I Hit the Data Goldmine Yesterday and Today

I've also detailed this information on the (252) 685-9865 phone number thread, as that was the originating call. Yesterday I received a robo-call with the "Kelly from Card Services" message, and apparently got deeper in their system without trying to validate the false credit card number (I used the contact number of my USAA card, and they typically prompt for more security information) I supplied. The most critical portion is that I was transferred to a location (with hard details) from that initial call, showing their interaction to how the call originated.

"April" was the initial live-person, from there I was transferred to "Gendro", and then on to "James Taylor" ("badge number 1858, and a "licensed financial adviser"). From there I was transferred to "Carol" (with the "Verification Department"), whom provided this company information:

"Madison and Company" (Madison is the daughter of Lee Siler, whom is the registered owner for all of the associated domains)
1-844-658-7439

From that detail, here is the domain: mandcosolutions.com ("Carol" stated that the $695 charge to my credit card would show up under "Madison and Company", and advised me to tell my bank that it was "Ok" if they saw the charge as being outside the United States)

I was then transferred to "Ann Marie", and then on to "Thomas", whom would be my "Coach". "Thomas", whom I have since learned is Thomas Schwartz (at extension 512 of their toll-free number 844 658-7439) immediately offered to call me back, saying that we were talking on "one of the marketing numbers". He and "Ann Marie" announce their company as "The Common Sense Group" (silerfg.com), although it is the same address and suite number for entities ran by Lee Siler under other names:

2180 West State Road 434
Suite 6138
Longwood, FL  32779

There are a few different toll-free numbers to that location, "Ann Marie" even answered today, and was able to forward me to the extension for "Thomas" (she said the extension was 512 when I prompted, but that he was "out of the office" today, which makes sense). He announces his name as "Thomas Schwartz", and I left a message for him to call me back (since he threatened me with a "lawsuit" for defaming the company he worked for [I did not, I called him a "scammer" when he conferenced me with a USAA receptionist], and defended the initial contact with me violating the DNCR). These entities (based on Thomas' reaction) are clearly aware of the operation, and I think it is a very good lead to pursue.

Further information is that my (employer-provided) cell phone has been on the DNCR for a few years, and I am the first to hold that number. I have not provided that number for any solicitations, as it is used for my support of our customers. Each call needs to be answered by me because of that, even though I start to recognize some of the spoofed numbers from receiving calls several times a day.

Here's a link to "Ripoff Report", with a complaint from 2010 about a "Thomas Schwartz" that worked for Lee Siler: http://www.ripoffreport.com/r/siler-financial-group/longwood-florida-32750/siler-financial-group-thomas-schwartz-ripped-off-and-ticked-off-longwood-florida-580298

There are two other entries for "Siler Financial Group" at the Ripoff Report, one with a response from an "ex-employee" Wendy Foster claiming the company threw her under the bus (in 2012). The irony being that the Siler domains still share (the same entries on all of their relevant pages) testimonials praising her. On all complaints (which strangely are solved to retract any bad will, to me it seems like a payoff) it is said they are initially contacted by phone, but they don't specify if it is a "cold call". If that has been going on since at least 2010 (with seemingly the same personnel), it shows how entrenched they are.

Since you have already made these posts under the correct thread, why did you start a new forum thread on this?

Four complaints on the Common Sense Group, even a possible link to the FTC-penalized "Innovative Wealth Builders" outfit: http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/specific_search/Common%20Sense%20Group

Because it was listed under one spoofed number (meaning that it would be generally unseen, except by people on the site called by that specific number). Moderators can adjust and penalize as they see fit, I'm trying to flesh out more details that may be relevant to others. I'll conform to the social norm, are you saying I'm in the wrong compared to some of the other chatter on the forum?

