Tag: fraud
Proven identity and device authentication to minimize identity tax return fraud Identity fraud places an enormous burden on its victims and presents a challenge to businesses, organizations and government agencies, including the IRS and all state revenue authorities. Tax return fraud occurs when an attacker uses a consumer’s stolen Social Security number and other personal information to file a tax return, often claiming a significant refund. The IRS is challenged by innovative fraudsters continually trying to outsmart its current risk strategies around prevention, detection, recovery and victim assistance. And with the ever-increasing number of identity data compromised and tax return fraud victims, it’s necessary to question whether tax preparation companies are doing all they can to keep personally identifiable information (PII) secure and screen for fraud before forms are submitted. “ID theft isn’t just credit card fraud,” said Rod Griffin, Director of Public Education for Experian. A recent Experian online survey indicated that nearly 76 percent of consumers are familiar with ID theft and tax fraud — up significantly from the past two years. And 28 percent of those surveyed have been a victim or know a victim of tax fraud. To protect all parties’ interests, tax preparation agencies are challenged by today’s savvy fraudsters who have reaped the benefits of recent breaches. In order to protect consumers, organizations need to apply comprehensive, data-driven intelligence to help thwart identity fraud and the use of stolen identity data via fraudulent returns. The key to securing transactions, reducing friction and providing a consistently satisfying customer experience, online and offline, is authenticating consumers in a clear and frictionless environment. As a result, it’s necessary to have reliable customer intelligence based on both high-quality contextual identity and device attributes alongside other authentication performance data. Comprehensive customer intelligence means having a holistic, bound-together view of devices and identities that equips companies and agencies with the tools to balance cost and risk without increasing transactional friction. Businesses and agencies must not rely on a singular point of customer intelligence gathering and decisioning, but must move to more complex device identification and out-of-wallet verification procedures. Effective solutions typically involve a layered approach with several of the following: Identity transaction link analysis and risk attribute derivation Device intelligence and risk assessment Credit and noncredit data and risk attributes Multifactor authentication, using one-time passcodes via SMS messaging Identity risk scores Dynamic knowledge-based authentication questions Traditional PII validation and verification Biometrics and remote document verification Out-of-band alerts, communications and confirmations Contextual account, transaction and channel purview Additionally, government agencies must adhere to recognized standards, such as those prescribed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology to establish compliance. The persistent threat of tax fraud highlights the urgent need for businesses and agencies to continue educating consumers and more importantly, to improve the strategic effectiveness of their current solutions processes. Learn more about Experian Fraud and Identity Solutions, including government-specific treatments, and how the most effective fraud prevention and identity authentication strategy leverages multiple detection capabilities to highlight attackers while enabling a seamless, positive experience for legitimate consumers.
According to a recent Experian Marketing Services study, 36% of companies interact with customers in five or more channels.
