Lazy Man and Money

Is Donating My Car a Scam?

by 1 Comment

Happy Consumer Protection Friday. (If I keep writing it perhaps others will join in and make it a real thing.)

Typically, I cover MLM scams because I find it interesting how they confuse victims into thinking they are legitimate business opportunities. This week I’m switching it up. I’m going to look into car donation charities. You’ve probably heard those annoying, earworm, jingles sung by kids on the radio (yes Kars4Kids I’m looking at you… and please make an attempt to learn to spell).

Are they good charities or should you put your money elsewhere? Let’s find out.

To start, I should mention that I normally wouldn’t have thought about car donation companies being scams. I’ve gotten rid of one car in the last 15+ years and it was a sale as a private party. I don’t remember how I moved the cars before that.

Car donation scams cross my radar when this LA Times headline piqued my interest: California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris sues to shut down 2 car donation charities.

It’s not very often that I hear about Attorneys General suing companies. It is less often that those companies are charities. The article was full of information that I didn’t know. This was perhaps the gem: “…car donation organizations give a much smaller portion of the donations they receive to charity than similar sorts of fundraising campaigns, spending nearly two-thirds on salaries for their own employees and other administrative costs.”

So if you donate a car worth $9,000, you are really only giving $3,000 to the people who need it.

Is that really a scam? I say that a scam is in the eye of the beholder and my opinion of a scam is not necessarily going to be yours. That said my opinion allows for a very broad definition.

These car charities definitely fit my opinion of a scam. Why? Simply because it isn’t what a consumer (or in this case the charity gifter) would expect. It feels to me that the organization exists to create well-paying jobs for the people who work at the organization… and maybe give away some money to help others in need in order to sleep well at night. Aside from the salaries at the charity, there are also high advertising costs (the radio airtime on those jingles isn’t free) to bring in the money for the jobs and the recipients of the charity. Finally, I presume that the cars often need to be fixed up before being passed on to the recipient.

So then I went to look for more articles. I found this one on Kars 4 Kids, which said:

“According to [Doug White, professor at Columbia University], many car-donation-based charities that operate under this simple model ‘hoodwink’ the public, losing a large portion of the money raised from the sale to the middlemen who recycle the car or sell it on behalf of the charity. Kars 4 Kids is one of the few that does most of the work in house and thus avoids many of these losses.”

I’d definitely call “hookwink” the same as “scam”, wouldn’t you? However, it at least sounds like Kars for Kids might be a good charity because it doesn’t use the middleman, right?

Not so fast.

NBC’s New York affiliate found:

“Financial statements for two nonprofits associated with Kars 4 Kids show the charity lost more than $5 million on real estate investments in 2010. In the same time frame, Kars 4 Kids spent about $6 million on programs for children.”

That makes it sound like it’s “Kars 4 Real Estate Investments” doesn’t it? There’s also this:

“In 2009, attorneys general in Pennsylvania and Oregon forced Oorah to pay $130,000 in fines for failing to disclose the religious purpose in ads.”

You didn’t realize that Kars 4 Kids (which gives its money to Oorah and Joy of Our Youth) is a religious organization. I didn’t either. It’s fine to donate to religious organizations, but maybe people would donate to a religion of their own faith… if the jingle actually disclosed it.

Fortunately, it looks like I’m not the only one to cover this. It seems like BankRate has a consumer warning. About.com is very blunt: “The ads that you see everywhere that offer to help you make a car donation to charity are almost always rip-offs.”

So how do you avoid these car donation scams? I’d personally just avoid donating cars and money to them. If you have a car that is working condition, perhaps you can sell it for cash. Then donate the cash to a reputable charity that you’ve researched and vetted. This way, you know where your money is going.

P.S.

Years ago I created a car site with a friend’s help. I had forgotten about it until this article. It turns out that How to Donate a Car is one of the most popular articles. Now I have to go back and see if the author I hired was accurate.

