LTiCP examples 5) USA Gov Fraud reward

Great article from Hesch and Associates company about 3 fraud programs managed by Government:

* Federal Reward Program;

* State Reward Program (21 state adopted law to themselves and more expected);

* Income Tax Reward Program

Congress has authorized DOJ ( Department of Justice) to pay up to 30% of the amount of fraudulent payments recovered back. You can read article here:

http://www.howtoreportfraud.com/overview-of-the-reward-programs

Just want to mention results:

Having recovered over $20 billion ;

Paying out nearly $3 billion in rewards to citizens ;

The largest rewards for reporting fraud > $100 million ;

average reward is $1.5 million ;

4% cases get reward by more than $1million;

DOJ accepts 25% of applications;

A reward has been paid to 95% of accepted cases,

But 2 must criterion for cases on IRS Tax Fraud program makes it far from effective:

* Company should hide taxes of $2 millions!

* Person cheating from that company, must have had a gross income of at least $200,000 /1 tax year.

Why? It states that reward program does not want to see it used as a weapon in family or neighborhood squabbles or for smaller tax fraud cases.

Ok. so it means, that:

1) Probably 95% of frauds are not even registered, what impact to crime prevention it gives? 19 of 20 cases are unprevented and can easy risk for 1million, which is still huge money :)

2) Big frauds starts from small frauds.Tree should be bend, while it is young.

Of course it still better than nothing...

I know Government of Lithuania had or maybe still having (just poor informational compaign) one similar Tax Claim Fraud law 5years ago as well. Law promised up to 100 000Lt (up to ~ 29 000Eur) for reported information. Law was administered

FNTT (Finantial Crimes ......

No news about Lithuanian program success, but will be interested how that was going on.

Would be interesting to here from other countries False Claims Act attorneys. Do law gives them enough possibilites to cooperate with people having information and to earn.

Please leave comments below..

LTiCP examples 4) Business self-prevention

* LT: sena blogo versija http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (tik lietuviškai). Jei sudomino blogo idėjos, pakomentuokite čia arba NETLOG nariai junkitės į http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP
ENG: old blog version http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (only in lithuanian). If you interested in these ideas, pls contact me here or in http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP




Today example, how business should evaluate after reward-based law will be more practically developed. This is copy of email, which i recieved 2 months ago from one tipster team (betting business service provider) :

"

£1,000.00 CASH REWARD

Hi

Just to let you know that I've received quite a lot of feedback about our WinnersToLosers system.

It seems, despite favourable reviews at a number of independent websites including... www.bettingsystemreviews.co.uk/ and www.cash-master.com/blog/, most of you are still very sceptical about the past results.

Although, we do guarantee that the past results are 100% accurate, it has occurred to me that we may have made a palpable error. If that has happened I do sincerely apologise but assure you that any such error is totally unintentional.

Anyway, just in case there are errors we have not spotted, we are offering a £1,000 Reward to anyone who brings any errors to our attention. Full details are on our website at the link below...

www.taps-uk.com/winnerstolosers.htm

Should any errors be brought to our attention, we will correct them immediately and post a clear notification on the website.

Thank you for your help.

Kind regards,

Dave

Administrator

The Alternative Punters Syndicate

WinnersToLosers "


After few days i got another email, in which was described, how somebody found minor mistake (unfortunately it is not about results) :

"----- Original Message -----

From: The Alternative Punters Syndicate

To: TAPS

Sent: Friday, September 26, 2008 3:51 PM

Subject: [Bulk] Sincere Apologies! There is an error in our results!!

Hi

I regret to inform you that an error has been found in the past results displayed on our WinnersToLosers website.

This was spotted by someone scrutinising all our results in order to claim the £1,000.00 CASH REWARD I told you about the other day.

...a tiny mistake was a horse name and that's SRIKUANTAN (in the result page on 26/01/2008) which is actually SRI KUANTAN (sorry for it but I only wanted to show you that I am doing some "research")...Fodor

The mistake is a simple typing error (the space has been omitted between the "I" and "K") and does not affect our reported profits in any way. Therefore Fodor does not qualify for any reward but I am very grateful to him for bringing it to my attention. The mistake should not have happened and I apologise unreservedly for any confusion this may have caused.

I can fully understand why so many of you are sceptical about our reported results. After all a clear profit of £40,520.53 in the first eight months of this year is very hard to believe!

Hopefully, the fact that so many people are now scrutinising our results to such an extent will reassure you that those profits are 100% genuine.

If you still have some doubts then by all means read the independent reviews at various 'system testing' sites such as... www.bettingsystemreviews.co.uk/ and www.cash-master.com/blog/.

If you still disbelieve our results then show us an error that proves the profits are not as good as we are claiming and we will give you £1,000.00 in CASH! Full details available on our website.

www.taps-uk.com/winnerstolosers.htm

(If the above link doesn't work then simply copy and paste it into your browser)

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me personally.