Ensure you’re protecting consumer data privacy Data Privacy Day is a good reminder for consumers to take steps to protect their privacy online — and an ideal time for organizations to ensure that they are remaining vigilant in their fight against fraud. According to a new study from Experian Consumer Services, 93 percent of survey respondents feel identity theft is a growing problem, while 91 percent believe that people should be more concerned about the issue. Online activities that generate the most concern include making an online purchase (73 percent), using public Wi-Fi (69 percent) and accessing online accounts (69 percent). Consumers are vigilant while online Most respondents are concerned they will fall victim to identity theft in the future (71 percent), resulting in a generally proactive approach to protecting personal information. In fact, almost 50 percent of respondents say they are taking more precautions compared with last year. Ninety-one percent take steps to secure physical information, such as shredding documents, while also securing digital information (using passwords and antivirus software). Many consumers also make sure to check their credit report (33 percent) and bank account statements (76 percent) at least once per month. There’s still room for consumers to be safer Though many consumers are practicing good security habits, some aren’t: More than 50 percent do not check to see if a Website is secure Fifty percent do not have all their Web-enabled devices password-protected because it is a hassle to enter a password (30 percent) or they do not feel it is necessary (25 percent) Fifty-five percent do not close the Web browser when they are finished using an online account Additionally, 15 percent keep a written record of passwords and PINs in their purse or wallet or on a mobile device or computer Businesses need to be responsible when it comes data privacy Customer-facing businesses must continue efforts to educate consumers about their role in breach and fraud prevention. They also need to be responsible and apply comprehensive, data-driven intelligence that helps thwart both breaches and the malicious use of breached information and protect all parties’ interests. Nearly 70 percent of those polled in a 2015 Experian–Ponemon Institute study said that the increased visibility and media reporting of breaches, including payment-related incidents, have caused their organizations to step up data security efforts. Experian Fraud & ID is uniquely positioned to provide true customer intelligence by combining identity authentication with device assessment and monitoring from a single integrated provider. This combination provides the only true holistic view of the customer and allows organizations to both know and recognize customers and to provide them with the best possible experience. By associating the identities and the devices used to access services, the true identity can be seen across the customer journey. This unique and integrated view of identity and device delivers proven superior performance in authentication, fraud risk segmentation and decisioning. For more insights into how businesses are responding to breach activities, download our recent white paper, Data confidence realized: Leveraging customer intelligence in the age of mass data compromise. For more findings from the study, view the results here.
It may seem like April is far away, but tax season in fact launches next Tuesday, January 19. And whether you’re a business or an individual, you’ll want to know if you’re eligible for any tax benefits. Thanks to a recent announcement from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), identity theft protection will now be considered a non-taxable benefit – a nod to the rising importance of the service for all consumers in today’s security landscape. The IRS will treat identity theft protection as a non-taxable, non-reportable benefit—for any employee or company, regardless of whether they’ve experienced a data breach, or whether the identity theft protection is provided by an employer to employees or by a business to its customers. Previously, only employees or customers who were in the aftermath of a data breach could treat identity theft monitoring as a non-taxable event. But after that announcement just four months ago, several businesses suggested a data breach was not a remote risk, but rather, “inevitable.” What does this mean for companies? They can now deduct any cost of offering identity theft protection to their employees or customers. The IRS defines identity theft protection services as: Credit report and monitoring services Identity theft insurance policies Identity restoration services Other similar services It’s important to note that these don’t need to be reported on either W-2 or 1099-MISC forms. However, this new policy won’t apply to cash given to employees or customers in place of identity protection services. Perhaps the change in defining what qualifies was spurred by the IRS’s need to provide identity theft protection last summer, as its online database of past-filed returns and other documents was hacked. That breach affected over 300,000 individuals. Whatever the reason, the announcement means this is a perfect time to sign up for identity theft monitoring services. You can do so through an employer or directly with a retailer. Particularly for individuals, the ability to receive tax benefits while knowing your personally identifiable information is safe and secure is a great feeling. For existing subscribers, upgrading to premium services may now be a more viable option. Does your company offer identity theft protection and monitoring as an employee benefit? If not, would this announcement change their minds? Visit our website for more information on identity protection products you can offer your customers. Learn more
Customer Experience during the holiday shopping season During the holidays, consumers transact at a much greater rate than any other time of the year. Many risk-management departments respond by loosening the reins on their decision engines to improve the customer experience — and to ensure that this spike does not trigger a response that would impede a holiday shopper’s desire to grab one more stocking stuffer or a gift for a last-minute guest. As a result, it also is the busy season for fraudsters, and they use this act of goodwill toward your customers to improve their criminal enterprise. Ultimately, you are tasked with providing a great customer experience to your real customers while eliminating any synthetic ones. Recent data breaches resulted in large quantities of personally identifiable information that thieves can use to create synthetic identities being published on the Dark Web. As this data is related to real consumers, it can be difficult for your identity-authentication solution to determine that these identities have been compromised or fabricated, enabling fraudsters to open accounts with your organization. Experian’s Identity Element Network™ can help you determine when synthetic identities are at work within your business. It evaluates nearly 300 data-element combinations to determine if certain elements appear in cyberspace frequently or are being used in combination with data not consistent with your customer’s identity. This proven resource helps you manage fraud across the Customer Life Cycle and hinder the damage that identity thieves cause. Identity Element Network examines a vast attribute repository that grows by more than 2 million transactions each day, revealing up-to-date fraud threats associated with inconsistent or high-risk use of personal identity elements. Our goal is to provide the comfort of knowing that you are transacting with your real customers. Don’t get left in the cold this holiday season — fraudsters are looking for opportunities to take advantage of you and your customers. Contact your Experian account executive to learn how Identity Element Network can help make sure you are not letting fraudsters exploit the customer experience intended for your real customers. Learn more about the delicate balance between customer and criminal by viewing our fraud e-book.