What is a Scam Anyway?

by 6 Comments

Over the last year or two, I’ve been using Friday as a day to write about “scams.” I didn’t consciously make a decision about it, it is something that kind of just evolved. A lot of readers ask me questions, I do some research to answer them. I figure this information may help other people, so I write an article with my findings.

I think scams are often overlooked in personal finance. It’s great to save money for retirement, have an emergency fund, and all that, but it is also important to not lose your money to some scheme. Saving and growing money is important, but don’t forget about protecting it. That protection may directly save people tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I particularly like covering scams because it gives me a chance to exercise my critical thinking muscles. I hope readers enjoy exercising those muscles with me.

When I started writing about scams, I didn’t think much about the word. Readers know I write in a conversational tone. So my writing is often a reflection of what I’d say to a friend, a colleague, or anyone else if they asked me about my opinion on something.

It never occurred to me that “scam” may mean different things to different people. The other day someone told me that it implies illegal activity. That was very, very surprising to me. Here’s why:

Wikipedia redirects the word “scam” to Confidence Trick, which I feel is very appropriate as they have the same meaning to me. Wikipedia further defines Confidence Trick (and scam):

“A confidence trick (synonyms include confidence scheme, scam and stratagem) is an attempt to defraud a person or group after first gaining their confidence, used in the classical sense of trust. Confidence tricks exploit characteristics of the human psyche such as dishonesty, honesty, vanity, compassion, credulity, irresponsibility, naïveté and greed.”

I’ve heard people whine when I cite Wikipedia as a source, but it was deemed as accurate as Encyclopedia Britannica back in 2005 and has only gotten much, much better since then… especially in cases like this one where the article has many more than 500 edits dating back to 2002. In such cases, it represents the collective wisdom of hundreds of people, which I think is more powerful than a dictionary. So please don’t whine about my reliance on Wikipedia with regard to this specific case.

If you are going to extend “scam” to imply illegal activity, I believe you are making a statement about what is and what isn’t legal. I have ideas of what is legal and what is illegal, but I don’t possess a 100% understanding of all laws. I don’t even think judges know ALL laws. They may be able to look them up, but in the context of writing an article under deadline, it simply isn’t practical. Furthermore, laws and their interpretations change over time. Finally, since this blog is accessible worldwide, I obviously don’t know what your laws are in your area.

So to the person who told me that “scam” implies illegal activity, I’d say that it can imply illegal activity, but I’m not sure it has to. For example, I’m fairly sure that reducing the amount of propane you are refiling a tank with is legal, but I would say it is confidence trick or scam to not tell people you are putting in less propane in tank. And I certainly don’t know if there is a law on the books about the disclosure of the amount of propane in tanks.

Am I going to say that consumers are getting “scammed” by it? Sure, but that’s because it is my opinion based on the information I have available and doing my very best to disclose in my articles.

“Scam” and the Law

I’m not a lawyer. I don’t even play one on TV. However, I’m pretty good with research (thanks Google!) and I think my computer science background gives me a strong grasp of logic. When something isn’t logical, it irks me… in that way, I’m a little like Sheldon in Big Bang Theory. I think that most of the time the law is right. Judges generally make good decisions and fair precedent is set. That’s not true all the time as I don’t like to get into absolutes, but it’s just my opinion.

I tried to research “‘scam’ and law” and I came across some interesting cases. I’ll start with a great resource on defamation by The Consumerist which states:

Defamation is:

  • A false statement of fact
  • About the plaintiff
  • That is publicized to a third party
  • Causes some injury to the plaintiff

I’m usually very careful to ask if something is a “scam”, until I feel that there’s so much overwhelming evidence that my opinion is that it is indeed a scam. I ask because reader feedback is very important in helping me. I try to put a ton of research into my articles, but if a reader comes up with a rock-solid explanation for why I am wrong in my research, I’m happy to say, “Nope, no scam here.”

If the day arrives that asking questions is anything other than free speech in the United States… well it would be the darkest day in our nation’s history.

