Lima Rotary learns about utility-related scams
During its regular weekly meeting Monday at Lima's Veterans Memorial Civic Center, the Lima Rotary Club was informed about nearly 10 common utility-related scams currently emerging and what actions to take if they become victims. Similar to scams that trick people into paying unpaid tolls or sending a link verifying an address for a package, scams are also prevalent with utilities.
"Because it is a trusted entity for you," said Amy Carles, senior outreach & education program specialist for the Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel. "And you don't want to lose them. So that's one of the things they can use to kind of scare you into thinking, oh my goodness, I don't want something to happen to my utilities."
One of the biggest scams the OCC comes across is the emergency payment scam, which makes people think they will be disconnected if they don't immediately pay. "Whether someone shows up and knocks on your door, they could also call you on the phone, send you an email, send you a text, lots of ways this can happen," Carles said. "They tend to look for times when you would panic a little bit more, and we are in one of those time periods."
The issue with this particular scam is that the scammer will call after hours.
"Because you can't call and check it out," Carles said, explaining the late calls. "Most people do not know that it is illegal for investor-owned utilities to disconnect you after hours."
Scammers will also ask to be paid in a variety of ways.
"Now they may ask for account information, credit card information, some of that normal stuff that you would do," Carles said. "They are also, a lot of times, asking for peer-to-peer, so CashApp, Venmo, Zelle, all of those. They also really like debit cards, they also really love gift cards, and cryptocurrency, because once they're gone, you can't get the money back."
Other scams to OCC encourages the public to watch for are utility worker imposters, false refunds or discounts, caller ID spoofing, door-to-door, and solar scams.
If fraud is suspected, contact local law enforcement or the Attorney General's Office at 1-800-282-0515. Direct questions and complaints about utility services, including scams, can be made on the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio's website, https://bit.ly/3FhVkTA, or by calling 1-800-686-7826.
Established in 1976, the Office of the Ohio Consumers' Counsel serves as Ohio's advocate for residential utility consumers.
"We are your voice; we represent you legally," said Carles.
Based out of Findlay, Carles covers over 30 counties.
Reach Cade Higgins at 567-242-0351.
Featured Local Savings
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
New York Accuses Bank-Backed Zelle of $1 Billion Security Bungle
New York Attorney General Letitia James says the digital payments network Zelle, owned by a consortium of Wall Street banking giants, 'has been teeming with fraudsters who have stolen staggering sums from consumers.' Zelle says James' office, which accused its parent Early Warning Services in a lawsuit Wednesday of enabling fraud by doing next to nothing to stop it, is engaging in nothing more than a 'political stunt to generate press.' The heated exchange made for exciting, Billions-style drama, but more importantly, offered a look at the state of clampdowns on Corporate America in 2025 and beyond. READ ALSO: Warren Buffett Reveals Multibillion-Dollar Pre-Retirement Bets and Trump Admin's MAHA Agenda Brings Politics to the Dinner Table New York State of Mind Zelle was launched in 2017 as an alternative to peer-to-peer payment platforms like PayPal and its subsidiary Venmo, with the selling point being that it was backed by the weight of the country's top consumer banks. Bank of America, Truist, Capital One, JPMorgan Chase, PNC Bank, U.S. Bank, and Wells Fargo jointly own its parent, and some 2,200 financial institutions allow customers to use Zelle directly through their app or services. It's not an understatement to say that, with access to the enormous customer base of all these financial institutions, Zelle has taken off. Last year, the network topped $1 trillion in person-to-person transactions, a 27% year-over-year increase, while its user base grew 12% to 151 million accounts. That was the most in P2P transactions for any payments service in a single year — PayPal, by comparison, reported $400 billion in P2P payments in 2024. But Zelle's astronomical growth, the state Attorney General's Office alleged, coincided with negligent loopholes the size of the Milky Way Galaxy: New York's lawsuit claims Zelle's registration process was missing verification steps, which it alleges EWS and its bank backers were aware contributed to fraud amounting to roughly $1 billion, 'for years.' James is seeking restitution and damages based on the claim that scammers stole more than $1 billion from Zelle users from 2017 to 2023, and is asking for a court order requiring Zelle to put anti-fraud measures in place. Zelle, rebuffing the lawsuit, said the Attorney General's Office did not conduct an investigation of its platform and argued the claims are meritless. 'Had they conducted an investigation, they would have learned that more than 99.95% of all Zelle transactions are completed without any report of scam or fraud — which leads the industry,' a spokesperson said. Cases Closed: James' lawsuit suggests that states that disagree with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's softening approach to bank oversight may file their own lawsuits where the agency has stepped back, though consumer advocacy groups have questioned whether they could fill the gap. This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive delivering razor sharp analysis and perspective on all things finance, economics, and markets, subscribe to our free The Daily Upside newsletter.
