The Whistleblower blog was started in 2008. Look for posts by these contributors: James Eli Shiffer, Jane Friedmann, Brandon Stahl, Eric Roper and Alejandra Matos. | Check out the Whistleblower archive.
The Star Tribune's journalists need your help blowing the whistle in Minnesota. Contact us here.
Two more people and four companies have agreed to settle charges in the “Rachel robocall” scheme, the Federal Trade Commission said last week.
The Rachel scam, which used other names as well, called people, often on the do-not call list, to offer lower interest rates on their credit cards.
The six defendants, including Emory Holley, aka Jack Holley and Lisa Miller from Arizona, agreed to pay a partially suspended $11.9 million judgment for charging illegal upfront fees during telemarketing calls in which they falsely claimed they could reduce the interest rate on consumers’ credit cards.
There were 10 total defendants in the Rachel scheme, and four other defendants had already agreed to settled their charges in June. Those four had allegedly opened merchant and bank accounts in their names for processing consumer payments obtained through the calls.
Previously, Whistleblower was on a search for Rachel. Click here for some of our reporting.
An Arizona company was fined $5.2 million for selling worthless services to victims of earlier scams that the company claimed would get their money back, the Federal Trade Commission announced Wednesday.
The FTC fined Business Recovery Services LLC and its owner Brian Hessler, who sold “worthless do-it-yourself kits” for $499 to people who had lost money to work-at-home schemes, the FTC said.
“In effect, this scheme rubbed salt in the wound of people who had already been victimized, targeting them and defrauding them all over again,” Jessica Rich, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said in a statement.
The $5.2 million fine was stayed so long as Hessler pays $90,000.
In a letter this week to more than 20,000 nursing union members, the president of the Minnesota Nurses Association said a series of Star Tribune articles on nursing discipline unfairly tarnishes all nurses.
"The cases reported by the newspaper are disturbing but also very limited," wrote Linda Hamilton, who has been president of the state's largest nurses union since 2009. "It would be a disservice to good nurses everywhere to let this smear campaign gain a groundswell."
MNA spokesman Rick Fuentes said Wednesday that the union has heard from members who say they're concerned that the stories affect their workplaces.
"When you start labeling nurses as diverting, it makes it seem like they are all like that," Fuentes said. "That's not fair."
Hamilton's statement said the Board of Nursing "has some difficult questions to answer" regarding its disciplinary process, echoing a statement it provided to the legislature last week when it called for more scrutiny of nursing discipline.
The statement incorrectly reported that the Star Tribune has not asked the union to comment on the nursing stories "since they were first printed." Prior to the publication of the first story Oct. 6, the union declined to comment on the disciplinary process when contacted by the Star Tribune. Last week, a reporter again contacted the union, which declined to comment.
The full letter:
"Dear MNA Members:
You may have recently seen the Minneapolis newspaper’s series regarding the Minnesota Board of Nursing’s discipline process.
We take the reputation of nurses, as well as the safety of patients, very seriously. The most recent Gallup poll showed nurses’ trustworthiness at 85 percent of the American public. That’s not only the highest among all professions, it’s the highest credibility we have ever had since Gallup began asking about nurses.
The Minnesota Nurses Association has not been asked to comment on these nurse stories since they were first printed, and we’ve decided not to respond or repost the stories in any manner.
You may ask why. MNA believes that to comment or add to the negative publicity would continue to further the damage to nurses’ reputations. The cases reported by the newspaper are disturbing but also very limited. It would be a disservice to good nurses everywhere to let this smear campaign gain a groundswell. Our staff has been tracking these stories and revealed that they are among the least popular articles in this newspaper. They have received extremely limited coverage among other media outlets.
As all of you know, these few stories are not representative of the nearly 120,000 RNs and LPNs practicing in Minnesota, the majority of whom are skilled caregivers who always put patient safety first.
MNA was requested to provide testimony to the joint legislative committee investigating the procedures of the Board of Nursing, which is where the focus should be. The Board has some difficult questions to answer, and the state may need to give the Board resources to fulfill its mission. Policy-makers will look to us as a resource and to help shape this ongoing and multi-faceted discussion.
MNA will continue to be an advocate for nurses in the workplace, and we will continue to monitor the coverage and the effects in the legislature. If you feel the effects of these stories have affected your workplace conditions, please contact us at the MNA office.
MNA believes in a fair system of oversight that protects patients, but also treats substance abuse for the chronic disease that it is. I hope that you will join me in advocating for the profession as these important issues are discussed during the legislative session. I also encourage you to write a letter to the editor of your local paper or the Star Tribune in support of the profession.
Please do not hesitate to contact me or MNA staff with further questions.
Linda Hamilton, RN, BSN
Some Xcel Energy customers may have opened their energy bills and discovered someone else’s information printed on them.
Xcel Energy said it is notifying approximately 16,000 of its 1.4 million customers in Minnesota and South Dakota that their accounts were printed on another customer’s bill.
The bills, dated Nov. 12, included another customer’s name, address, account and meter numbers, energy use and the amount owed.
“It does not include any billing or payment history or sensitive personal or financial information, such as Social Security numbers or bank account information,” said the company, which is changing the customer account numbers of those affected.
The mix-up was made by its bill printing vendor and no external party had accessed their records, Xcel said.
The company is sending letters notifying customers of the mix up and a corrected statement.
Don’t be fooled by ads that sounds too good to be true on sites like Craigslist or Ebay, said Attorney General Lori Swanson’s office in her monthly consumer warning.
Personally, I love Craigslist. Every apartment I have lived in was found on Craigslist, and I bought a pretty cheap Nintendo DS on the site about a month ago.
But I also almost feel for a few scams. About a year ago, I really wanted a Maltese puppy and a woman on Craigslist claimed she was giving one away because she was moving, and her new landlord did not allow pets. All she asked was that I pay the cost of shipping the dog from California to my home in Texas.
She asked that I wire the money to her, and of course, that’s when I grew suspicious, especially since the money was headed to a country in Africa. Thankfully, that’s where our “business” ended.
Swanson warned that is one of the most common ways people get scammed on sites like Craigslist.
“Citizens who are asked to wire or otherwise submit payment to a party in another country who they do not know should exercise great caution, as this is a primary red flag for potential Internet classified scam,” Swanson said in her warning.
Other red flags, according to Swanson:
|Crime (1)||Employment (1)|
|Whistleblower (439)||Home Improvement (4)|
|Advertising claims (64)||Businesses in hot water (287)|
|Buyer beware (181)||Civil liberties (19)|
|Complaint sagas (109)||Corruption (1)|
|Dangerous products (49)||Free speech (1)|
|Government spends your money (30)||How to blow the whistle (12)|
|Loopholes (10)||Neighborhood nuisances (36)|
|Polling problems (21)||Problems on the job (14)|
|Property problems (44)||Public records (35)|
|Scams (142)||Seniors (39)|
|Whistleblowers (22)||Discrimination (4)|