Apple Being Sued For Refusing To Help iTunes Gift Card Scam Victims (9to5mac.com) 111
"Apple is being sued for allegedly refusing to help those who have fallen victim to a iTunes gift card scam," reports 9to5Mac, in an article shared by Slashdot reader AmiMoJo:
An 11-count class action lawsuit has been filed against the company. Apple is accused of lying when it says that there is no way to trace or refund the value of the cards...
iTunes gift card scams usually work in a slightly different way, typically being used to buy paid apps owned by the scammers, so they receive 70% of the money when paid by Apple. The lawsuit says that Apple tells scam victims there is nothing that can be done once the money has been spent, but argues that this isn't true. In fact, Apple holds 100% of the funds for a period of 4-6 weeks, between the apps being purchased and Apple paying the developer. During this time, the company is in a position to refund 100% of the card value. Additionally, Apple takes a 30% commission, so would always be in a position to refund this much, even after the scammer has been paid.
ZDNet quotes the court documents as arguing that Apple "is incentivized to allow the scam to continue because it reaps a 30% commission on all scammed proceeds... knowingly or recklessly, Apple plays a vital role in the scheme by failing to prevent payouts to the scammers."
iTunes gift card scams usually work in a slightly different way, typically being used to buy paid apps owned by the scammers, so they receive 70% of the money when paid by Apple. The lawsuit says that Apple tells scam victims there is nothing that can be done once the money has been spent, but argues that this isn't true. In fact, Apple holds 100% of the funds for a period of 4-6 weeks, between the apps being purchased and Apple paying the developer. During this time, the company is in a position to refund 100% of the card value. Additionally, Apple takes a 30% commission, so would always be in a position to refund this much, even after the scammer has been paid.
ZDNet quotes the court documents as arguing that Apple "is incentivized to allow the scam to continue because it reaps a 30% commission on all scammed proceeds... knowingly or recklessly, Apple plays a vital role in the scheme by failing to prevent payouts to the scammers."
Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is being obviously duped seen by some people as someone else's problem?
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is being obviously duped seen by some people as someone else's problem?
For the same reason being shot in the head is seen by some people as someone else's problem.
Illegal acts are, by extension, societies problem. Prevention and punishment both follow in unpredictable measure.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Interesting)
Yeah, ok, but that's not what's happening here. Some trial lawyer is attempting to make a killing off of this. The lawyer's will get 40% of the award in cash while the plaintiffs will get coupons for discounts for cellphone accessories that nobody will ever use.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't disagree, and it's rather sad that is probably the very most that will ever be done to fix the actual problem.
I guess the only real question is whether it is better than nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like it's not better than nothing.
And probably worse.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
You're assuming Apple has control over any of that.
Gift Cards are not registered to anyone. They're basically a more limited form of cash - if you lose it, you don't get it back. If you open a pack and it doesn't work, sometimes you can get a new code if the money wasn't spent, but that requires you to actually have the card.
It's why there are gift card scams where they get the code, carefully put it back on the shelf and wait for someone to activate it.
Apple's involvement is simply having a system that is popular enough that you can buy gift cards for it anywhere. If Amazon gift cards were sold in every store, you'd see scammers use them to pay your "back taxes" or "arrest warrant" or whatever.
And Apple doesn't profit - scammers don't use the gift cards to redeem iTunes stuff ever - it's basically just codes being sold on gift card resale sites for 50 cents on the dollar. If you want a cheap gift card, you go there and the ones selling really cheap are the ones from scammers because they want it sold quick before the code gets cancelled (which is about as much as Apple can do). But once it's been redeemed, well, at that point you're probably going to hurt an innocent third party who bought a code.
There is no magic technology that can tell if the person buying the gift card is being scammed. Retailers sometimes notice if people are buying $500+ in iTunes gift cards and ask.
About the only thing Apple can do would be to limit the maximum amount of gift cards you can at one time. But that just makes the problem worse - if the retailers can only sell you $200 of gift cards in one transaction, the scammers just make the victim visit more retailers. And it's impossible to detect since $200 may be a perfectly reasonable amount of gift cards to buy.
