The First Unexplained Wealth Order

Originally from Azerbaijan, she is the wife of an ex-state banker, Zamira Hajiyeva is the first person named on an Unexplained Wealth Order.

She risks losing her £15m home near the London store and a Berkshire golf course if she fails to explain the source of her wealth to the High Court. Mrs Hajiyeva must now provide the National Crime Agency with a clear account of how she and her husband, Jahangir Hajiyev, could afford to buy their large home in the exclusive London neighbourhood of Knightsbridge.

Jahangir Hajiyev is the former chairman of the International Bank of Azerbaijan and his wife Zamira wil have to explain amongst other expenditure spending £16 million in Harrods using 35 credit cards issued by her husband’s bank.

Oh Dear!

Do enter your email address and click on the subscribe button on top right to keep up to date with new posts.

Fightback Ninja Signature

Latvian Virus King Sentenced

Ruslans Bondars, a 37-year-old Latvian citizen, was convicted of conspiracy to violate computer crime laws, commit wire fraud, and computer intrusion with intent to cause damage and sentenced to 14 years in prison.

He is the creator of a notorious service called scan4you that helped malware authors avoid detection by anti-virus software.

He charged criminals a monthly fee and his service allowed them to upload their latest malware to receive a report on whether any of a wide range of anti-virus products would detect it as malicious.

Although Scan4You was not the only counter anti-virus service operating on the web, it became the most popular amongst online criminals.

One of the most infamous pieces of malware which took advantage of Scan4You’s service was the Citadel malware, which was then used to steal tens of millions of customer credit card details from US retail giant Target.

Citadel is thought to have infected millions of computers worldwide, inflicting hundreds of millions of dollars worth of damage.

Scan4You was advertised on online criminal forums and even offered technical support to its paying customers.

Bondars, who has also been linked to pharmaceutical spam campaigns peddling illegal prescription drugs, and assisting in the distribution of banking trojans, told the court that he felt “ashamed that some of the website users used it for such terrible things.”

Good riddance, at least for 14 years.

Do enter your email address and click on the subscribe button on top right to keep up to date with new posts.

Fightback Ninja Signature

New Banking Code on Fraud

A new code of conduct has been created but it is not binding in law yet, so really it’s just a set of guidelines.

This has been created by the Payment Systems Regulator after Which? raised a super-complaint about the banks treatment of people defrauded in push payment scams. These are the scams where the victim transfers money to a scammer from their bank account. The banks consider these to be largely the victim’s own fault and hence not their responsibility. But many disagree and believe the banks should identify and stop these payments where possible and make it more difficult for scammers to get away with these frauds.

The issue of who pays compensation and under what circumstances has not been resolved – when should the banks compensate the victims of push payment fraud?

Figures from trade association UK Finance show that in the first half of 2018 consumers lost £92.9 million because of this type of fraud.

The guidelines propose the principle that where the victim of such a crime has met their requisite level of care, they should be reimbursed.

The draft code has been published by the APP Scams Steering Group, made up of industry and consumer group representatives. It has been open for consultation.

It said there may be instances where a victim of this type of fraud has met their requisite level of care, and so should be reimbursed, but no bank or other payment service provider involved has breached their own level of care.

It will work to identify “a sustainable funding mechanism” through which to reimburse consumers in such a scenario.

Under the draft code, banks and other payment service providers would take measures to tackle APP scams, such as:

  • Detecting APP scams through measures such as analytics and employee training;
  • Preventing APP scams from taking place by taking steps to provide customers with effective warnings that they are at risk;
  • Responding to APP scams, for instance, by delaying a payment while an investigation is conducted and, if necessary, carrying out timely reimbursement.

Do you have an opinion on this matter? Please comment in the box below.

Fightback Ninja Signature

UK Cyber Force

The UK government announced the creation of a £250m cyber-force unit that will combat terrorist groups and domestic gangs.

The government is planning it to be an offensive cyber warfare unit in a bid to meet the online threat posed by Russia, North Korea, Iran and other countries active in cyber-attacks.

Experts will be recruited from the military, security services and industry for the project which will be set up by the Ministry of Defence and GCHQ.

In July 2019, a parliamentary committee warned that ministers are failing to get to grip with the shortage in cyber security experts despite the “potentially severe implications” for national security.

MPs and peers said the situation is of “serious concern”, but the Government response lacks “urgency”.

They warned that the WannaCry attack in May 2017, which hit the NHS, showed the need to protect critical national infrastructure  from cyber threats.

In July, a Government spokeswoman said: “We have a £1.9 billion National Cyber Security Strategy, opened the world-leading National Cyber Security Centre and continue to build on our cyber security knowledge, skills and capability.”

For obvious reasons, the UK’s cyber-attack capabilities are a secret, but are widely regarded to be very active.

Do leave a comment on this post – click on the post title then scroll down to leave your comment.

Fightback Ninja Signature

Fakespot Identifies Fake Reviews

The website at www.fakespot.com/ was created to “Bring trust back to the Internet” say the owners.

Fakespot is a data analytics company that wants to change the way people read reviews and similar content.

They believe that authentic user reviews are just about the best thing to come out of the Internet. However, the user review system is often abused by sellers that pay for reviews, by companies trying to make their competition look bad, and technologies that pretend to be real reviewers.

How to Use Fakespot

Fakespot can scan all of the reviews for any product or service you select on Yelp™ or Amazon™, Trip Advisor and Apple APP store and tell you whether the reviews are generally reliable or generally unreliable through the letter grade system.

With so many online shopping options, a strong or weak product review can have a huge impact on whether or not a purchase is made. The credibility of these reviews is undermined by businesses who leave fake reviews for themselves or for their competitors – or by individuals with an undisclosed bias.

Fakespot does not review products so cannot tell you how good a product is, it simply analyses the existing reviews looking for patterns that indicate authenticity or otherwise.

Fakespot uses various techniques to evaluate the authenticity of reviews, including:-.

  • English language pattern recognition
  • The profile of the reviewer
  • Correlation with other reviewer data

The algorithm uses machine learning to constantly improve itself by looking at profile clusters, sentiment analysis and cluster correlation. We use artificial intelligence that has been trained to pick up on patterns. The more data that flows into the system, the better the system gets at the detecting fakes.

Amazon unverified reviews are considered unreliable by Fakespot because when the system associates a product review with a product purchase, that review is from a “verified purchaser”. These reviews are in most cases reliable, since Amazon has already confirmed an actual purchase of the product being reviewed.

But, if an Amazon review is not from a ‘verified purchaser’ there is no way of knowing for sure if the reviewer even used the product. While it is possible that a reviewer could have purchased the product elsewhere and left a review on Amazon at a later date, without purchase verification, it is impossible to tell.

Also, Fakespot systems have shown that most paid reviews come from unverified purchasers.

Do leave a comment on this post – click on the post title then scroll down to leave your comment.

Fightback Ninja Signature