Getting back to The Consumerist’s list above. I have never tried to say a false statement on Lazy Man and Money. If any reader finds a false statement, I challenge them to point it out in the comments so I can correct it. (If your opinion is different than mine, it doesn’t mean that my statement is false). I admit that I have been wrong. I’m fallible like any other human out there.

I also can get in heated discussions about the scam articles I cover. This happens particularly when the person commenting is using false statements when they should, as representatives of the company, know better. I think about the misinformation and disinformation that they are spreading to lure in unsuspecting victims into the scheme. (See the point about Sheldon above being irked by this.) Sometimes I use hyperbole in these situations to get people to understand exactly how far off they are. In general, I focus mostly on customer service and that means getting back to people as soon as possible, even if I see the comment late at night. This is the way I’ve always blogged, get information out there as fast as possible, even if it isn’t quite polished. Most publishers don’t reply back to comments at all. I want to do better than that. Some 99.999% (maybe more “9”s) of the time this works out awesomely. For the rest of the time, go back to the previous paragraph about being fallible.

Moving on, statements of opinion are protected speech. As I covered above, my use of “scam” is always my opinion. The Consumerist specifically cites this court case as precedent that “running scams” is a matter of opinion.

Update (4/2/2018):

And if you need more evidence of it being a matter of opinion, let’s take a famous example. Trump: Amazon ‘scam’ costing Postal Service ‘billions’

If this was a blind test, any sane person would agree that comparing a mutually agreed upon Amazon/USPS arrangement a “scam” would be a thousand times more defamatory based on falsity more than someone asking a question if a consumer is getting treated honestly by a company. I don’t know how anyone can be held accountable for defamation in a truthful attempt to protect consumers while others are clearly not held accountable for “post-truth” comments that can and do hurt people.

Moving on from that update…

Also as lawyer Eric Goldman notes in a big Gizmodo case, the court ruled that the use of “scam” wasn’t an issue there either. Personally, I like Sequence, Inc’s coverage because it made many more great points.

Finally, a high Colorado state court said that “scam” was not libelous.

So again, while I’m not a lawyer, this information helps me form the opinion that using the word “scam” isn’t an issue. That is unless you want to believe all these courts and media outlets got it wrong.

Sometimes some government authority sanctions a company or operation validating my opinion. Sometimes they don’t. I know people have been speaking out against Herbalife for more than a dozen years and it only has gotten attention from authorities until recently. Fortune Hi-Tech Marketing (FHTM) got shut down by the FTC years after USA Today reported they may be a pyramid scheme.

When USA Today asked the question if a FHTM was a pyramid scheme, they were ahead of the law enforcement system… same with the people calling out Herbalife a decade ago.

Earlier this year the FTC halted Vemma alleging it was a pyramid scheme. That was nearly two years after I asked if Is Vemma a Scam?

I don’t mean to disparage the law enforcement system, but it seems like they’ve got too much to do and not enough money to do it with. It doesn’t make sense that I could call the scheme two years in advance and consumers have to be victimized while the law enforcement gets its act together.

A Message to MLM Companies

If you are an MLM company, you are going to get people calling you a pyramid scheme. The FTC warns people about MLMs and pyramid schemes. The NY Times is going to write articles that read we can’t know if your business is legit.

By signing up to be an MLM, you’ve placed your entire company under scrutiny. To the best of my knowledge there is pending litigation on ViSalus, MXI Corporation, and Stream/Ignite all MLMs alleged to be pyramid schemes.

So my best advice to these companies is ditch the questionable pyramid behavior. It is extremely easy to do. You can run a legitimate affiliate program if you want to reward people for marketing your products.

If you don’t ditch the questionable pyramid behavior people should rightly ask “WHY?!?!” and presume you are guilty. If your company is legit, simply act legit.

My best advice to prospective entrepreneurs is not to get mixed up in MLM shenanigans as the FTC could shut down the business at any time. Why attempt to build a business on something that appears to be illegal? They could leave you and you’d be left with no business.