It's just like if they use bitcoin ATMs - but luckily for those, most people using them are being scammed and very little of it is legitimate, so retailers can lock them away and require an interaction before purchase. People buying iTunes gift cards is a completely legitimate activity versus the number of people being scammed, and sometimes the only sign is that someone is buying $500 or more at once. But like I said, in that case the scammers just say to buy $200 instead to fly under the radar.
The only other way is to make them non-transferable, which kind of defeats the purpose since almost no one buys gift cards for themselves unless there's a sale. They're almost always bought to give to other people.
Unless you think Apple has magic intention detecting technology that can determine why someone buys their gift card.
The lawsuit is not likely to succeed, at least not without some really big ramifications that would make it almost impossible to buy anything anonymously. Or perhaps Apple can force all the gift card resellers to shut down, which would pretty much kill a perfectly legitimate business which is for the most part providing a valuable service.
So you're either going to screw over the scammed, screw over an innocent third party, or screw over all of us. Apple can't control the market of their gift cards anymore than the government can control how every single dollar is used. It may be a dollar, it may be a crack pipe. It may be turned into a paper airplane, it may be dumped into a water fountain.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You can in fact buy Amazon gift cards in most supermarkets here in the UK.
Re: (Score:2)
I stopped reading after the 3rd or 4th obviously false statement you made but I assume the rest is similar.
With 'cash' the value is tied directly to the possession of the bill/coin. That is entirely and completely untrue for gift cards where the value is tied to the issuing company (be it Apple, Amazon, or Amex) holding the value and then approving any transactions against the it.
Gift cards are more similar to credit cards, except they are pre-paid and (relatively) anonymous.
If Apple can reverse a fraudule
Re: (Score:2)
And Apple doesn't profit
What? Of course they do. They get paid no matter who uses the card. They profit whether it's used legally or not.
Re: (Score:2)
It’s been estimated that nearly 30% of the American economy is the result of fraud or deception. Charges not agreed to and tacked onto your credit card bill, channels never ordered, “opt-outs” that weren’t unchecked, false advertising, etc.
It’s hardly even seen as a crime here anymore. Hence the first post. Pay taxes out the ass for a government to provide for the general welfare of the people, but eh, fuck you, not our problem.
We’re a nation in decline. It’ll b
Re: (Score:2)
That may happen, but also Apple may put measures in place to make the scams more difficult in the future and cut down the amount of fraud. As it stands, they profit from the current system and have no incentive to stop it.
Re: (Score:1)
It's like a check that somebody falsified/stole/copied and fraudulently sold to somebody.
How is that the bank's problem?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes they do. They charge overage fees and returned check fees of $32-50, they take the investment returns on most checking and savings accounts.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. You see, the flaw in your question is that proof of "illegitimate criminal activity" tends to come well after the transactions occur. At most banks are required to flag and report suspicious activity.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
The court decides after the event has occurred, you git. You keep missing that point and simply assuming that the account is known to be "associated with illegitimate criminal activity" from the start.
And I used the definite article "the" on purpose. "Does the bank take a percentage or charge a fee associated with facilitating financial fraud?" Nope. Accordi
Re: (Score:2)
I'll take it further:
US Banks (and most elsewhere) are 100% required to have anti-fraud and anti-money-laundering monitoring in place. In fact, they're subject to some stiff fines if they fail audits around this. i.e. it's not enough to just have a system, but it has to be a working one.
Credit card companies are bound by consumer protection laws which limit liability for the card holder to $50 per fraudulent instance. They're on the hook for any/all money above that so they have active and very functiona
Re: (Score:2)
And I acknowledged that when I initially wrote "[a]t most banks are required to flag and report suspicious activity." They also have "know your customer" regulations that can't really apply with gift card transactions, although I'll note that mo
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Informative)
It's like a check that somebody falsified/stole/copied and fraudulently sold to somebody. How is that the bank's problem?
It's not actually. It's like a check that the legitimate account holder filled out themselves, absolutely voluntary, and handed over to a scammer.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like a check that somebody falsified/stole/copied and fraudulently sold to somebody.
How is that the bank's problem?
It's not actually. It's like a check that the legitimate account holder filled out themselves, absolutely voluntary, and handed over to a scammer.