Electronic signatures and their emerging presence in our Internet-connected world I had the opportunity to represent Experian at the eSignRecords 2015 conference in New York City last week. The concept of electronic signature, while not new, certainly has an emerging presence in the Internet-connected world — as evidenced by the various attendee companies that were represented, everything from home mortgages to automobiles. Much of the discussion focused on the legal aspects of accepting an electronic signature in lieu of an in-person physical signature. The implications of accepting this virtual stamp of approval were discussed, as well as the various cases that already have been tried in court. Of course, the outcome of those cases shapes the future of how to properly integrate this new form of authorization into existing business processes. Attendees discussed the basic concept of simply accepting a signature on an electronic pad as opposed to one written on a piece of paper. That act alone has many legal challenges even though it provides the luxury of in-person authentication through a face-to-face meeting. The complexities and risk increase exponentially when these services are extended over the Internet. The ability to sign documents virtually opens up a whole new world of business opportunities, and the concept certainly caters to the consumer’s need for convenience. However, the anonymity of the Internet presents the everyday challenge of balancing consumer expectations of greater ease of use with necessary fraud prevention measures. Ultimately, it always comes back to understanding who is actually signing that document. All of this highlights the need for robust authentication and security measures. As more and more legal documents and contracts are passed around virtually, the opportunity to properly screen and verify who has access to the documents gets more critical. Many organizations still rely on the tried-and-true method of knowledge-based authentication (KBA), while many others have called for its end. KBA continues to soldier on as an effective way to ensure that people on the other end of the wire are who they say they are by asking questions that — presumably — only they know the answers to. In most cases, KBA is viewed as a “check the box” step in the process to satisfy the lawyers. In certain cases, that’s all you need to do to ensure compliance with legal policy or regulatory requirements. It starts to get tricky is when there’s more on the line than just “check the box” actions. When the liability of first- or third-party fraud, becomes greater than simple compliance, it’s time to implement tighter security, while at the same time limiting the amount of friction caused by the process. Many in attendance discussed the need for layers of authentication based on the type of documents that are being processed and handled. This speaks directly to the point that one size does not fit all. As the industry matures and acceptance of e-signatures increases, so too does the need for more robust, flexible options in authentication. Another topic — that was quite frankly foreign to everyone we talked to — was the need for security around the concept of account takeover. When discussing this type of fraud, most attendees did not even consider this to be a hole in their strategy. Consider this fictional scenario. I’m responsible for mergers and acquisitions for my publicly traded company. I often share confidential information via electronic means, leveraging one of the many electronic signature solutions on the market. I become a victim of a phishing attack and unknowingly provide my login credentials to the fraudster. The fraudster now has access to every electronic document that I have shared with various organizations — most of which have been targets for mergers and acquisitions. Fraudsters are creative. They exploit new technologies — not because they’re trendsetters, but because oftentimes these new technologies fail to consider how fraudsters can benefit from the system. If you are considering adopting e-signature as a formal process, please consider implementing: Flexible levels of authentication based on the risk and liability of the documents that are being presented and what they are protecting FraudNet for Account Takeover, which enhances security around access to these critical documents to protect against data breaches Not only the needs and experiences of your own business, but customer needs as well to enable to the best possible customer interactions If you haven’t considered implementing e-signature technology into your business process, you should — but be sure to have your fraud team present when considering the implementation.
