Sandy Hutchens Ripoff Reporting

New York’s attorney general says that Tagged.com stole the identities of more than 60 million internet users by sending emails that raided their private accounts.

Many are now planing to sue the social networking website for deceptive marketing and invasion of privacy.
Consumers had their privacy invaded and were forced into the embarrassing position of having to apologise to all their email contacts for Tagged illegal behaviour.

Started in 2004 by Harvard math students Greg Tseng and Johann Schleier-Smith, Tagged calls itself a “premier social-networking destination.” The California-based company claims to be the third-largest social networking site after Facebook and MySpace, with 80 million registered users.

Tagged may have acquired many of them fraudulently, sending unsuspecting recipients emails that urged them to view private photos posted by friends.The message read: “(name of friend) sent you photos on Tagged.”
When recipients tried to access the photos, they could in effect become new members of the site

The system was set up so that a user was asked whether the sender of the photos was a friend, then suggesting that if the recipient didn’t respond, the friend “may think you said no” (accompanied by a sad face icon). Every person on a user’s contact list received an email that again read, “(name of user) sent you photos on Tagged.” The site then released a flood of offers for everything from sweepstakes to other services.

The attorney general said a lawsuit would seek to stop Tagged from engaging in “fraudulent practices” and to seek fines. Plans to sue the social networking website for deceptive marketing and invasion of privacy are definitely in the works.

If you or anyone you Know have more information on this scam please leave us a comment on Sandy Hutchens Ripoff Repoting.

Banks will be able to keep £10billion from rip-off overdraft charges after the Office of Fair Trading abandoned a legal challenge yesterday.

Millions of customers have been hit by the charges, with some forced to pay hundreds of pounds just for going a few pence into the red.

But the watchdog has decided it can no longer pursue its claim that the fees are unfair after a surprise Supreme Court ruling last month that sided with the banks.

The court said that the OFT had no jurisdiction over the charges and no right to reach a ruling that would have paved the way for customers to claim a refund.

Some estimates had suggested that the banks would have faced repaying more than £10billion if they had lost. The OFT’s decision was described as a ‘huge blow’ for consumers yesterday.

Philip Cullum, of the official customer body, Consumer Focus, said: ‘Consumer trust in banks is at an all-time low. This decision will add to the public frustration towards the banking sector.’

Conservative Shadow Treasury minister Mark Hoban added: ‘This is a huge blow. Given the uncertainty-about the fairness of charges for unauthorised overdrafts, we urge the OFT to use other avenues to ensure a fair deal for consumers.’

The Tories have pledged to set up a Consumer Protection Agency to represent ordinary people against the might of large organisations if they win the General Election.

LibDem leader Nick Clegg described the move as ‘extremely disappointing’. He added: ‘We will continue the fight for fair bank charges in Parliament and push for a change in the law if necessary so that High Street banks cannot keep ripping off their customers.’

The OFT said it would change its focus to winning a voluntary agreement from banks to adopt a fairer and more open system of overdraft charges.

Chief executive John Fingleton said: ‘We remain deeply concerned that the market for personal current accounts is not working well for consumers and does not give banks sufficient incentives to compete.

‘We are committed to securing significant changes to unarranged overdraft charges going forward, whether through voluntary agreement with the banks or by other means.’

Some consumer campaigners, including Which?, believe there is still scope to mount a legal challenge.

But it is unlikely any change could happen before next year’s General Election. The Daily Mail has campaigned for customers to be given refunds of unfair charges since February 2006.

Anger was fuelled by reports of students and pensioners being forced to pay huge amounts of money. Banks have been raking in more than £2.6billion a year – £5,000 a minute – from the charges.

One-off charges have included up to £39 for bouncing a cheque or exceeding an overdraft limit.

Even the banks themselves were doubtful that the charges were legal, with many offering refunds to customers who threatened to take them to court even before the OFT launched its legal challenge.

It is believed banks paid out more than £500million to those who complained and asked for refunds.

But once the OFT tried to cap the charges, the banks poured millions into a legal case and repeated appeals to block it.

Posted by Sandy Hutchens

Detectives with the Shelby County Sheriff’s ALERT Squad (Area Law Enforcement & Retailers Team) say they’re tracking a spate of locker room thefts at fitness centers from Southaven to Collierville to East Shelby County.

The latest, a break-in at 24-Hour Fitness Sport, 1285 Ridgeway Rd. in East Memphis, led to a credit card theft caught on the Action News 5 Scam Cam.

ALERT Det. Dee Bowling says Nov. 7, someone worked her way through 24-Hour Fitness Sport’s check-in process and broke into a member’s locker inside the women’s locker room.

“Cut the lock off her locker, took all of the personal belongings out, then replaced it with a new lock,” says Bowling.

Not long afterward, the Scam Cam caught the woman below using the member’s credit card at two Southeast Shelby County department stores.

Bowling says the suspect charged over $8,500 in electronics.

“We’re talking IPods, Wii games, high-end electronics, and each time she forged the victim’s signature,” says Bowling.

A department store source says the cashier never asked the suspect for identification because credit card companies, including VISA and MasterCard, advise retailers not to request identification on credit card purchases. The source says — and a MasterCard source confirms — that the companies believe it’s more beneficial to keep purchases flowing and let the credit card’s built-in insurance against unauthorized purchases protect the consumer.

Bowling disagrees.

He says retailers should make it store policy to request identification on all credit and debit card purchases. He also believes consumers should write “Ask For ID” or “Check ID” in the signature boxes on the back of their credit cards to subtly encourage cashiers to check.