If it is all voluntary why do you consider them scammers?
Sounds like legitimate business people to me.
Cough.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, and you can contact Apple to have the gift card refunded in the exact same way.
The problem here is that you cannot stop a check from being processed AFTER it has already been cashed. That is exactly what apple is saying. They cannot return funds after the gift card has been spent.
The lawsuit argues that Apple can technically do this, even if this means that both Apple and the app developers take a loss.
Re: (Score:2)
But if you can track the funds, you can get banks and law enforcement to go after the criminals and possibly retrieve the money stolen.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Informative)
It's not the bank's problem but if the bank has the contact information of the person who cashed they check, the right thing to do is turn that information over to the police. A gift card is fully traceable from the entry point to the exit point of Apple's ecosystem with contact information and credit card information on each end. The criminals are using Apple's system to launder money and Apple is fully capable of tracing that money for the law enforcement. They can also terminate the fake app on the receiving end. They have the moral obligation to not knowingly harbor criminals and allow criminals to use their system to launder money.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, but they don’t know how the cards are actually disposed of— did an “innocent” third party purchase the gift card from the scammer and proceed to use it? How deep is Apple’s obligation to investigate fraud?
From past experience, I know for a fact that they do have fraud detection in place, and when it is a clear case of fraud and the parties involved they take action. I think, but cannot be 100% certain, that some gift cards are not controlled by Apple, just Apple-branded.
Re: (Score:1)
How much does Apple want to be a bank and/or credit card?
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
If you actually read the lawsuit, its not about Apple refusing to hand over information to law enforcement, its about the plaintiffs wanting Apple to do something outside of the legal system - they want Apple to trace and refund the amounts (either the 30% commission or the full gift card value) on the mere say so of the claimant.
If law enforcement want the information, they can ask Apple for it - the lawsuit isn't claiming that Apple won't provide this information to law enforcement, its claiming they won't provide this information to the claimants or conduct internal investigations at Apples own expense in order to establish the source and destination of the funds and carry out a refund.
Re: (Score:2)
The claimant has the gift card number as proof. They give the number in an email or over the phone and retain the original card.
Re: (Score:2)
A lot of the posts here say that the scammer is selling the gift card number, taken from "actual" cards. Does the scammer not also have the gift card number? Can they not phone in the number as well as the "legitimate" holder? If they gain the numbers by taking photos of the cards, they can send those in as well as "proof".
The only reasonable course would seem to be to have the card holder mail the physical card in for exchange.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Where did I talk in my comment about "proof"? Having the physical gift card is only proof that you have the physical gift card - everything else ("I've been scammed") is still on the say so of the claimant and should go through law enforcement rather than Apple.
Re: (Score:2)
Well there is another easy way to show you have been scammed - the purchase made with the gift card isn't on your Apple account.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Informative)
It's like a check that somebody falsified/stole/copied and fraudulently sold to somebody.
It is sort of like that, except that the "check" hasn't cleared yet and the "bank" gets to keep 30% if they allow the transaction to continue despite knowing it is fraudulent.
Re: (Score:1)
Checks clear instantly these days, moreover, in this case, the check did clear and only later does someone realize they've been scammed.
If you do a bank transfer, you don't just get to reverse it because the bank doesn't actually give the receiver real cash. It's all numbers in a database.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Most checks contain at least eight security features that are inspected.
That protects against forged checks. Most of the time the fraudulent checks will be genuine checks. Like someone steals your check book and writes checks, they are all genuine. And that's where the hit the scammer's victim. Even if the check is accepted, that can be reversed months later.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Someone else's problem (Score:2)
A check is an entirely different matter, a $50 gift card is like a $50 bill, and not the banks problem.
Re: (Score:1)
That would be like suing Ford for supplying the getaway car used in a bank robbery. Ford made money off the sale of the car.
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Ford cannot control what you can do with the car, Apple can control what you do with the card.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
That would be like suing Ford for supplying the getaway car used in a bank robbery. Ford made money off the sale of the car.
No, using your example it would be more like Ford supplying a getaway car with a GPS and that car is used to rob a bank and Ford refusing to disclose the current or previous locations of the getaway car. Oh, and also Ford got a kickback from the criminal for not disclosing the information.
