Cybersecurity can affect any individual at any time. We’re sharing a very scary story that happened to someone we know, right here in Charlotte, with tips on what to look for in each scenario.
The individual received a call from someone who identified himself as with the Sheriff’s Office and asked if he was speaking with her by name. This person stated, “You missed a court appearance two days ago and a Federal Judge has issued an order for you to appear. We have your signature on the subpoena served to you on May 27 at your home address” (which he had). The caller said he was working this as a civil matter, but if she did not cooperate he would refer her to the criminal division. If he did so, she would be arrested and be put in jail for possibly up to two weeks.
When she began to protest, stating she didn’t know what he was talking about, he said, “You need to calm down before you get yourself in worse trouble.”
He went on to say she was not to speak to anyone – no phone calls, no texts – because she was under a gag order. Further, if their call should drop and she didn’t answer after three attempts by him to reconnect he would have no choice but to refer the case to the criminal division. She asked what this was regarding, and he said, “I don’t know specifically but when I am assigned cases often it is related to a problem at work, child custody, HIPAA, DEA, or immigration status.”
What’s important about this scenario: This scammer called at an inopportune time (Friday afternoon) while the person was likely busy (she was at the grocery store with her children) and not focused or thinking about a work-related issue. They called using a number that, when she Googled it, showed she was receiving a call from the local Federal Courthouse. Further, he cast a wide net of possible issues (HIPAA, DEA or immigration status) that would relate to this individual’s work. One of which, did, so she believed him.
The more that this woman protested that this was a scam, the more adamant the caller told her she would end up in jail. He was, after all, doing her the favor of giving her this option before her “court appearance.” This was what she would need to do:
- Withdraw $9,700 in cash from her bank to pay for her bail (if not paid, she would be jailed)
- Purchase $9,700 in gift cards in $500 dominations
- Drive to the Federal Courthouse to meet the caller, take the signature test to prove she was (or was not) the person who was currently being subpoenaed and under a gag order
He would then give her the packet of information that he had regarding the reason why she was “in this mess.” She agreed to do the steps. She thought, I know I didn’t do anything wrong, so let me just clear up the situation by going through these steps. The caller then asked her to do two more things:
- He asked for her odometer reading and explained they would check it when she arrived at the courthouse to ensure she didn’t take any detours from the agreed route she would be driving.
- He asked that she disable location services on her phone. She checked and saw that she was not sharing her location with anyone and confirmed she had disabled location services (unaware that her phone could still be tracked by iCloud FindMy).
There are several red flags in this exchange, however, the fact that going to the courthouse was considered part of the plan kept the reality of the situation in the here and now. Where we often hear scammers say, “We can clear this up online, right now,” this scammer kept an in-person meeting on the table.
After agreeing to the steps to get herself “out of this mess,” with the Federal Court, the caller asked her to identify which bank she would be making the withdrawal. As she drove there, he explained that he could not speak with her while she was in the bank due to the Patriots Act. But she was to leave her phone on so he could hear the conversation with the teller to make sure she complied with the gag order.
Back in her car, he recommended going to Walmart to purchase the gift cards. She proceeded to Walmart #1. Along the way, he explained she would be receiving text messages with scan codes for the gift cards she was to purchase and to put $500 on each one. In Walmart, the process took a long time as about half of the codes didn’t work. After about $3,000 in cards were purchased, the clerk said, “I can’t spend any time with you as the line behind you is long,” and asked her to go elsewhere.
Back in her car, she protested again, and the caller – again – threatened her with jail. She agreed to go to Walmart #2. She had the same experience with code problems but was able to purchase another $3,000 in cards at this location before being sent away by the clerk.
Again, she protested. Again, she was threatened with jail. So she agreed to go to Walmart #3. Along the way, she said, “This is taking a long time and I see I’ve missed many texts from my husband and others. My husband said in one of these he had called the police. Can you call our local police department and let them know I’m under a gag order but me and my children are ok?” The caller said, “I’ll let you send one text back to your husband – but I’ll dictate it to you.” She sent: I’m handling a legal matter and should be home in about an hour. I have the children with me and they are ok.
This may seem obvious, but police agencies don’t ask for gift cards. However, the fact that this caller had instilled fear and used aggression early on in the call, prompted the woman to anxiously want to “fix” the situation – no matter what that meant.
When the woman arrived at Walmart #3, she noticed a new text from her husband saying: I see you are at Walmart #3, I’m just a couple of minutes away. Stay there. The caller said “OK, you’ve got to leave now. Start driving.” They agreed she would go to Walgreens a few miles away to purchase the remaining gift cards. She started driving and the caller asked what type of phone she had. He had her pull over and walked her through disabling location services as he had determined that had been missed earlier.
She was unaware but her husband saw her car and followed her to Walgreens. Once she parked, he blocked her car. He approached and his wife explained she was under a gag order. However, the officer on the phone had agreed her husband could take the children so that she could complete the steps and visit the Federal Courthouse. The husband had called 911 and reported a carjacking while following her to the Walgreens, so at this time, the actual police arrived. Once the officer identified himself to the caller, the call was ended.
What problems in a relationship could losing $6,000 create? This family was well off, so the loss of $6,000 was unfortunate, but would not mean they couldn’t cover their living expenses for the next few months. What could have occurred while driving in such a distracted situation, especially with children in the back of the car? She could have run a red light, or been speeding unnecessarily due to the urgency that the caller created.
The woman was right to continue to question this caller, and it’s important to trust that gut feeling. If something doesn’t feel right, even if it’s possible that you may be in a sticky situation, trust your gut. Hang up the phone.