A Californian man who raked in $50,000 after opening thousands of bogus accounts with online brokers, sometimes in the name of cartoon characters, has pleaded guilty to fraud. Michael Largent, 23, of Plumas Lake, California pleaded guilty to computer fraud and wire fraud charges on Thursday over a scam that ran for six months …
If he'd opened the accounts in his own name, would it still have been fraud?
They gave HIM the money, no?
Merely taking advantage.
They make test deposits because it is cheaper than having someone actually check documentation. Personally, I don't see it as a scam but instead merely taking advantage of the greed of these companies.
Is this federal pound you in the ass prison?
Paris, because. Well you know why.
I'm gonna go ahead and let this prison rape reference through because it is from a brilliant film and not just some plonker who thinks Bubba + soap in showers = comedy.
DId he go to Chotchkie's?
can wee get more detils
on what part of what he did was a crime?
Well, no, but they probably wouldn't have let him set up multiple accounts had they known...
at a guess
what companies tend to do is deposit a small amount of money to your account and then debit it back out again. He probably waited for the deposit then closed the account pocketing it before the debit. It's such a negligibly small amount that the company probably wouldn't bother recovering it.
Depending on the size of the deposit, each one could net a few cents to a few dollars, repeating this 50,000+ times could pocket you quite a bit.
@ what crime
Um its called fraud , or theft by deception. Why because he didn't use his own name because e-trade would of stopped if he did use his own name 58k times
I would have to disagree..
I think this is one of those things that the company is trying to be cleverer than they really are. The interesting thing here is to note that they usually write this amount off without bothering. Why they're peeved is because they'll never make any money off this person.
Had he stuck around and used the money in some way so that they could cheat him out of more than they gave him, there wouldn't have been an issue.
Same thing with any business really. They exploit every loophole in the law they can get their paws on to stick the knives in. You, the lowly consumer, are not worth the effort of them being ethical. Hell, they won't even make safe products unless you sue them enough to make it too expensive to ignore you.
But if you uncover a loophole that doesn't benefit them, whether you benefit or not they'll shiv you in the back. And act all pious and "injured" while they're screwing you over.
Online money tranfewr Co's do this to authenticate account details you tell them that you bank with The bank of XYZ and have Acc No 12332197846 they then put in to that Acc £0.50 and ask you to return it to ensure that you do indeed have that Account if you pocket the money instead you are commiting an act of theft but to do as this person did you would have to set up several thousand bank accounts and sometimes credit/debit card details also must have been a very busy fellow for some time.
- Mounties always get their man: Heartbleed 'hacker', 19, CUFFED
- Analysis Oh no, Joe: WinPhone users already griping over 8.1 mega-update
- Leaked pics show EMBIGGENED iPhone 6 screen
- AMD demos 'Berlin' Opteron, world's first heterogeneous system architecture server chip
- OK, we get the message, Microsoft: Windows Defender splats 1000s of WinXP, Server 2k3 PCs