If you have a gift card number, Apple has full record of where that card entered and left their ecosystem. At a bare minimum, after proper proof, they should refund the 30% and disable both the incoming account and the
Re:Someone else's problem (Score:5, Insightful)
If you have a gift card number, Apple has full record of where that card entered and left their ecosystem. At a bare minimum, after proper proof, they should refund the 30% and disable both the incoming account and the outgoing app account and release the contact information of both sides of the transaction to the police. Failure to do so and they are accomplices in facilitating money laundering.
Wrong on so many levels.
Lets start with knowing where the card(s) came from: Unless the card(s) was purchased directly from Apple, the absolute most Apple can know is that the card(s) came from Walmart / Target / some gas station. Maybe they will even know the transaction came from a specific store number when it was activated. They won't have any info on who bought the card(s), if it was bought with cash / credit / debit, or anything other than it was purchased from said store chain or specific store. Good luck proving you bought the said card when you tossed the receipt and likely mailed off the physical card to the scammer. If you don't have to prove you actually bought the card... I'm out a billion dollars from itunes scams, I'll settle for the 30% of that.
Secondly: it's not Apple's job to report every Tom, Dick, and Harry to the police because some dumb fuck thinks they were scammed and accuses someone else. All while expecting Apple to pay them back. That just opens up tons of room for fraud in and of itself. The only time Apple should ( and in fact the only time they have any obligation to ) be contacting police is if it is blatantly obvious that money laundering is going on. And even then, it's not the police, but government agencies that have the power to investigate across state or international borders.
Re: Someone else's problem (Score:2)
That is why I qualified it with the statement that if you know the card number. If it was a digital certificate, you stupidly emailed or gave the number over the phone, etc.. then you very well might know the number.
But that being said, gift cards are now activated at the register so it is very possible that if you purchased it with a credit card that walmart can actually look up the number for you as well even if you no longer have the physical card.
Re: (Score:2)
The proof would be the email containing the card number that they sent to the scammer. That's how it works, they ask you to send the number over, not the physical card. Since the numbers are long and pseudo-random the chances of someone guessing one that happened to be used to buy that particular app are extremely low.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If you have a gift card number, Apple has full record of where that card entered and left their ecosystem. At a bare minimum, after proper proof, they should refund the 30% and disable both the incoming account and the outgoing app account and release the contact information of both sides of the transaction to the police.
They have already stopped the money from being paid to the app developer, removed the app, and turned the app developer info over to police.
They've also refunded the itunes cards purchased from apple.
Technically, they also have done your last requirement.
After proper proof they refunded all zero cards purchased elsewhere.
The people in this lawsuit are just pissed off that "the other side of the transaction" are the stores the gift cards were purchased from, walmart, cvs, gamestop, etc. all of which refuse
Re: (Score:2)
Or blaming gun manufacturers for someone using their product to murder someone.
Re: Someone else's problem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You cannot attack the problem from the middle effectively, which I think reading the story is the real issue. When you buy a gift card from a third party, Apple is just in the middle; they do not control the means or place of purchase, and they do not have a sufficient data to deal with the fraud detection on the buyout end— that can happen via a developer, but is equally likely to be resold to another party.
The whole gift card system likely should be shut down as it is not possible to comply with pr
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Re: Someone else's problem (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Except in this case the scammers are creating a "fake" app on the Apple store and using the gift cards to buy said fake app. Apple then after several weeks pass the money onto the developer of the "fake" app. It should not be too hard for Apple to track down these fake apps, because likely they will have more than one person reporting they where defrauded related to the app in question. One imagines the apps don't actually do very much either.
Re: (Score:2)
Scammers never do this. Because it makes them traceable.
They use
Re: (Score:2)
Why, I never noticed it before, but you are absolutely correct! Shut down all the fraud investigations, cancel the chargeback services, deny all the insurance policies! If someone can convince someone else to give them money by whatever means possible, that's the victim's fault entirely and nobody else needs to do anything about it!
I'll bet Visa will be pleased...
Come on (Score:5, Funny)
How can anyone believe that an Apple Gift Card is a valid, reasonable way to pay taxes? How do they pay their trafic tickets? Dunkin' Donuts gift cards?
