Shell game?

“Payment processing” used to involve standing in the checkout line and handing the cashier your pennies.  (Remember checkout lines?  Remember cashiers?  Remember pennies?)  In a lawsuit filed in federal court, the FTC alleges that Ideal Financial Solutions and more than a dozen individual and corporate defendants used an “intricate web of concealment” to game the payment processing system in a way that resulted in more than $25 million in unauthorized credit card charges and bank account debits.

How did the operation work?  According to the complaint, the defendants set up shell companies to establish merchant accounts with third-party payment processors they used to charge people’s credit cards or debit their bank accounts.  The fees, usually around $30, showed up on consumers' statements with nondescript descriptors like Debt2Wealth, Fund Assur, or Avanix.  When people called the phone number listed by the transaction to complain — and the volume was so high, the company had to set up a new call center to handle the deluge — operators claimed the consumers had OKed the charges.

Except that according to the FTC, that was flat-out false.  Consumers had never agreed to pay.

So where did the defendants get people’s financial info?  According to the complaint, the source is unknown.  However, many consumers caught in the web had applied for payday loads online, a process that required them to give their bank account numbers with the understanding that the loan, if approved, would be deposited directly.  Unapproved charges are enough to arouse any consumer’s ire, but by targeting consumers already in financial trouble, the defendants’ unauthorized debits allegedly caused many cash-strapped victims to incur pricey penalties and overdraft fees.

Here’s where the story takes an interesting turn.  As most businesses know, when consumers contact their bank or credit card issuer to complain about an unauthorized debit or charge, those companies often process a reversal — called a chargeback — to refund the consumers.  High reversal rates can be a key sign of financial shenanigans.  According to the FTC, the return rates for the defendants’ transactions were astronomically high, compared to industry averages.  As a result, at least some payment processors terminated their merchant accounts.

But the FTC says the defendants took steps to fidget with the digits, gaming the system to make their chargeback rates look artificially low.  According to the complaint, the defendants manipulated their return rates by making multiple unauthorized debits from consumers’ bank accounts for tiny amount like one cent or three cents.  They immediately refunded those amounts before making the unauthorized $30 debit.  By doing that, they falsely inflated the number of total debits and thereby made their return rates look lower by comparison.  According to the complaint, the defendants engaged in that shell game to forestall fraud investigations and merchant account termination.

A federal judge in Nevada has frozen the defendants’ assets and appointed a receiver to manage the business pending trial.  But even at this preliminary stage, there are tips savvy businesses can take from the FTC’s law enforcement action.

Many (un)happy returns.  Regardless of where your company is in the payment chain, watch for warning signs of consumer dissatisfaction.  High chargeback rates can be a serious signal that something’s amiss.

Charlatan’s web?  According to the FTC, the defendants registered more than 230 domain names, ran 50+ different billing campaigns, and often used identity-hiding services and auto-forward features.  Companies can try to hide what’s going, but there aren’t many tactics federal and state enforcers haven’t seen.  It’s a mistake to think that shell corporations, multi-layered transactions, or clever end-arounds will deter detection.

Leading edge.  Some companies seem to ask more trenchant questions when buying office chairs than business leads.  Given heightened sensitivities about consumer privacy — especially when it comes to confidential financial data — ask the questions that need to be asked before acquiring those “can’t miss” leads.

Visit the BCP Business Center's Payments and Billing page to find out more.

 

 

4 Comments

>> Leave a Comment | Comment Policy

i think i got caught up in a shell company scheme involving magazine sales. i agreed to purchase some magazine from one company, then they called and said they where the same company with all my infomation already and said they would lower my payment because i was a good customer then other company's names would show up on my credit card with a debit. i called and told them i did not ask for or want their magizines,they played me a recorning of me saying yes,but like i told them that's not the complete recording. i stopped payment on all them but the one i agreed to purchase and paid it off. i recorded them one time, then asked to hear their recording of our conversation,they said they wasn't allowed, their manager would have to do that,i told them i had recorded the conversation,they said that was against the law because i did not inform them they were being recorded. i informed them that when they said some or all of this call will be recorded i answered me too.they hung up on me. i am now getting calls from collection agencies telling me they will sue me.i said go ahead i have reciepts where i paid around $2500.00 to these companies and i was not paying any more, to do what they had to do and i would do what i had to do.
thank you,
gedith butler

I had click the boxes telling Amazon I die not want their Prime Service but I was charged anyway. When I saw the charge online I contacted the bank/ Told this an unapproved charge will the bank reverse, the answer was no. I would have to sign forms and wait for a department within the bank to process the forms which would take weeks. I thought that usually as I needed the money that was taken to cover a check. I called Amazon, after searching for over an two hours for the correct number, the charged was reversed and I got the impression that a lot of people had called for reversals. There should be more public notice as to what to do about unauthorized charges against individual back accounts.

This is scary. I will try to avoid similar situations in the future by using well-established payment processors and guarding my financial data from everything else.

Continue doing the great job u guys do over at the FTC. Keep busting these "companies" that are just riping ppl off. Good job.

Leave A Comment

Don't use this blog to report fraud or deceptive practices. To file a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission, please use the FTC Complaint Assistant.

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT: It is your choice whether to submit a comment. If you do, you must create a user name, or we will not post your comment. The Federal Trade Commission Act and the Federal Information Security Management Act authorize this information collection for purposes of managing online comments. Comments and user names are part of our public records system, and user names are also part of our computer user records system. We may routinely use these records as described in our Privacy Act system notices. For more information on how we handle information that we collect, please read our privacy policy.