We all know that first party fraud is a problem. No one can seem to agree on the definitions of first party fraud and who is on the hook to find it, absorb the losses and mitigate the risk going forward. More often than not, first-party fraud cases and associated losses are simply combined with the relatively big “bucket” of credit losses. More importantly, the means of quickly detecting potential first-party fraud, properly segmenting it (as either true credit risk or malicious behavior) and mitigating losses associated with it usually lies within more general credit policies instead of with unique, targeted strategies designed to combat this type of fraud. In order to create a frame of reference, it’s helpful to have some quick — and yes, arguable — definitions: Synthetic identity: the fabrication of an identity with the intention of perpetrating fraudulent applications for, and access to, credit or other financial services Bust-out: the substantive building of positive credit history, followed by the intentional, high-velocity opening of several new accounts with subsequent line utilization and “never payment” Default payment: intentionally allowing credit lines to default to avoid payments Straight-roller: an account opened with immediate utilization followed by default without any attempt to make a payment Never pay: a form of straight-roller that becomes delinquent within the first few months of opening the account So what’s a risk manager to do? In my opinion, the best methods to consider in the fight against first-party fraud include analytical solutions that take multiple data points into consideration and focus on a risk-based approach. For my money, the four most important are: Models and scores developed with the proper set of identity and credit risk attributes derived from current and historic identity and account usage patterns (in other words, ANALYTICS) — Used at both the account opening and account management phases of the Customer Life Cycle, such analytics can be customized for each addressable market and specific first-party fraud threat The monitoring of individual identity elements at a portfolio level and beyond — This type of monitoring and LINK ANALYSIS allows organizations to detect the creation of synthetic identities Reasonable (e.g., one-to-one) identity and device associations over time versus a cluster of devices or coordinated attacks stemming from a single device — Knowing a customer’s device profile and behavioral usage with DEVICE INTELLIGENCE provides assurance that applications and account access are conducted legitimately Leveraging industry experts who have worked with other institutions to design and implement effective first-party fraud detection and loss-mitigation strategies — This kind of OPERATIONAL CONSULTING can save time and money in the long run and afford an opportunity to avoid mistakes By active use of these methods, you are applying a risk-based approach that will allow you to realize substantial savings in the forms of loss reduction and operational efficiencies associated with non-acquisition of high-risk first-party fraud applications, more effective credit line management of potentially high-risk accounts, better segmentation of treatment strategies and associated spend against high-risk identities, and removal of first-party fraud accounts from traditional collections processes that will prove futile. Download our recent White Paper, Data confidence realized: Leveraging customer intelligence in the age of mass data compromise, to understand how data and technology are needed to strengthen fraud risk strategies through comprehensive customer intelligence.
Profile of an online fraudster I recently read a study about the profile of a cybercriminal. While I appreciate the study itself, one thing it lacks perspective on is an understanding of how identity data is being used to perpetrate fraud in the online channel. One may jump to conclusions about what is a good indicator for catching fraudsters. These very broad-brush observations may result in an overwhelming number of false positives without digging in deeper. Purchase value A single approach for understanding the correlation between purchase value and fraud does not work to best protect all businesses. Back in 2005, we saw that orders under $5 were great indicators of subsequent large-ticket fraud. For merchants that sell large-ticket items, such as electronics, those same rules may not be effective. To simply believe that the low dollar amount is the extent of the crime and not just a precursor to the real, bigger crime indicates a lack of understanding of how fraudsters work to manipulate a system. For some merchants, where fraudsters know they can go to do card testing against their business, low-dollar-amount rules may apply. However, for other businesses a different set of rules must be put into place. Time of day We have been tracking fraud time of day as a rule since 2004, but the critical point is a clear definition of which time of day. For the merchant, 3 a.m. is very different than 3 a.m. for a fraudster who is in Asia or Eastern Europe, where 3 a.m. merchant time is actually the middle of the online fraudster’s day. FraudNet is designed to identify the time from the user’s device and runs its rules from the user’s time. We find that every individual business will have a very specific threat profile. Businesses need to build their individual fraud strategy around their overall attack rate taking into account the strength of the defense and the ability to be flexible to accommodate the nuances for individual consumers. A general approach to fraud mitigation inevitably results in a system that begins to chase broad averages, which leads to excessive false positives and mediocre detection. That’s what drives us to do the job better. The proof of every fraud solution should lie in its ability to catch the most fraud without negatively impacting good customers.