Re: (Score:2)
Many of the victims of this kind of scam are old enough that they have no idea what an Apple Gift Card is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
One day, you'll be old, and there will be all kinds of things in the world about how to pay and buy things that don't make so much sense anymore.
And you won't think so quickly anymore.
And then maybe someone will say all the right things for you to think that there's a big problem, and trigger fear, which will make you even slower to think. I guess you'll have it coming?
My dad's 82. He was a pioneer of computing. He was brilliant and raised himself up from poverty to technology leadership; honor societies
Re:Come on (Score:4, Interesting)
How can anyone believe that an Apple Gift Card is a valid, reasonable way to pay taxes?
It seems that many victims are (legitimate) immigrants, who although legitimate are in fear that something might be wrong with their immigration status. And they are coming from a place where an immigration officer asking for a bribe to fix the problem (whether real or fake) is something that reasonable people would do, so they pay because they fear otherwise they would get removed from the country.
I assume you were raised in the USA. So you know that a cop who could give you a $100 speeding ticket can't be bribed with a $50 Dunkin' Donuts gift card. But there are countries where it would happen. So _some_ people would think it is normal (not legitimate obviously, but the way things are done).
Re: (Score:3)
Re: Come on (Score:1)
Nice story brah. Get a badge/shield number and the cop instantly loses his job. No way a cop is going to accept a $50 gift card, if anything youâ(TM)ll be in jail for attempted bribery.
Use a disposable credit card (Score:3)
and do chargebacks if you're getting robbed....
Re: (Score:2)
Would a chargeback work if you bought the card yourself, in person? I mean it's a lot of work for the retailer, they have to dig up the CCTV, but the sale wasn't actually fraudulent, was it? The victim bought the card because they were being scammed, not because the retailer scammed them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Use a disposable credit card (Score:1)
I just did a chargeback. Took 5 minutes, online or through the app.
They are doing an investigation only if the merchant (Uber does this even though theyâ(TM)re a big launderer of credit card fraud) throws a stink but even then itâ(TM)s just sign a letter that what youâ(TM)re saying is truthful.
Re: (Score:2)
they are liars (Score:1)
apple claiming they cannot refund since they no longer have the money! and this from a company that has 207 billion dollars on hand! they could refund customers anytime they want.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: they are liars (Score:4, Informative)
As stated in the summary, they do have that money for 4 to 6 weeks after the card is used.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
they have 207 billion dollars in cash on hand. they have the money to pay. this is not on paper. It is actual cash. though it may not be cash from the cards it is still cash that can be used.
Re: (Score:1)
apple claiming they cannot refund since they no longer have the money!
No, apple claimed they cannot refund to the rightful owner because they don't track sales and receipts made at every other store in the world that isn't apple.
Which is true.
Go buy an itunes card from walmart. Now prove you bought it using NO walmart receipts and only paperwork apple has. You can't. Only walmart has that info in this example.
You'll notice apple already took the funds back from the in-app purchases and delisted the fake apps owned by the hackers.
They also already refunded all of those itun
Re: (Score:1)
This is what needs to happen, and after enough stores are sued, they will stop selling Apple Gift Cards. Apple could easily find the retail outlets selling their cards disappear.
Re: they are liars (Score:1)
At least thereâ(TM)s an app for that. The stores each have their own policies on returning gift cards, in most places it states right on the gift card carousel that sales are final, return with original receipt, no refunds once the gift card has been opened.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, Apple should refund 100% of the scam purchase (Score:2, Interesting)
This way, I could send $1000 in iTunes gift cards to my brother-in-law, er, that scammer that contacted me about my back taxes, and then get a refund of the whole amount. Double win!
Re:Yes, Apple should refund 100% of the scam purch (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple in this case is acting as a financial conduit for both financial fraud and money laundering. Are they held to the same standards as any other institution?
Re: (Score:2)
Financial institutions are required by law to have policies that allow them to handle cases of financial fraud or other illegitimate activity conducted via the services they provide.