Final Thoughts

Sorry for the rant. If you are reading this, you are a saint for sticking through nearly 1700 words of this. If you couldn’t tell, much of this has come from personal experience. However, I’ve also seen dozens of well-meaning consumer advocates get shut down by fear or something else, when they legally shouldn’t have been. That means that people are getting robbed of the information they need to make an informed decision, which is never a good thing.

[Originally Published: June 19, 2015]

Are Preggie Pops a Scam?

by 9 Comments

A couple of months ago, a regular reader sent me an interesting email. His wife is pregnant with their first child. (Congrats!) Like most expecting mothers, she is dealing with morning sickness. Her doctor told her to suck on Preggie Pops, and if that doesn’t help, to come back for another visit, and she would prescribe her something for the nausea.

After driving all over town looking for Preggie Pops, the couple came home empty-handed. They turned to the internet to order some. It isn’t instant relief, but it is better than nothing. Like all brilliant consumers, they looked to see what the active ingredient is so that they can look for an equivalent generic and save some money. It was then that they discovered that the active ingredient in Preggie Pops was… nothing. There is no active ingredient. He wrote me:

“[They are] an over-priced piece of candy placebo on a stick, marketed to pregnant women! My wife (who is a doctor herself) was more than a little insulted. Ingredients: Sugar, corn-syrup, corn-starch, natural flavors.

To top off his frustration, it was another hour trip to see the doctor for the nausea medicine.

His frustration is understandable, right? No one likes wild-goose chases. It’s a lot of running around for sugar and corn-syrup.

About that Placebo Effect…

Over the last 7 years, I’ve covered in excruciating detail the damage pyramid schemes selling snake oil do. In particular, I cover some of the harm of the placebo effect. It can lead to self-licensing of unhealthy behavior. It also undermines good science and the doctor-patient relationship.

Finally, let’s just say that I’m not a fan of marketers lying to consumers to make a buck. I believe there is a simple word for it, “fraud.”

What Makes Preggie Pops Different?

I had a gut feeling that Preggie Pops weren’t nearly as bad as the pyramid schemes selling snake oil. It took a little thinking to bring my gut feeling into words that I can use to explain it.

The pyramid schemes selling snake oil use a Groupthink and financial bias (through a financial fraud) to coerce its cult-followers that the products work. Preggie Pops do nothing of the sort. No one joins the Preggie Pop cult. When Scarlett is trying Preggie Pops, she’s not thinking “If this works for me I can make money recommending it to Candice”, which would logically increase the placebo effect.

As if avoiding a cult isn’t important enough, there are the other considerations. If your doctor is recommending it, it doesn’t undermine the doctor-patient relationship.

Morning sickness is also a special case. Its very nature is fleeting with the advancement of the pregnancy. No one goes through life with a chronic case of morning sickness.

One of the other problems with placebo is that they can prevent people from getting real medical treatment during which time the condition may worsen. In this case, the condition isn’t likely to worsen.

Finally, until very recently there didn’t exist real medical treatment out. This Reuters article points out that this morning sickness drug is the first the FDA approved in 50 years.

(Interesting side story: It was taken off the market in 1983 after mothers filed a ton of lawsuits claiming it hurt children. It wasn’t that it was shown to cause harm or be ineffective, but the company didn’t have the money for a legal defense. Reminds me a little of the witch-hunt with vaccinations, except they have the money and scientific community.)

According to the Reuters article, this new medication, Diclegis, “consists of two main ingredients: doxylamine succinate, which is contained in several over-the-counter antihistamines; and pyroxidine hydrochloride, also known as vitamin B6.”

We’ll get back to the B6 in a bit.

Understandably, expecting mothers aren’t going to rush to take medication. We are all very, very careful with such little lives. Many of the safest medications specifically state to consult your doctor. My wife, a pharmacist, not only stayed away from every medication known to man, she extended her boycott to anything that she considered a chemical such as high-fructose corn syrup or artificial sweeteners.

Given this, I can understand and appreciate the appeal of a sugar candy to alleviate a temporary symptom.

So Do Preggie Pops Work?

If you want to know if something is clinically effective, you do studies as described here. These studies properly blind patients and researchers to avoid bias as well as take other safeguards to ensure the science is accurate. I couldn’t find any such studies on Preggie Pops.