What the EMV Shift means for you I recently facilitated a Webinar looking at myths and truths in the market regarding the EMV liability shift and what it means for both merchants and issuers. I found it to be a very beneficial discussion and wanted to take some time to share some highlights from our panel with all of you. Of course, if you prefer to hear it firsthand, you can download the archive recording here. Myth #1: Oct. 1 will change everything Similar to the hype we heard prior to Y2K, Oct. 1, 2015, came and went without too much fanfare. The date was only the first step in our long and gradual path to EMV adoption. This complex, fragmented U.S. migration includes: More than 1 billion payment cards More than 12 million POS terminals Four credit card networks Eighteen debit networks More than 12,000 financial institutions Unlike the shift in the United Kingdom, the U.S. migration does not have government backing and support. This causes additional fragmentation and complexity that we, as the payments industry, are forced to navigate ourselves. Aite Group predicts that by the end of 2015, 70 percent of U.S. credit cards will have EMV capabilities and 40 percent of debit cards will be upgraded. So while Oct. 1 may not have changed everything, it was the start of a long and gradual migration. Myth #2: Subscription revenues will plummet due to reissuances According to Aite, EMV reissuance is less impactful to merchant revenues than database breaches, since many EMV cards are being reissued with the same pan. The impact of EMV on reoccurring transactions is exaggerated in the market, especially when you look at the Update Issuer provided by the transaction networks. There still will be an impact on merchants, coming right at the start of the holiday shopping season. The need for consumer education will fall primarily on merchants, given longer lines at checkout and unfamiliar processes for consumers. Merchants should be prepared for charge-back amounts on their statements, which they aren’t used to seeing. Lastly, with a disparate credit and debit user experience, training is needed not just for consumers, but also for frontline cashiers. We do expect to see some merchants decide to wait until after the first of the year to avoid impacting the customer experience during the critical holiday shopping season, preferring to absorb the fraud in the interest of maximizing consumer throughout. Myth #3: Card fraud will decline dramatically We can look to countries that already have migrated to see that card fraud will not, as a whole, decline dramatically. While EMV is very effective at bringing down counterfeit card fraud, organized crime rings will not sit idly by while their $3 billion business disappears. With the Canadian shift, we saw a decrease in counterfeit card loss but a substantial increase in Card Not Present (CNP) fraud. In Canada and Australia, we also saw a dramatic, threefold increase in fraudulent applications. When criminals can no longer get counterfeit cards, they use synthetic and stolen identities to gain access to new, legitimate cards. In the United States, we should plan for increased account-takeover attacks, i.e., criminals using compromised credentials for fraudulent CNP purchases. For merchants that don’t require CVV2, compromised data from recent breaches can be used easily in an online environment. According to Aite, issuers already are reporting an increase in CNP fraud. Fraudsters did not wait until the Oct. 1 shift to adjust their practices. Myth #4: All liability moves to the issuer EMV won’t help online merchants at all. Fraud will shift to the CNP channel, and merchants will be completely responsible for the fraud that occurs there. We put together a matrix to illustrate where actual liability shifts and where it does not. Payments liability matrix Note: Because of the cost and complexity of replacing POS machines, gas stations are not liable until October 2017. For more information, or if you’d like to hear the full discussion, click here to view the archive recording, which includes a great panel question-and-answer session.