Forbes
5 days ago
- Forbes
As Trump Rolls Back Federal Financial Regulation, Blue State Regulators Step Up
New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a lawsuit against Zelle after the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau dropped its own suit against the bank-owned money transfer app. The Associated Press O ur patchwork system of U.S. state and federal financial regulators is confusing and, at times, redundant. Yet that redundancy means when one regulator is neutered, another can step in. As the Trump administration moves to reduce federal regulations, states (in particular, Democratic-controlled ones) are rushing to fill the gap. The latest example came earlier this week, when New York Attorney General Letitia James announced a lawsuit against Early Warning Services, the bank-owned company behind popular money transfer app Zelle. The suit alleges that Early Warning let fraud proliferate on Zelle for several years and didn't do enough to stop it, which cost consumers 'hundreds of millions of dollars' in losses. The case was originally brought by the federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) in December 2024, under President Biden. In March 2025, while the Trump Administration was preparing to dramatically reduce the CFPB's staff and activity, the agency withdrew its Zelle lawsuit. In an emailed statement, a Zelle spokesperson called the New York attorney general's new lawsuit 'a copycat of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau lawsuit that was dismissed in March.' He added that 'more than 99.95 percent of all Zelle transactions are completed without any report of scam or fraud.' Have a story tip? Contact Jeff Kauflin at jkauflin@ or on Signal at jeff.273. Kareem Saleh, a former attorney and State Department official who's now founder and CEO of fair lending startup Fairplay, points out two other examples of states ramping up regulatory actions. They both relate to the concept of disparate impact, when a lender uses a seemingly neutral method of assessing risk that ends up disproportionately excluding or hurting borrowers based on protected characteristics like race, religion, nationality or age. The Supreme Court first recognized the disparate impact theory in 1971. This past spring, President Trump issued an executive order calling for the elimination of disparate-impact liability and instructing federal agencies to 'deprioritize' the enforcement of laws and regulations related to disparate impact. Yet state regulators and courts have continued to make rulings based on disparate impact. On July 10, San Francisco fintech startup Earnest entered into a regulatory consent order with Massachusetts regarding its student loans. The state alleged that Earnest made unfair, manual adjustments to risk assessments and that its underwriting models created disparate impact in loan approval rates and terms, 'with Black and Hispanic applicants more likely to be penalized than White applicants.' Earnest agreed to pay a $2.5 million fine and to develop a 'corporate governance system of fair lending testing, internal controls, and risk assessments for the use of Artificial Intelligence Models,' in addition to taking other steps. Earnest denied the allegations and didn't admit wrongdoing, agreeing to the enforcement action to 'avoid the uncertainty of litigation,'' according to the consent order. Then on July 28, Maryland's Supreme Court ruled that an apartment complex owner may have discriminated against a rental applicant, Katrina Hare. The landlord required applicants to earn 2.5 times the cost of monthly rent in income and denied Hare's application. She argued that the 2.5-times-income threshold should only apply to the amount of rent she was responsible for paying after counting her government-issued housing voucher. The Maryland Supreme Court opinion concluded that more analysis will be needed to decide if the landlord's minimum-income rule disproportionately (and illegally) hurts voucher holders under the state's Housing Opportunities Made Equal Act. Fairplay's Saleh expects this trend of increased state regulatory activity to continue. 'I think these are the first examples of what's likely to be a widespread initiative by the states over the course of the next several years,' he says. He also notes there has been a 'brain drain' from the CFPB to state regulators. Gabriel O'Malley, who had spent 12 years at the CFPB, most recently as a deputy enforcement director of policy and strategy, left in March to become an executive deputy superintendent at New York's Department of Financial Services. Atur Desai had been at the CFPB for nearly 10 years and was a deputy chief technologist for law and strategy there before leaving last month, also for a deputy superintendent role at the New York Department of Financial Services, according to his LinkedIn profile.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Why Wells Fargo Stock Wilted on Wednesday
Key Points A top regulator in New York state is unhappy with a payment service offered by the bank. It has filed a lawsuit against Zelle. 10 stocks we like better than Wells Fargo › A popular payment system offered by Wells Fargo (NYSE: WFC) came under some legal fire on Wednesday, and more than a few investors scuttled out of the bank. This left the lender's stock with a 2% loss on the day, during an otherwise generally upbeat session in which the S&P 500 index bumped 0.3% higher. Headed to court? That flame was lit by New York Attorney General Letitia James, who has brought a lawsuit against the popular Zelle payment service. The suit accuses Zelle of falling short in efforts to protect its many users from fraud. James' office wrote in a press release that an investigation it conducted found that Zelle's operator, a company called Early Warning Systems (EWS), "designed Zelle without critical safety features, allowing scammers to easily target users and steal over $1 billion between 2017 and 2023." "EWS knew from the beginning that key features of the Zelle network made it uniquely susceptible to fraud, and yet it failed to adopt basic safeguards to address these glaring flaws or enforce any meaningful anti-fraud rules on its partner banks," the Attorney General's team added. EWS is owned and controlled by a consortium of seven of the top American banks and financial services purveyors. In addition to Wells Fargo, its ownership structure includes JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Capital One Financial. Accusing the accuser A Reuters report on the matter quoted Zelle's statement that "This lawsuit is a political stunt to generate press, not progress. The Attorney General should focus on the hard facts, stopping criminal activity and adherence to the law, not overreach and meritless claims." Still, this doesn't help the reputation of Zelle and, by extension, the banks behind it. I don't think this is a make-or-break for Wells Fargo stock. However, it's a development that's surely worth watching. Should you invest $1,000 in Wells Fargo right now? Before you buy stock in Wells Fargo, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Wells Fargo wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $653,427!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,119,863!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,060% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 182% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Bank of America is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. JPMorgan Chase is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Wells Fargo is an advertising partner of Motley Fool Money. Eric Volkman has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends JPMorgan Chase. The Motley Fool recommends Capital One Financial. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Why Wells Fargo Stock Wilted on Wednesday was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