The closest thing we have to that (which isn’t that close) are the Amazon reviews Preggie Pops. There are currently 139 ratings that average 3.6 out of 5 stars. That’s very underwhelming as far as Amazon reviews go.

The Wall Street Journal reported on the lollipops as well. They bring in gastroenterologist Patricia L. Raymond, an assistant professor of clinical internal medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School in Norfolk, Va, who said, “there is insufficient proof that any of the candies are effective.”

The article goes a little further to explore the company’s claims. In particular Preggie Pops contain two ingredients that may help with nausea.

The first is ginger. Preggie Pops contain 62mg of ginger according to the article. A Dr. Leung has reviewed studies which seemed to show that 750 to 2,500 milligrams may help with morning sickness. It is dangerous to make conclusions on a few studies and of course, Preggie Pops contain far less of the ingredient than in the research.

I noticed that only one of Preggie Pops flavored were ginger. It wasn’t clear to me if there was ginger in their other flavors. However, these Ginger Tummydrops are better rated than Preggie Pops with a 4.2 rating across 366 reviews. So maybe people’s reviews of Preggie Pops are dependent on the flavor.

The Wall Street Journal also mentioned that a couple of studies showed that 10mg of B6 or more may help with morning sickness. Again, these studies are sparse, but it is worth noting that Preggie Pops do contain 10mg of vitamin B6 and a competing brand has 25mg.

If you remember, one of the two ingredients in the recently approved prescription medicine above was vitamin B6. Again, the research in general appears to be paper thin.

So what about the cost of Preggie Pops

This website is about money, so I need to talk about the money aspect. This might also help people who can’t locate Preggie Pops locally or don’t wish to wait for them to be shipped over the internet.

Preggie Pops and Tummydrops on Amazon cost around 32 to 37 cents a piece. It doesn’t sound like much, but it could be a a buck per day for a couple of months.

This Source Naturals Vitamin B-6, 50mg, 250 Tablets is 3 cents per does, about 1/10th cost… and it has twice as much vitamin B6. If you have a pill splitter handy, you could make that 500 pills of the same amount of B6 in some of the drops or pops. The pills also state that they are used for morning sickness.

What about the Ginger? The Ginger Tummydrops seems to contain 15mg of ginger even less than the Preggie Pops 62mg. However you can get 550mg of Ginger Root for 5 cents a pill. That’s a lot more ginger than you can in drops.

If it’s sucking on sugar that helps, add in a bag of Jolly Ranchers for really cheap for another penny or two.

For a total of around 8 or 9 cents a dose you can get a lot more ginger and B6 than what you’d get with the drops. That’s better than 32 or 37 cents right?

If those two ingredients are really effective, the 7 cents seems like the right way to go, right?

What do you think? Let me know in the comments.

Shaw’s Monopoly “Scam”…

by 85 Comments

I usually reserve Friday for exposing an MLM/pyramid scheme scam, but today I thought I’d take a lighter-natured look at different kind of “scam.” I’m putting it in quotes, because I’m not sure many people intelligent people are tricked by it. It also doesn’t directly cost them any money. However, it does fall into the category of a “confidence game.”

In New England, one of the biggest grocery stores is Shaw’s. Following on the heals of McDonald’s popular Monopoly game, Shaw’s has launched their own Monopoly game. For some reason, I didn’t notice it last year. This year, it caught my attention.

It’s a bit of a kooky game. It doesn’t have properties that you collect like McDonalds. Instead it has pieces such as 122C and 187J. They don’t limit you to collecting 2 or 3 pieces, but it varies. The big prizes have 6 pieces to collect.

That’s not why I’m writing the article today. I’m writing it for two reasons:

You Have Almost Zero Chance of Winning Shaw’s Monopoly Game

I think everyone knows from the McDonalds’ game that there’s a rare piece. That’s what limits the company (I should say the insurance company) from paying out billions of dollars.

