The constant reference in articles such as this article from BBC News is starting get on my goat.
*There is no such thing as identity theft* OK? If someone pretends to be me and takes money out of my bank account, *I* am not a victim of “Identity Theft”. The *bank* is a victim of *fraud*.
The myth of Identity Theft has been promulgated by those with an interest in labelling it differently from all the other frauds for which they are liable. By making *me* a victim, they hope to make sure it’s *me* who ends up being responsible, and paying for it.
Grrrr.
Your are correct as well as incorrect with that statement Doug. Your example could be considered bank fraud. However there IS such a thing as Identity Theft! If someone commits a crime using your name, SS#, birth date, address, etc. this is Identity Theft! If someone uses your medical records for services it is Identity Theft! If your drivers license is used by someone other then you it is Identity Theft. Identity Theft is real and out of control. I hope you educate yourself for protection against it.
Thanks for the post time.
Steve
I’d disagree, I really would. Identity Theft has been defined as a crime as you describe, but my identity has not been stolen. I am still me. The person who has committed the crime is still them - they are not me. They have just defrauded a single business of some money, by using my details.
It is interesting that none of the details you specify are even private - these are all items of public record. If a business is really defrauded so easily, trying to claim this is anything at all to do with me is surely rather egregious?
Doug, hopefully this never happens to you, but, if you get pulled over by the police and you are arrested for an outstanding warrant, and it really wasn’t you but you go to jail, and you have to prove it wasn’t you, remember, there is no such thing as “Identity Theft”