If you have insurance, you might have had your identity stolen
Toronto Police have arrested a woman for credit fraud. She used her position of trust at an insurance company to obtain personal data on individuals, then apply for credit cards in their names.
The police announcement says the company is taking steps. The problem is that since the police have not named the company, how do I know whether my credit rating was put at risk?
From Toronto Police Services (via email):
On Tuesday, August 29, 2006, police were called to a store in the Bayview Avenue/Sheppard Avenue East area for a woman using a fraudulent credit card.
It is alleged that the woman was attempting to pick up merchandise purchased by her with a fraudulent credit card.
It is further alleged that:
- the woman was an employee of a major insurance company,
- through the course of her employment, she obtained the victims' personal information,
- with the information, she would apply for and use credit cards,
- at the time of her arrest, she was in possession of credit cards in the name of five different people.
Marilyn Linton, 44, of Toronto, has been charged with:
- Personation with intent,
- Obtaining Credit by Fraud or False Pretence,
- Possession Property Obtained by Crime (under),
- Fraud Under,
- Five counts of Possession Property Obtained by Crime (under),
- Criminal Breach of Trust.
She appeared in court on Wednesday, August 30, 2006, at 444 Yonge Street, College Park, in courtroom 504 at 10 a.m.
The insurance company is currently taking steps to ensure the security and confidentiality of their clientele.
The last charge is the significant one. She was in a position of trust, and she betrayed that trust to a criminal level. But without knowing which insurance company she worked for, how can that trust be restored? The "steps" being taken are just as likely to be devoted to protecting the insurance company against immediate liability, including destroying records or otherwise limiting the exposure of the company to legal action, either criminal or civil. Fair enough. But it's not up to the police to help the company clean up its mess or hide its dirty laundry. Identity fraud has been committed, and every consumer who has insurance is at risk of having been one of the people whose credit has been damaged by Linton's actions. Until we know more, it could have been any of us.
This was a "major" insurance company, according to the police. Does that mean having clients all over Ontario? All over Canada? Farther away than that?
The police ought to be providing information to help those of us in the community who have not been affected by this particular crime know that their information was not available to Marilyn Linton, and help those of us whose information could have been compromised take steps to repair any damage that might have been done. I bet it won't be pleasant for the insurance company which employed Linton, but that's no excuse.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Toronto credit fraud Marilyn Linton identity theft
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
Well argued. I think the insurance companies should be shamed into ensuring confidential personal client data is treated with the utmost respect via negative publicity in situations like these. Think of it as a small check against an industry extremely adept at lobbying.
Another item that really bothers me are the "personalized" credit card solicitations routinely sent via mail. Some companies go so far as to fill out part of the application with your name and address for you. Anyone with half a brain knows that this attempt at "personalizing the sell" is a routine form letter. And yet the rudimentary data is there for unethical folks to pluck out of your recycling box if you are not careful enough to rip up the personal information peppering the pages of the form letter and application.
When you think how hard it is to keep your personal info, well, personal, it's amazing this doesn't happen more often...
Posted by: Proud & Unapologetic Winnipegger at August 30, 2006 04:39 PM
First, as far as I understand, these are as yet unproven allegations; you may wish to consider whether any comments assume they're already proven facts, or could be misread as suggesting such a thing.
Then, I agree that it would be better to name this particular company. But that doesn't suggest that customers of other companies (and not just insurance companies) are immune to credit card fraud. There are many sources through which miscreants falsely obtain credit information and commit fraud. That such an event may have occurred at an insurance company is cause for due caution, but that caution probably applies to all of our financial transactions.
Posted by: Paul O at August 30, 2006 05:43 PM
Sometimes it's unreal how banks, insurance companies and other institutions operate.
We got a call from our insurance company, asking for personal information over the phone. When I refused to give said information to an anonymous caller, he became rather indignant so I asked him for the same personal information and said "After all, you have the advantage since you know who I am since you called me."
Needless to say, I did not get his personal info and he did not get mine but I set an appointment to visit my broker.
Posted by: Mac at August 30, 2006 06:27 PM
That final charge - Breach of Trust - is the wrong charge insofar as it does not apply; that is, the Criminal Code Breach of Trust charge is not warranted by the facts. The Crown will drop it. Since the accused stole from her employer, that circumstance amounts to a breach of the trust inherent in such a relationship. This breach of trust (lower case) will be mentioned by the Crown as well as by the judge as a aggravating factor on sentencing.
This aspect of fraud charges is frequently misunderstood by police.
Posted by: Chas MacGill at August 30, 2006 07:20 PM
Ah, this is the previous higher standard to which I referred in a previous comment! Excellence is often if not always the best response. Sorry about the nastiness, eh? Even if I'm right about the Tories being out of line re: Kennedy fauxtography (which, of course, I am) I should've phrased it better. In any case, great post.
Posted by: CMT at August 30, 2006 07:24 PM
Have you noticed that large companies (like insurance) actually allow their staff not to tell you their full names when they call you (and ask for personal info) or send you letters with same. I've received more than one letter with a tremendous amount of my personal information in it signed by John 'D' or Mary 'W'. Apparently THEIR privacy is the big concern right now, not the customers.
Posted by: at August 30, 2006 08:10 PM
Weekend Star had an article on people in TO losing their homes. One old guy had his rental property sold by a man using a phoney licence[same last name] and a forged power of att. Sold the house to a couple from Russia for 400Gs. They can't move in, though they're carrying a 340Gs mortgage. Old guy can't touch his house cause it's been sold. That was one of three incidents in TO. Just the ones they featured. This scam has happened in Michigan enough times that they recently passed a law 1st offence 10yrs min.
Posted by: rick at August 31, 2006 11:40 AM
 
|
|
