About 2 years after moving out of these condos, I found that retaliation through Identity Theft was apparently used & now I'm attempting to get this cleared up with the credit companies (and with any luck, bring the individual to justice that did it).
One 2/7/2018, I got a call from the automated anti-fraud system of my bank, reporting a number of possible fraudulent charges to the Lyft service. I was in the middle of a stream on Twitch at the time, my webcam showing me going through the automated prompts, then having to shut off the stream to report the fraudulent charges as the forward to that system was not successful. While I was on hold with my bank to report the fraudulent charges, I contacted Lyft on their Facebook page, which surprisingly got me a response very quickly, this eventually leading to getting a page to their support page, where I reported the matter & they eventually reversed the charges themselves (canceling out the reversals that was to be expected by my bank). The matter was still reported to the police on 2/19/2018 regardless because I wanted to bring the individual to justice that has misused my information, but what it resulted in was because Lyft was apparently just choosing to write off the loss, no charges would be taken against the individual that caused the crime...
The other thing I noticed directly after reporting this matter to my bank was that my credit rating 45 points (not being below 800 in years), not being certain that it was a matter of identity theft at the time & told the officer (when I was handing over about 20 pages of evidence regarding the fraudulent charges to Lyft), so I stated I wanted to confirm whether that was the case before filing a legitimate Identity Theft report.
About mid-March, I determined that there had to be something going on when my credit score dropped another 16 points, at which point I attempted to get my credit report from Experian again & as was to be expected, I wasn't able to get it again (as before, claiming there was an error & I had to request it via regular mail). Normally I wouldn't have considered this a big issue, but I noticed that I had an entire page of questions on the application asking about accounts that were opened in 2015, where there really shouldn't have been any... I do understand that the credit report companies will sometimes throw in false-positives to throw of people from requesting those reports for somebody other than themselves, but there was no way there was going to be an ENTIRE page of false-positives, so I started looking for a contact on line for Experian to try & figure out why these were on my report at all.
I didn't find a phone number online that I could contact them at (not one that worked anyways), so I considering making a review against the company through consumeraffairs.com, however decided to fire attempt to contact Experian directly through their Facebook page. It was no surprised that Experian flat-out ignored the attempted contact on their Facebook page, so the next step was to attempt to sign up for LifeLock. Of course this ended up being a dead end also, LifeLock was never able to complete the registration, I would expect due to false information on my record (wrong addresses or social security numbers).
After asking the LifeLock representative for her badge number & first name, I made a call to the Millcreek Police, the first officer giving me a number for the member's line of Experian, but I didn't really expect they would be willing to speak to me about out, so I waited for the follow-up call to fully report the matter. The officer that called me back was actually the same officer that I spoke to about the fraudulent charges back during the Lyft situation. I explained what I got when I attempted to get my credit report through Experian & pointed out the timeline of the opening of those accounts (2015) gave me a good indication of who was responsible & I could have given him at leave 4 names right there of people that were likely responsible (of course I didn't have proof & wasn't able to give them to him, but I might at a later date if I can prove who has committed the fraudulent activity effecting my credit rating). He gave me 3 phone numbers where I was supposed to be able to report fraud that could have been effecting my credit score, but it's no surprise that those numbers really didn't help in getting a live representative on the line, looked like I was going to have to take the matter another route (likely through a legal representative and/or mediator).
Currently the problem is still unresolved, but I'm still digging into what is happening & will eventually have enough information to at least get my credit rating fixed, but whether I'll be able to bring the individual to justice that caused it, well that's just wishful thinking currently & still undetermined whether I'll get enough to information to go that far (that's definitely what I'll be shooting for, however).
March 19, 2018
January 17, 2018
01/17/2018
Early January, it became apparent that my father was contacted about the review that apparently had been accepted onto the PMS BBB page (previously expecting they would be able to get the BBB to not publish it by claiming it wasn't accurate, however I had proof to provide should it be needed, including some voice logs from the manager of the South 67 Condos). At the time I wanted to write the review on the South 67 Condos, however when I contacted the BBB to request the creation of a page for the condos HOA themselves, they stated that seeing as PMS was the manager of those condos, the review needed to be done on the management, not the HOA themselves.
Back to the matter at hand, it seems my father had no intentions in telling me anything about this contact & for the most part still hasn't told me anything about it (so I can't really say what was said in that contact), but approximately 18 hours after my father stated something about "not wanting to hear about my site ever again" (something that slipped out during a discussion on rent for another property), I started looking into it & found that the PMS BBB page did in fact have the review I submitted to the BBB.
