Senior falls prey to antivirus scam

Key learnings:

• Fraudsters often begin a relationship with a victim, appear to send them too much money, and then ask the victim to send money back. The money that the scammer sends is fake, but the money that the victim sends back is real.
• Even when they are innocent victims of fraud, consumers are responsible for losses resulting from their own actions.

One day in 2017, Mr. R’s computer froze. A warning appeared on the screen and a message from what appeared to be a reputable company was displayed. It warned Mr. R that a virus had infected his computer and provided him with a number to call. He called and spoke to a representative who recommended an antivirus software to correct the issues. Mr. R agreed to buy the software for $400.

Scammer requests access to the consumer’s computer

The agent said he would remove the virus and install the antivirus system but first, he would need remote access to Mr. R’s computer. Mr. R agreed to provide access to his computer. A month later, the company called Mr. R and said that there had been a problem with the antivirus system installed so they needed to remove the software. They said that they would refund his purchase. Once again, he provided remote access to an agent so that they could remove the supposedly faulty software. To give him his refund, the agent told Mr. R that he would need to make a direct deposit into his bank account and requested Mr. R’s bank information.

Scammer puts too much money into consumer’s account and requests payback in gift cards 

On his online banking screen, Mr. R could see the deposit that the agent made into his account. However, instead of just refunding the $400, the agent made a deposit of $4,000. The agent told Mr. R that he had made a mistake. He asked Mr. R to refund the difference. He instructed Mr. R to buy $3,600 in gift cards. Mr. R complied with this request.

After Mr. R had given the agent the numbers on the back of the cards, he was told that the agent could not access the gift cards. The agent said he would return the $3,600 to Mr. R’s account. Following the agent’s directions, Mr. R tried several times to help correct the error. Each time Mr. R would purchase new cards, each time the cards would be faulty, and then the funds would be again returned to his account.

The fraud is discovered

Eventually, Mr. R discovered that all of the refunds had been made with funds taken from his own accounts and personal line of credit. He realized he had been scammed. He reported the events to his bank’s fraud department and to the credit card company.

Mr. R believed the bank should reimburse him for the losses he sustained due to the actions of the fraudsters. He believed the bank’s protection systems or their representatives should have noticed irregularities in his accounts. However, the bank disagreed. They told him that they did not offer these types of protection services. They also showed him that their account agreement clearly says that the customer is responsible for all transactions they complete.

Our recommendation

Mr. R was the victim of a crime and suffered significant losses. However, we were unable to recommend compensation in his case. Unfortunately, he participated in the loss through his purchase of the gift cards, and he also provided the fraudsters access to his computer and online banking accounts that allowed them to complete the fraudulent transactions. The bank was not at fault because the losses resulted from legitimate purchases Mr. R made and then gave to the fraudsters. No compensation was recommended.