That would be up to the administrators to decide.  The problem is that we have thread after thread of redundant posts in the Forum.  The forum threads tend to wander off into obscurity.  The number threads are always there.  I was simply wondering why another thread was started when all the information was posted in the correct place.  If you watch the "latest forum threads" you will see that these threads work their way off the page as new posts are made or new threads started.  We are simply trying to get everyone to post under the numbers, because that is where the information belongs.  The forums should only be used for those subjects not related to a phone number.

Can someone help me .....

I get a lot of catalogues via snail mail. I order mail order frequently but only through online catalogues, I never look at actual mail catalogues. How do I stop them from sending?  they take up my mail box space and are a nuisance!

This is a web site about scam phone calls, not mail order catalogs.

I know. Was just wondering since y'all are quite knowledgeable about spammers.

I have up to several calls from different spoofed numbers (that change over time) per day, typically from a single aspect (credit card interest rate reduction, although the wireless security system and medical alert bracelet/necklace are new). On rare occasions a spoofed number may be used for more than one target market (and it ultimately is not a legitimate number, so it only helps to compose a list of what telemarketers are currently using). If (252) 685-9865 is viewed as permanently burned tomorrow (the automated dialers stop using it), I doubt that the information will be found by those that need it most.

Many of the people posting on the "number" threads are new to the game, and unless they see that the call was malicious, they won't get involved any further (some members may be viewed as posting redundantly if it is the same canned text on more than one thread). A reverse lookup (all numbers an operation is known to use) might be more functional here. It just isn't a single number anymore.

This experience was unique for me, where I was still on the original call of a spoofed number, but started to gain company details and information that I had not been able to get before. It is traceable information, with company contacts stating sketchy practices that have penalized under law before. These companies can be shut down if that information is found, listed only under a single spoofed number it becomes much harder.

Good work Dick, for posting the information both on the number threads and here in the forum. Over time I have found that the regular posters at this site tend to be cliquey and will gang up on any new viewpoints. Watch, now they will jump all over me and demand specific examples of their bullying but I have already moved on with my day. Don't be discouraged by their viewpoints and thanks again for your information.

>>> Good work Dick, for posting the information both on the number threads and here in the forum. <<<

Actually, I tend to agree with you. However, the way this web site is indexed, it is true that forum posts tend to get hidden after a relatively short time, whereas posts under number threads are easily found even 7 years after they are posted. And they are indexed in more ways than might appear immediately obvious to a "newbie" or even many regulars.

What can tend to happen, however, is that a forum thread might suck the life out of the whole purpose of the board by serving as a dumping ground of lists of phone numbers that can never be fully sorted out, as has happened here from time to time.

Also, the first contact that people have with a scammer is seeing a caller ID number on their phone, or getting a callback number on a voice mail message. People tend to search for and look up these numbers when they come here. That's another reason the number threads are usually a better place to post information -- people come here looking up numbers, not particular scammers.

It would be nice, however, if it were easier if there were an option to group together number threads that may originate from a single source. But currently, while there are a lot of different ways the number threads are indexed, there is no way of which I am aware of adding a secondary key to the number thread database to indicate other numbers that may be coming from the same source. You may want to request that service from the system administrator.

>>> Over time I have found that the regular posters at this site tend to be cliquey and will gang up on any new viewpoints. <<<

That may be true, but we have disagreements with each other, too, and yet still manage to maintain conversations at a cordial level.

>>> Watch, now they will jump all over me and demand specific examples of their bullying <<<

I don't think so.  In ANY anonymous posting, it helps or may be necessary to present evidence (which here can be in the form of links, even to other cites) to make your point more persuasively. (Watch "Judge Judy" sometime.)  Nevertheless, the issue you raise here is a just side-show straw man undeserving of any serious attention.

Perhaps you would like to point out where I was cliquey and ganged up on this poster?  I asked a simple question, why two posts.  He explained his reasoning to me, and politely explained my position on the matter.  Now as to the catalog post, that was completely off topic and not relevant to phone calls.  In addition, a simple web search could have given him his answer.