While I can't say what exactly was discussed during the contact, I expect they were stating that they were going to sue him as a result of the review. Why go after my father rather than myself? Well my father was the owner of the unit & they used the blood relationship to their advantage by going after my father rather than an individual that doesn't even make enough in disability benefits to pay their own living expenses (rent, utilities, food, phone/internet, clothes, etc). My father on the other hand has the money, so they chose to go after the person they could gain an advantage on, even though he is not the person they could legally go after & was not the person they were retaliating against, but they were going to use the blood relationship to their advantage regardless. In the beginning (before moving out) it was threats of a lawsuit, threats to have a lien placed on the condos or flat out taking the condo from him if the information online was not removed & I didn't cease attempting to publish the truth about the condos so others were aware of just how corrupt the HOA was. They had no legal standing to go after my father after he had sold the unit, however (while unproven & will be unless my father gives me information on the contact made regarding the BBB review submitted on 12/19/2017) they chose to go after my father regardless & didn't even bother to contact me about it (which is unsurprising, as all retaliation thus far has been put into that review on the BBB & appended to the original review on my personal site, with follow-up reviews being published later on, later deciding if they were going to continue cyber attacks against my site to have those reviews de-indexed by search engines, I had to get the review published to a site where it would actually be seen). This was probably smart on their side, as they knew I would publish it (this was specifically stated in one of the follow-up reviews published mid-December), but either way I got wind of it & I'm still going to publish what new information I have on it, possibly with even more follow-up reviews in the future. Should I found they are suing my father as a result of the review being published to the PMS BBB page (where they no longer have legal right to do so), I am expecting to write a secondary review to their BBB page (not that I expect the BBB will allow a secondary review, however it is stated in that review that it was expected there would be legal action should they find the review & it appears the BBB contacts the company when a review is published to their page, so I'm certain they were notified by the BBB about the review & they may allow a secondary review to be published on those grounds) regarding the lawsuit against an uninvolved individual (at least uninvolved at this point) they are using as leverage for retaliation to negative factual publicity.
One other thing to point out is it seems the PMS Facebook page appears to have been shut down (I would expect directly after the publication of the BBB review, despite still being listed at the bottom of the PMS website), however there is the possibility that my account could have just been blocked from accessing it (however this would be a fairly extensive block, as I created a secondary account in an attempt to test whether the page was still there, where I got the same results even with the test account. Another step to avoid negative publicity, although what is interesting about this is they haven't attempted to claim the South 67 Condos Facebook page yet, because nobody in the condos would have originally known about the reviews if not for being originally mentioned there & the management getting notified about the reviews when those that found them decided to inform the management about them (while only a few people agreed with my fight for clean air, most of the condo did not & were hostile against it, which makes it unsurprising they were choosing to snitch on the facts of those condos being published publicly).
Screenshot of BBB review
NOTE: Paragraph formatting was removed from the review when submitted, however the original review can be found here.
Back to the matter at hand, it seems my father had no intentions in telling me anything about this contact & for the most part still hasn't told me anything about it (so I can't really say what was said in that contact), but approximately 18 hours after my father stated something about "not wanting to hear about my site ever again" (something that slipped out during a discussion on rent for another property), I started looking into it & found that the PMS BBB page did in fact have the review I submitted to the BBB.
While I can't say what exactly was discussed during the contact, I expect they were stating that they were going to sue him as a result of the review. Why go after my father rather than myself? Well my father was the owner of the unit & they used the blood relationship to their advantage by going after my father rather than an individual that doesn't even make enough in disability benefits to pay their own living expenses (rent, utilities, food, phone/internet, clothes, etc). My father on the other hand has the money, so they chose to go after the person they could gain an advantage on, even though he is not the person they could legally go after & was not the person they were retaliating against, but they were going to use the blood relationship to their advantage regardless. In the beginning (before moving out) it was threats of a lawsuit, threats to have a lien placed on the condos or flat out taking the condo from him if the information online was not removed & I didn't cease attempting to publish the truth about the condos so others were aware of just how corrupt the HOA was. They had no legal standing to go after my father after he had sold the unit, however (while unproven & will be unless my father gives me information on the contact made regarding the BBB review submitted on 12/19/2017) they chose to go after my father regardless & didn't even bother to contact me about it (which is unsurprising, as all retaliation thus far has been put into that review on the BBB & appended to the original review on my personal site, with follow-up reviews being published later on, later deciding if they were going to continue cyber attacks against my site to have those reviews de-indexed by search engines, I had to get the review published to a site where it would actually be seen). This was probably smart on their side, as they knew I would publish it (this was specifically stated in one of the follow-up reviews published mid-December), but either way I got wind of it & I'm still going to publish what new information I have on it, possibly with even more follow-up reviews in the future. Should I found they are suing my father as a result of the review being published to the PMS BBB page (where they no longer have legal right to do so), I am expecting to write a secondary review to their BBB page (not that I expect the BBB will allow a secondary review, however it is stated in that review that it was expected there would be legal action should they find the review & it appears the BBB contacts the company when a review is published to their page, so I'm certain they were notified by the BBB about the review & they may allow a secondary review to be published on those grounds) regarding the lawsuit against an uninvolved individual (at least uninvolved at this point) they are using as leverage for retaliation to negative factual publicity.
One other thing to point out is it seems the PMS Facebook page appears to have been shut down (I would expect directly after the publication of the BBB review, despite still being listed at the bottom of the PMS website), however there is the possibility that my account could have just been blocked from accessing it (however this would be a fairly extensive block, as I created a secondary account in an attempt to test whether the page was still there, where I got the same results even with the test account. Another step to avoid negative publicity, although what is interesting about this is they haven't attempted to claim the South 67 Condos Facebook page yet, because nobody in the condos would have originally known about the reviews if not for being originally mentioned there & the management getting notified about the reviews when those that found them decided to inform the management about them (while only a few people agreed with my fight for clean air, most of the condo did not & were hostile against it, which makes it unsurprising they were choosing to snitch on the facts of those condos being published publicly).
Screenshot of PMS Facebook page error
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)