As Savings Advice points out McDonalds doesn’t pay out the million dollars very often. They explain why in detail, but the gist is:

1) The Boardwalk piece may never get shipped to a store… they make more pieces than necessary so they don’t run out before the end of the game.
2) It may never get served to a customer.
3) The customer may never open the piece.
4) The customer may throw away Boardwalk not realizing it is the magic piece.
5) They have to go get the easy Park Place place as well.

The last two are probably not too limiting, but the first three are. It’s a little scammy (as in “confidence game”), but not the kind of thing I’d waste my time writing about.

So let’s get to the Shaw’s version of the game…

When you spend a certain dollar amount or buy special Monopoly ticket items you get game pieces. Every time I have gone to Shaw’s, they ask me if I’m playing the game before giving me the game pieces. They aren’t automatically served to customers. From what I’ve seen, I’d estimate that 80% of customers reject the game pieces.

I figured I’d play the game. Figuring that there are rare pieces like McDonalds, I went on a search for a list of the rare pieces. Fortunately, Boston on Budget had what I was looking for.

However, I found something I wasn’t expecting… for the bigger prizes there appear to be TWO rare pieces.

We just covered how hard it is to find Boardwalk… and people know to look for it. People don’t know to look for 107A… pieces aren’t getting consistently served… customers may throw it out. They have to collect 6 total pieces.

But then they have to find the rare 105A piece as well.

(All this is according to Boston on Budget’s list, which comes with the disclaimer that I can’t verify the information.)

It is almost like having to pitch a perfect game in baseball and then them saying, “Well now you need to go out and pitch a no-hitter.”

Therein lies the scam/confidence game. The image you see above of $80,000,000 in prizes is tempting consumers to come in and play. It even tempts them to buy products that they might not otherwise to earn extra game pieces. Yet Shaw’s will very likely only pay out a small percentage of the money… and I highly doubt they pay out the million.

I’d be more harsh on the scam, but with so few playing the game, it doesn’t seem to be a big temptation.

However, perhaps the real reason I’m writing this is because I decided to play the game in hopes of getting one of the small prizes. I thought I might even be lucky enough for an instant winner prize similar to the free food that McDonalds gives away.

I was lucky. I pulled one of the instant winner prizes:

I was a winner of something that literally had no cash value.

I do love Shaw’s response to rub a little more salt in the wound with the #BePositive hashtag:

Update (3/9/2015)

I’ve been in good contact with Shaw’s Twitter account. They saw the article are responded with:

This lead to:

Which naturally lead to:

So I decided to take them up on their invitation to look at the prizes that were given out last year. In fact, I put them in a spreadsheet so I could add them all up.

Before I go any further, I want to highlight that not all prizes are listed there. There are many smaller prizes and the odds are here. Shaw’s made that point, but it isn’t exactly clear if that’s the 2014 or 2015 numbers. If I had to guess I’d say it is 2015 due to the copyright at the bottom (2015).

However, they only pointed me to that page of prizes claimed, so I can only go on that. To the best of my knowledge I have no way of knowing how many $25 grocery gift cards were awarded.

What’s interesting is that this Playmonopoly.us is not Shaw’s website. It appears as if the game is run across the grocery chain’s many brands. This means that it is possible they could limit winners by shipping different rare pieces to different geographic regions and pairing them with the “more rare” pieces to other chains.

All that said, I’m going to present the data from the link they suggested a few different ways.

Of the “over $55,000,000 in prizes and money saving offers”:

Overall: There were 77 people who won $600,500 in prizes represented on the page.

Winnings from game pieces: There appear to be 63 people who won a total of $73,500.

Second Chance Winnings: One person won $500,000 which only came into play as a second chance winning because none of the top 6 prizes were claimed. (the rare pieces on Boston on Budget no one won when there were two rare pieces… just as one would expect and as I wrote.

My analysis is that a little more than 1% of the over 55 million in prizes was awarded. The amount won from game pieces themselves appears to be 0.13% of the marketed $55 million number. (Again, this all comes with the caveat that it doesn’t include smaller prizes.)