Kind regards,

Dave

Administrator

The Alternative Punters Syndicate

WinnersToLosers "

This Tipsters Team understand trust value and introduced self-prevention rules themselves, involving people to report mistakes to them first, but not to Government regulators.
Let's say i don't want to check their mistake, but still (because of possibility to earn for somebody) i feel more safe in such type of control (multiple tied control), which is much more realistic, than government agency control ( one tied control) alone.
I got benefits from such new type control for free, like all others people! Wouldn't you be happy to leave your vehicle, where maybe few not clear visible cameras are spotted from different windows? Now other request: Imagine you are theft... :)

After Private initiative introduced in Crime prevention, all business will be motivated to introduce self-prevention systems in order:
* to get feedbacks first;
* not to be penalised by government and heard to others as bad service providers. if you can, pls read in Lithuanian my blog about Lithuanian Food Retail Network "Maxima" which has rule in one small aspect (to give 5Litas ~1.45EUR for buyer, if goods were calculated in bigger price. I heard they still continue this practice, but not clear, why they take off ads about such type prize near every checkout or cashier "

LTCP examples. 1) ''MAXIMA'' 5 litų premija"

http://lt.netlog.com/LTCP/blog/blogid=8799#blog )

In other words reward-based crime stopping, will make fines transformed in prizes. Additional benefit would be better realationship between deeling sides (stronger feedback, bigger service provider trust, less customers angry, avoid misunderstandings, product orservice development, better customers loyality, earnings possibility for testers etc. )

P.S.
If you have desire to work on similar ideas, projects, Please don't hestitate to contact me from any country.

LTiCP examples 3) S. Korea catchers schools

ENG: old blog version http://LTCP.netlog.com/blog (only in lithuanian). If you interested in these ideas, pls contact me here or in http://lt.netlog.com/clan/LTCP


Today i continue new version of blog with amasing news. Have a great example which shows a lot elements of private crime prevention system, which i'm inspiring in my blog. We have country, which even have schools for training people to become crime stopping agents and get reward.
Welcome to South Korea!
Please check video before continuing to read: http://www.telerate.com/news/video?videoId=94037 (LT translation: http://tv.delfi.lt/video/5WNiWNq6/ )
and today (18/11/2008) Reuters news http://www.reuters.com/article/lifestyleMolt/idUSTRE4AH1BH20081118
and more info (what more type of infringements new system works)
http://www.pet-story.net/customer/notice/read.asp?idx=480


South Korea has great law which let to rise private crime prevention industry:

* Schools (Mismiz Report and Compensation School, Posang (Korean for compensation) Club);

* State Agencies giving rewards for evidence;

* Students, housevifes and other people and their time, initiative and other resources.

The impact of law was, that "...Students range from housewives to college students, all prompted by a desire for extra cash as the South Korean economy slows".
So law created possibility to get another source of income. And when we know, that in times, than economies slows, crimes starts to rise. So, because of law which started attract private initiative and resources (crime stop industry demonopolisation), some people now can start opposite movement instead involving in crimes!

No needed additional money for government police! Needed just to change law and let people act! Probably that's why government officials (don't want to be named) start to speak about taking action to slow down this process. Can they answer this questions: If this service is needed for society (how many infringements was stopped by private people means the same amount problems Governement Police was unable to resolve... ) and works as best prevention (you never know who can stop you for doing wrong) for infringements and crimes, why they want to stop it? I think they still don't want to be out of monopoly business.

Why some people still shy on doing this? I think S. Koreans are getting huge impact from their neighbours-experiment victims country North Korea. Because of bigger or smaller realationships with northern people rumours sounds, that following on people is bad things. But why not to pay attention, for what "crimes" northerns probably hate reporters or detectives. Mostly for speach breaches, talking with abroad by mobile, any opposite minds or steps on dictator-"god" Kim Jong Il...etc Powerful regime control like in ex-Soviet Union countries gives impact in mentality, that people reporting something are bad, doesn't matter what they report. But i can add one more strange impact from comunism, that a lot people are getting stressed if they get a phone call from Police, doesn't matter what policeman say on that call.
People should imagine, that can be other way of tackling crimes, not only government monopoly. While most industries went to free market, Crime stopping service mostly in all world countries still sitting deep in socialism/comunism.

One more idea to think. Food producers business is not questionable, while crime stoppers business is. Now my question: Without which service people couldn't live: Food or Crime stopping? Could you still live without food? so why governments are not making steps to nationalise food industry, while Crime stopping is in deep monopoly owned by state.

I'm proud of South Korea! Yes,(with You) We Can!

One more bad moment about law which criminalise shopkeepers act of giving away plastic bags to customers. This is bad law, because it victimless! Shoppers decision to give basket for free is not making victims! The worse thing is, that this act is even not gives ecological (secondary) problems! Such law starts only in desperate needs to impact rubbishing things, while true fault is monopolised crime control inefectness. Involving private initiative in rubbishing control, such law should be canceled. Or quick recommendation to S. Korea schools, agencies would be implement self regulation not to act on victimless "crimes". Private people power to handle such "bad things" is much more bigger, but it can split society, because such crimes are similar to North Korea "crimes" mentioned above in this article..
The law should be concentrated not on bag sellers, but on buyers, who handling bags incorrectly (rubbishing them on streets and so on).

And last suggesttion for South Korea and other countries, that they should clearly state to people, that fine is price for catching!

Blog Purpose

http://netlog.com/LTCP/blog (18 blog articles from 02/06/08 to 30/09/08)

To promote reward-based systems in crime prevention. It is forgotten very problematic sector, which sits deeply in socialism, while gives problems to other industries:
* to go further to free-market
* to develope self-responsibilty, which could born from private initiative of financially motivated society