What will the EMV shift really mean for consumers and businesses here in the U.S.? Businesses and consumers across the U.S. are still adjusting to their new EMV credit cards. The new credit cards are outfitted with computer chips in addition to the magnetic strips to help prevent point-of-sale (POS) fraud. The new system, called EMV (which stands for Europay, MasterCard and Visa), requires signatures for all transactions. EMV is a global standard for credit cards. In the wake of the rising flood of large-scale data breaches at major retailers – and higher rates of counterfeit credit card fraud – chip-and-signature, as it is also called, is designed to better authenticate credit card transactions. Chip-and-signature itself is not new. It has been protecting consumers and businesses in Europe for several years and now the U.S. is finally catching up. But what will the EMV system really mean for consumers and businesses here in the U.S.? There is the potential for businesses that sell both offline and online, to see an increase in fraud that takes place online called Card Not Present (CNP) fraud. Will credit card fraud ever really be wiped out? Can we all stop worrying that large-scale point-of-sale breaches will happen again? Will the EMV shift affect holiday shopping and should retailers be concerned? Join us as we explore these questions and more on an upcoming Webinar, Chipping Away at EMV Myths. Our panel of experts includes: David Britton, Vice President, Industry Solutions, Experian Julie Conroy, Research Director, Aite Group Mike Klumpp, Director of Fraud Prevention, Citibank Moderated by: Keir Breitenfeld, Vice President, Product Management, Experian
Protecting your customer The impact of fraud on the customer relationship Sadly fraudsters seem to always be one-step ahead of fraud-prevention strategies, causing organizations to play catch-up to the criminals. And as information security tightens and technologies evolve, so does the industrious nature of organized identity and online fraud. It should be no surprise then that fraud risk mitigation and management will continue to be an ongoing issue for organizations. But what continues to drive investment in identity management and online risk tools is the arms race across organizations to deliver superior customer experience and functionality. While the monetary cost of fraud losses can be high and rather detrimental, the impact of lost customers and overall reputational decline due to poor customer experiences can be higher. The key is finding the right balance between identifying and segmenting likely fraudulent customers across the vast majority of legitimate customers and transactions. I want to share a recent interactive eBook we launched which outlines the authentication and identity management balance with a focus on the consumer. We highlight current trends and what organizations should be thinking about and doing to protect their business, institution, or agency and customers. I hope you enjoy this look at the impact of fraud on the customer relationship.
Increased volume of fraud attempts during back to school shopping season Back to school shopping season will be the first time many consumers' use their chip-enabled credit cards and stores' new card readers. With the average K-12 family spending $630.36 per child in back to school shopping, and more than 1/3 shopping online, according to the National Retail Federation - is your fraud strategy prepared to handle the increased volume? And are you using a dynamic knowledge based authentication (KBA) solution that incorporates a wide variety of questions categories as part of your multi-faceted risk based authentication approach to fraud account management? Binary verification, or risk segmentation based on a single pass/fail decision is like trying to stay dry in a summer rain storm by wearing a coat. It’s far more effective to wear rubber boots and a use an umbrella, in addition to wearing a rain coat. Binary verification can occur based on evaluating identity elements with two outcomes –pass or fail – which could leave you susceptible to a crafty fraudster. When we recommend a risk based authentication approach, we take a more holistic view of a consumers risk profile. We advocate using analytics and weighting many factors, including identity elements, device intelligence and a robust knowledge-based authentication solution that work in concert to provide overall risk based decision. After all, the end-goal is to enable the good consumers to continue forward based, while preventing the fraudster from compromising your customer’s identity and infiltrating you’re your business.
Protecting consumers from fraud this summer vacation It’s that time of year again – when people all over the U.S. take time away from life’s daily chores and embark upon that much-needed refresh: vacation! But just as fraud activity spikes during the holidays, evidence shows fraudster activity also surges during the summer, as the fraudster’s busy season is when we step away for some well-deserved rest and relaxation. With consumers on vacation, identity theft becomes easier. We all know someone who has been the victim of identity theft, resulting in fraudulent purchases on their credit card, or their bank accounts being emptied. Consumers are most likely to break from their normal spending habits, and credit card’s fraud analytics teams struggle to differentiate these changes in spending behavior for a family on vacation from a fraudster who has compromised dad’s identity. To make matter seven more challenging, consumers are less likely to take measures that will help minimize fraud while they are out of town, making the fraudster’s job easier. Identifying risky behaviors, or patterns outside of a consumer’s normal behavior when used in combination with a knowledge-based authentication session can help validate that the individual is indeed who they claim to be. A knowledge-based authentication solution with a wide variety of question types to complicate the fraudsters ability to pass should be part of a risk-based approach to on-going account management, especially when combined with a risk score and device intelligence. Take measures to incorporate a knowledge-based authentication solution with a diverse range of question types to help protect your business and your customers from being burned while on vacation, at least by fraudsters. For more on travel spending behavior and projections for summer 2015, click here.
Understanding shelf companies and shell companies In our world of business challenges with revenues level or trending down and business loans tougher than ever to get, “shelf” and “shell” companies continue to be an easy option for business opportunities. Shelf companies are defined as corporations formed in a low-tax, low-regulation state in order to be sold off for its excellent credit rating. Click on the internet and you will see a plethora of vendors selling companies in a turn-key business packages. Historically off-the-shelf structures were used to streamline a start-up, where an entrepreneur instantly owns a company that has been in business for several years without debt or liability. However, selling them as a way to get around credit guidelines is new, making them unethical and possibly illegal. Creating companies that impersonate a stable, well established companies in order to deceive creditors or suppliers in another way that criminals are using shelf companies for fraudulent use. Shell companies are characterized as fictitious entities created for the sole purpose of committing fraud. They often provide a convenient method for money laundering because they are easy and inexpensive to form and operate. These companies typically do not have a physical presence, although some may set up a storefront. According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, shell companies may even purchase corporate office “service packages” or “executive meeting suites” in order to appear to have established a more significant local presence. These packages often include a state business license, a local street address, an office that is staffed during business hours, a conference room for initial meetings, a local telephone listing with a receptionist and 24-hour personalized voice mail. In one recent bust out fraud scenario, a shell company operated out of an office building and signed up for service with a voice over Internet protocol (VoIP) provider. While the VoIP provider typically conducts on-site visits to all new accounts, this step was skipped because the account was acquired through a channel partner. During months one and two, the account maintained normal usage patterns and invoices were paid promptly. In month three, the account’s international toll activity spiked, causing the provider to question the unusual account activity. The customer responded with a seemingly legitimate business explanation of activity and offered additional documentation. However, the following month the account contact and business disappeared, leaving the VoIP provider with a substantial five figure loss. A follow-up visit to the business showed a vacant office suite. While it’s unrealistic to think all shelf and shell companies can be identified, there are some tools that can help you verify businesses, identify repeat offenders, and minimize fraud losses. In the example mention above, post-loss account review through Experian’s BizID identified an obvious address discrepancy – 12 businesses all listed at the same address, suggesting that the perpetrator set up numerous businesses and victimized multiple organizations. It is possible to avoid being the next victim and refine and revisit your fraud best practices today. Learn more about Experian BizID and how to protect your business.
A recent Experian survey found that while consumers are getting better about protecting their information on a regular basis, many do not take the same precautions when traveling. According to the survey, 1 in 5 consumers has had an item with sensitive information lost or stolen while traveling, and 39% have experienced identity theft while traveling or know someone who has. Organizations can protect themselves and customers by using innovative fraud-detection tools designed to reduce potential losses while preserving the customer experience. >> Video: The reputational impact of fraud and identity theft