More Than 1 Million Kids Had Their Identities Stolen in 2017 (nypost.com) 69
More than 1 million children were victims of identity fraud in 2017, a new study from Javelin Strategy & Research found, costing a total of $2.6 billion. From a report: With limited financial history or existing account activity, children are the most likely to become victims of new-account fraud, the research showed. These attacks can occur before children even become active internet users, with some two-thirds of victims being under the age of eight. The overall numbers are likely even higher, said Al Pascual, research director at Javelin said, since their study relied on parents and guardians reporting cases of identity theft. In many cases, the parent or another relative may be the one using a child's identity to start a new account.
bauaTOTC ? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Or health insurers who require enough data to clone your kids, but can't adequately secure their data warehouses.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes, damn me for giving Blue Cross my children's Social Security numbers and a host of other information, as they demanded in order to insure us. Totally my fault they turned out to have shitty security. :eyeroll:
Re: (Score:2)
I am not faulting your parenting - but in my case I refused to order a SSN for my daughter. She can apply for one when, and if, she feels she needs one when she gets her first job.
I wonder if this is feasible for many people? Probably not, as you need their SSN to claim them on taxes.
Re: millenial parents are at fault (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Take a moment to think about this.
What is required to apply for an SSN? What information was stolen from Blue Cross?
Golly, they stole the information needed to apply for an SSN. So not having an SSN does not help.
To what end? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
actually yes, children's SS numbers are in fact used to establish lines of credit by identity thieves. And to get utilities and rental contracts. Also identities are used to get government benefits
Re: (Score:2)
It is not identity theft, it is credit fraud and the idiot who accepted the fake identity should be prosecuted unless they can prove someone did provide a fake identity. The person who accept the fake identity is solely responsible for that failure to accurately confirm identity and should be liable for all harm and suffering caused to the person they cheated. The credit companies just waffle this shit, to shift liability and proof of innocence to the person whose identity was used, rather than the idiot wh
Re: (Score:2)
It is not identity theft, it is credit fraud and the idiot who accepted the fake identity should be prosecuted unless they can prove someone did provide a fake identity. The person who accept the fake identity is solely responsible for that failure to accurately confirm identity and should be liable for all harm and suffering caused to the person they cheated. The credit companies just waffle this shit, to shift liability and proof of innocence to the person whose identity was used, rather than the idiot who accepted the false indemnity and the credit companies for failure to provide proper security methods in place, to cheap and greedy.
Then why not just make both of them at fault instead of pointing your finger to just one? Shouldn't identity thief be at fault and the idiots who accepted and approved the fake identity be at fault as well?
Re: (Score:2)
wrong, a persons identity is first needed to commit the fraud.
Re: (Score:3)
The overall numbers are likely even higher, said Al Pascual, research director at Javelin said, since their study relied on parents and guardians reporting cases of identity theft. In many cases, the parent or another relative may be the one using a child's identity to start a new account.
That indicates to me that the exact numbers are hard to arrive at because of confounding factors. One is that it relies on self-reporting which may not accurately allow researchers to determine the real extent of the issue. The other is that the parents in their capacity as legal guardians may be creating the accounts for the child in which case it may be difficult to classify as identity theft. In some circumstances this is a legal requirement since chil
Re: (Score:3)
A child's identity has no good history, but it has no bad history either, so it's suitable for, oh, getting utility services, or low-limit credit cards, or maybe a low-value loan with collateral, like a used car. Stuff that we typically expect college students who've just moved away from their parents to need to do.
Re: (Score:3)
as to due diligence, if the SSN has no history, then the credit bureaus will have no data attached to it. So the financial institution has no basis to decide that the applicant isn't the holder of the SSN, unless they're really on the ball and demand both a photo ID and the SSN card itself, and refuse to accept discrepancies in the name... which is rare.
Re: (Score:3)
A minor's identity is a blank slate.
No arrests, no bad credit, no legal troubles in another state... It's a fresh start to adult life, just as soon as that identity turns 18 and stops raising the real big red flags on background checks. Usually for a job or credit account, the person running the check isn't actually dealing with the fraudster, so they're unlikely to notice that the guy who clearly looks middle-aged is claiming to be 20.
Unfortunately, the other common case is that it's often parents who hone
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As long as the date of birth adds up years later thats a part time job for a non citizen working illegally in a nation under a citizens name.
Thats a working ID, full bank account and way to never get a tax problem when getting a wage. Wage goes in, cash comes out clean.
Use it for a job for a while, buy a new ID again.
rusty shackleford (Score:2)
No rusty shackleford is the one with all the bad loans and not dale gribble or dale's dead bug
Re: (Score:2)
No party political work history.
No failed tests, bad credit, rent history, tax and education records.
No having worked for the gov, as a contractor. No strange university education, job to have to cover for.
Its a clean ID that can be sold and shaped by a new owner.
A fake ID with another persons history gets complex and is in too many databases.
Too wealthy, too poor, too many debts, unexpected encounters with the police? Governments and brands lo
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:sadly humans fail, not systems (Score:4, Interesting)
Not all lenders have strict standards.
For example, most "finance your new car here!" dealers will accept anyone with a pulse, and about half of the people without one.
Re: (Score:2)
Because for an 18 year old, "no credit history" is normal. For a 40 year old, it is not. If you are 40, and have no history of using credit, then you are likely an eccentric weirdo and a bad risk. So you have no CC, no mortgage, no car payments, and you prepay your utilities?
Banks and others are negligent (Score:1)
Banks and others are being negligent when they offer loans and other contracts to people they know are minors.
The first thing they should be asking for is proof of emancipation or a parent or guardian's signature.
Second, because of the amount of fraud involved, they need to do some "due diligence" in verifying the emancipation order is legit or verifying the purported parent's signatures are legit.
Parents Re:Banks and others are negligent (Score:2)
Replying to my own post before others say "parents:"
Parents committing fraud will be very difficult to detect until the child/victim discovers it on his own.
How can a bank tell the difference between a kid opening a credit card at his parent's urging so he can build up a credit history, and a parent opening the same account for fraudulent purposes? It is difficult or impossible without a personal interview, which isn't something most banks are going to do for your average consumer account.
But as for other
Re: (Score:2)
How can a bank tell the difference between a kid opening a credit card at his parent's urging so he can build up a credit history
By noticing the kid is less than 18 years old.
Banks should not be attempting to sign contracts with minors.
Banks are woefully out of date (Score:2)
They could use technology far more intelligently, they could come up with far more intelligent rules. They could let customers choose more secure options but they don't, the banks are the enablers of fraud. They rely far too much on assuming that if someone supplies the right ID 1 time that the account is secure from there onwards.
UK has chip and pin, yet the shops allowed the fraudster simply to verbally give card details, they asked for no ID, no card and gave the fraudster 100s worth of goods, unbelievab
Re: (Score:2)
No home loan, car loan, no bank account.
Generations of poor people, illegal migrants get locked out of the normal banking sector that citizens enjoy.
So the USA keeps its entry to loans and banking services open to all.
The way around that is a document list that proves citizenship. Photo ID, passport, birth certificate, driver licence should all add up in parts to getting a bank account.
Seen a lot of it (Score:2)
There is no telling how many unwashed fat 50-ish men are on the Internet posing as 14-year-old virgin girls.
That's been going on since way back into the BBS days.