Wait, I don't get this. The Amex agent called the old phone number on the account. The person who answered gave some indication of being the account owner, but didn't answer quite as many questions correctly as the thief. So what scenario is the agent hypothesizing? The person at the old number was actually the identity thief, and used the account for maybe several years without any challenge, before the actual owner…
That jumped out at me, too. I assume the person must have simple-mindedly assumed that the best answers win (or maybe they had some dumb policy to that effect)?
An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
11–20 of 69 posts
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#12Wait, I don't get this. The Amex agent called the old phone number on the account. The person who answered gave some indication of being the account owner, but didn't answer quite as many questions correctly as the thief. So what scenario is the agent hypothesizing? The person at the old number was actually the identity thief, and used the account for maybe several years without any challenge, before the actual owner…
Man breaks up with his partner, and moves out of their shared home. He changes his phone number to be his new home.
Amex calls the old number, gets the old partner who is particularly vindictive and decides to answer the questions as well as he can.
When I worked in banking we had all sorts of issues about how we handled change of address with respect to relationship breakdown.
If a husband and wife share and account and share an address do you send them separate statements, or combine them? If the husband tells you he has changed address, do you assume the wife has changed too or assume that she's still at the old address? If he's on the phone, you can ask him but do you assume he's telling the truth?
If one member of a relationship chooses to change their mailing address, for security reasons, you might want to send a notice to their old address in case the change was fraudulent - but if they've changed their address because they're fleeing an abusive relationship then you can't send anything to the old address that indicates what the new address is. And just because someone at the old address raises an objection to the change that doesn't mean it was wrong, just that you need to do more investigation.
Those sorts of incidents were rare, but our procedures needed to plan for them. And in this case, the correct action would be to lock the account and escalate to a superior.
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#13Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#14Wait, I don't get this. The Amex agent called the old phone number on the account. The person who answered gave some indication of being the account owner, but didn't answer quite as many questions correctly as the thief. So what scenario is the agent hypothesizing? The person at the old number was actually the identity thief, and used the account for maybe several years without any challenge, before the actual owner…
If the only ask is "please don't let that transaction go through," it makes sense for a bank to comply.
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#15Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#16The best part of the story is how he hacked the US immigration system to be able to stay in the US after serving his time: > Factoring in time served and a reduction for good behavior, Naskovets got out in September 2012. He faced a deportation order that would have sent him back to Belarus. Representing himself in immigration court, he argued that he risked torture if sent home, based on his run-ins with the KGB. As…
Yale-Loehr must be so proud. Deferring to the torture risk in Belarus is such as an obvious bullshit. The only way they can torture there is by forcing you to eat their organic condensed sweetened milk.
Belarus is subject to US sanctions for “undermining democratic process and constituting an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States”.[25] It is also subject to sanctions imposed by the European Union for human-rights violations.[26] Belarus has been determined to be a habitual violator of international human-rights laws and accepted norms of international behavior by the UN, the US, the Organization of Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, the European Council, the European Parliament, the European Commission, and the NATO Parliamentary Assembly. As stated by the UN Special Rapporteur on Belarus, “it is impossible to believe that all these people are wrong or biased.”
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#17Wait, I don't get this. The Amex agent called the old phone number on the account. The person who answered gave some indication of being the account owner, but didn't answer quite as many questions correctly as the thief. So what scenario is the agent hypothesizing? The person at the old number was actually the identity thief, and used the account for maybe several years without any challenge, before the actual owner…
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#18Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yale-Loehr must be so proud. Deferring to the torture risk in Belarus is such as an obvious bullshit. The only way they can torture there is by forcing you to eat their organic condensed sweetened milk.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Belarus#Opposi... Belarus is subject to US sanctions for “undermining democratic process and constituting an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States”.[25] It is also subject to sanctions imposed by the European Union for human-rights violations.[26] Belarus has been determined to be a habitual violator of internati…
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#19The best part of the story is how he hacked the US immigration system to be able to stay in the US after serving his time: > Factoring in time served and a reduction for good behavior, Naskovets got out in September 2012. He faced a deportation order that would have sent him back to Belarus. Representing himself in immigration court, he argued that he risked torture if sent home, based on his run-ins with the KGB. As…
Yale-Loehr must be so proud. Deferring to the torture risk in Belarus is such as an obvious bullshit. The only way they can torture there is by forcing you to eat their organic condensed sweetened milk.
Re: An Identity Thief Explains the Art of Emptying Your Bank Account
#20That being said while slightly exaggerated the claim of torture in Belarus isn't far fetched. Dude in charge is pretty much a crazy dictator. I remember during the (last?) elections his main opponent was mysteriously beaten up and he said in an interview that he shouldn't whine about it like a little girl.
p.s.: How do these arrests happen, is interpol involved or can the FBI negotiate with the Czech government and just roll in there?