That's why identify theft was not a thing in the US while it is prevalent everywhere else in the world, right? /s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Financial institutions are required by law to have policies that allow them to handle cases of financial fraud
Fraud? Yes, but not necessarily all illegitimate activity. For instance, just a few days ago I found out when looking into money transfer scams that frauds and scams are defined differently when it comes to banking (or at least Zelle splits hairs over them).
If someone gets into your account without your authorization, then transfers funds out of your account, that’s fraud but not a scam, and you’re generally entitled to get those funds back. If you’re tricked into voluntarily sending funds
Re: (Score:2)
I look at hit like this:
If someone successfully accesses my bank account without my permission, they're not defrauding me, they're defrauding the bank. That's entirely irrelevant to me, it's the bank's problem. They can't have given my money to the fraudster as that would require them to access my account without my permission. So they've given their own money away and it's a bank error that leads to my account being debited; something they can rectify.
If I access my bank account to transfer funds to a frau
Re: Yes, Apple should refund 100% of the scam purc (Score:1)
In the case of the credit card, the merchant is held liable for fraudulent transactions.
They should and have the opportunity at time of sale to verify the owner identity of the credit card.
Gift cards are just a form of cash which are likewise untraceable. Hence they are a scammers favorite because there is no track record. If you lose a gift card or a wad of bills, there is nobody to sue.
If you give a scammer on the street some cash, why should you sue the gas station or municipal locality where it happened
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Financial institutions are required by law to have policies that allow them to handle cases of financial fraud or other illegitimate activity conducted via the services they provide.
Apple in this case is acting as a financial conduit for both financial fraud and money laundering. Are they held to the same standards as any other institution?
That depends on the account and how the transaction happened. Pin transactions are treated differently than signature transactions, credit cards are treated differently than debit cards. Credit cards give you the best fraud protections, pin debit the worst, and signature debit in the middle, roughly.
But closed-loop gift cards? Like if someone makes an unauthorized purchase on your Starbucks card? I'm not sure you even need a fraud department for those. A lot can vary state to state, but if I shake a ma
Re: (Score:2)
Whoa... is this a real scam? (Score:3)
Wait a minute...
Whoa... do people really think that they can pay for their taxes and general computer repairs using an iTunes gift card... the actual gift card... not through Apple Pay, but by using the actual gift card!? Wow... that is very special indeed.
Of course Apple knows which iTunes account the gift card was redeemed into... the money is not gone without a trace. I don't think that the challenge is tracing the gift card to an AppleID. I think that the challenge is trying to arbitrate between two people, both claiming to be the legitimate owners of the gift card (...and maybe one of them does not even have an AppleID). In a world where all gift cards were still physical plastic and the store that sold the plastic gift card had a copy of the purchaser's ID, this might work because the purchaser could prove ownership. But those days are mostly gone.
I don't think that Apple wants to act as a small claims court, arbitrating between random claimants to a used gift card and its contents. That is what the courts are for... and the courts have the power to make apple reveal the personal details and identity of the other claimant to the gift card. The courts have the tools to determine which claim is the legitimate claim... Once ordered by a legitimate court, Apple should notify the other claimant that their information has been requested as part of an ongoing court case and then immediately release the information that the court requires to do its job.
Re: (Score:2)
Apple... (Score:2)
Re: Apple... (Score:2)
The gift card scam happens outside the App Store. It goes something like this:
- You have $10,000 outstanding taxes that youâ(TM)re not paying off
- You get a call from the âoeIRSâ telling you to pay up
- They mention, but if you get me a $1000 today, I can make this go away
- They instruct you to go buy gift cards
- You go along with it
- 2 weeks later you get a call from the real IRS (or another scammer) telling you to pay up
Scams always rely on the greed and cooperation of the supposed victim. W
Another way the "gift card scam" works. (Score:2)
Executive Assistant for the CEO gets an email with everything forged to look like it came from the CEO.
"Hey, Barbara, this is Steve, I'm going to be in meetings with a client today, and I really need some iTunes gift cards immediately. Could you pick some up using petty cash? I need ten $50 iTunes cards. When you get them, scratch off the backs and email me the numbers."
Reply-To address is "ReallyTheCEOTotallyNotAThief@gmail.com"
Never do anything financial via email. Seriously. Never. Not ever.