I’m not one to nitpick, but at this point I figure I’m in for a penny, why not be in for a pound? Of the $100,500 in non-second chance prizes awarded, $42,000 or 42% of it was in the form of groceries or gift cards. It’s a fine prize and actually what I was hoping to win when I decided to play the game. However, it is worth noting that the $42,000 is value to consumers, not the value that Shaw’s has to pay. We know that it is much cheaper for McDonalds to give out free food than cash. No one thinks it costs McDonalds $1.25 for a soda or a $1.50 for fries… we are all smart enough to understand margins, right? To Shaw’s it is probably less than $30,000 worth of groceries… a very far cry from the big number they claim they are giving away.

2017 Update

Once again Shaw’s is running the Monopoly game. I had compared it to McDonalds before so I did a little research into that one and found this article on Priceonomics about McDonalds Monopoly being a fraud. One quote from that is how these setups can cause real consumer harm:

” So thousands of people with 3 out of the 4 railroads are all searching for Short Line Railroad, with only 1 in 150 million odds of finding it. The setup draws scammers, who put out Craigslist ads or post on forums that they have Park Place and want to team up with someone who has the (rare) Boardwalk piece. When someone ignorant of the odds agreed, he or she sends the rare piece and never hears from the scammer again.”

US Airlines Scam

by Leave a Comment

Last November, I got an interesting letter in the mail. It had no return address, which I always consider a little fishy.

I opened it up to find that US Airlines has given me two free tickets to fly anywhere in the United States. You can see the letter here, but I’ll quote it for those not interest in the click:

Note: You must respond no later than December 1st, 2014

Dear Brian,

I am pleased to inform you that you have qualified for an award of 2 round-trip airline tickets. Congratulations! These tickets are valid for travel anywhere in the continental U.S. from any major international airport. The retail value of this award is $1,375.00. Certain restrictions apply.

We have attempted to contact you several times without success. This is our final attempt. If we do not hear from you soon, we may need to issue the ticket vouchers to the alternate.

Please call me today at 1-877-741-7882.

Regards,
Michelle Jackson
Customer Relations Manager

I have to give credit to my wife who knew it was a scam, even before I did. She pointed out that US Airlines doesn’t exist. It’s a mash-up of US Air and American Airlines.

It turns out that this is actually well-covered territory in the scam world. Even US Air warns about it at the bottom here.

I found one local news team who followed up on it. Here are a few excerpts from their story:

No one had actually called the number on the letter, so News 8’s Brian Roche did. He spoke to a woman named Dusty who would only tell me she worked for a marketing firm in Arizona…

She told him the tickets were not free, they were complimentary, as long as he went to a presentation for a travel agency…

Dusty made an appointment for Roche to attend the presentation at 52 Grumbacher Road in York. So News 8 went to the address and found an empty parking lot and an unmarked building…

News 8 learned that anyone responding to this would get the same sales pitch to attend a presentation at the address in York. One viewer who did attend told News 8 that she and her husband were asked to join a travel club and pay more than $11,000. As they tried to leave, the price dropped below $1,500…

While it may be easy to call this a scam, News 8 is going to stop just short of that. What it really seems to be is a promotional campaign designed to get people to join a travel club….

The most surprising thing of the article is how News 8 stops short at calling this a scam. I’m sure their lawyers told them that they should play it safe.

Seriously though… they invented an airline that doesn’t exist! They are wording the letter like a prize announcement (“Congratulations!”) They neglect any mention of a required sales pitch or a vacation club! They push you to act right away for fear that you’ll miss out on the (non-existent) “prize.” They send people to an empty parking lot and an unmarked building and ask people to pay $11,000 for something only to drop it to below $1,500.

It is a scam according to every definition of scam that I’ve ever read. Usually the definition centers around a confidence game, and that is clearly what “US Airlines” is using here. It’s sad that I have to refer to them as US Airlines, because there isn’t information on what the real vacation club name is.

P.S. I have to give credit to this guy on YouTube who called up the company to call them out on the scam: