The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has released data indicating that consumers reported losing over $10 billion to fraud in 2023. According to the FTC, consumers lost 14% more in 2023 than in 2022, becoming the highest amount lost to fraud thus far. The FTC revealed investment scams saw the most losses at over $4.6 billion for 2023. This loss is 21% more than 2022’s investment scam losses.

Imposter scams resulted in the second largest losses, with individuals losing $2.7 billion. Fraud also proved a significant problem, especially with online shopping, sweepstakes, and job opportunity scams. Due to the many complaints, the FTC has taken several steps in discovering and stopping consumer fraud.

One significant effort the FTC made involved joining with over 100 federal and state law enforcement partners nationwide. This partnership intends to reduce the number of illegal telemarketing calls through Operation Stop Scam Calls, involving over 180 actions that target operations responsible for many of the calls to consumers in the United States.

The FTC also proposed a ban on imposter fraud. The Commission is in the final stages of the rulemaking process, targeting government and business impersonation scams. The FTC also brought several cases against business and investment opportunity schemes. Additionally, the FTC has listened to consumers concerning new forms of fraud in hopes of developing tools to fight them.

The FTC also has a Consumer Sentinel Network database. It uses this database to receive reports from consumers, the Better Business Bureau, industry members, non-profit organizations, and law enforcement agencies. The reports include fraud, identity theft, and complaints concerning other consumer issues. The Commission uses the reports for many of its own law enforcement investigations and shares them with law enforcement professionals. 

Although the FTC is trying to protect consumers from fraud, consumers should also take steps to protect themselves. Some steps consumers can take include the following:

• Protect your personal information, including your Social Security number and account numbers;
• Use strong passwords;
• Only open emails from people you know;
• Monitor your bank statements and credit card statements

These are just a few steps consumers can take to protect themselves. However, consumers must understand that they can become victims without realizing anything went wrong. Anyone suspicious of identity theft or other issues should report their concerns to law enforcement. They should also inform the FTC at IdentityTheft.gov. Another step consumers can take is running a self-background check. Self-checks help consumers find errors in their reports, discover new accounts opened in their name, and identify other fraudulent cases that can harm a person’s reputation.

Click here to run a self background check

Source

The post FTC Reports 2023 Consumers Monetary Losses to Fraud appeared first on JDP.

The Small Business Administration (SBA) has announced changes to the loan program’s restrictions concerning an applicant’s criminal history. According to the SBA’s administrator, the federal agency intends to ban the restrictions on those with criminal backgrounds. This decision could benefit those with criminal records who want to start or expand a business. However, interested parties must complete their sentences to qualify for the loan programs.

The new rules by the Small Business Administration would remove most restrictions on loan programs based on an applicant’s criminal record. This change could improve eligibility for SBA loans for millions. The rules also enforce a ban-the-box on SBA loan applications. This change would prevent criminal history questions from appearing on loan applications.

The current eligibility SBA loan requirements often confuse applicants with criminal records, discouraging many from getting a loan. The SBA worked to correct this issue by making it easier for those with criminal records to apply. It also addressed disparities in the system and growth opportunities, especially the detrimental effect on black business owners. 

According to the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) chairman, the announcement “reflects our shared commitment to supporting Black-owned small business owners and expanding access to capital to Black and underserved communities.” The chairman also commented, “By finally banning the box on SBA loan applications, we are not just changing policy; we are eliminating unnecessary barriers to entrepreneurship, boosting our economy, creating well-paying jobs, and generating Black wealth.”

Many previously incarcerated individuals struggle to obtain work or loans due to discrimination about their criminal history. The Bureau of Justice Statistics conducted a study involving individuals released from state and federal prisons nationwide in 2022. Of these people, Nevada saw roughly 4,500 people fully rejoin the population. The SBA hoped to help those who finished their sentences re-enter the workforce by dedicating $52 billion in “capital, disaster relief, and bonding to small businesses and disaster-impacted communities.”

The Bureau of Justice Statistics ran a similar study concerning 51,500 people released from federal prisons in 2010. According to the Bureau, one-third of released individuals remained jobless at some point in the first four years after release. During this timeframe, employment for released individuals never exceeded forty percent. The new SBA rule could provide opportunities for those interested in starting a business.

It remains uncertain when the SBA loan reforms will take effect. Regardless, anyone interested in starting a business should consider running a self-background check. This check would allow them to correct any errors in their report and prepare to answer any questions about their background.

Click here to run a self-background check to prepare for your next job interview.

Source

The post SBA May Ban the Box for Small Business Loans appeared first on JDP.

Massachusetts has decided to pardon offenders charged with simple marijuana possession. As announced by Governor Healey, “I am exercising my executive power as governor under the Massachusetts Constitution, subject to approval by the Governor’s Council, to pardon all misdemeanor convictions for marijuana possession on record in our state.”

This is the first state to do so since President Biden decided to grant pardons to federal offenders charged with simple marijuana possession. Though the Governor’s Council approved the pardons and unanimously supported the effort, they voiced questions on the matter. Such questions included concerns about whether this was enough help for those affected by past marijuana laws.

According to the governor, anyone convicted of misdemeanors for possession of marijuana could qualify for the pardon. However, she emphasized that qualified records included those before the day her letter of request reached the council. The Lieutenant Governor also explained what would happen due to the Governor Council’s vote.

Those charged with misdemeanors of possessing marijuana before March 13, 2024, will see their crimes immediately cleared. As such, anyone receiving a pardon will see it done without taking personal action. Anyone who would like a Certificate of Pardon can request one.

The court system will update all charges of marijuana possession to show the pardoned status. This process involves updating records for approximately 70,000 to 100,000 people. As such, the Massachusetts trial court indicated this could take months. Though concerns have arisen, the court did not give an opinion on the pardon plan. Regardless, they are ready to begin updating the records.

The pardons do not remove the charges from an individual’s record. As such, the council voiced concerns about simply marking the records as pardoned. When searching for actions to help affected individuals, Councilor Kennedy asked District Attorney Kevin Hayden for ideas. District Attorney Hayden recommended they consider expungement. Councilor Kennedy has taken this into consideration and also encouraged the council to do more to inform affected individuals about their pardoned records.

Councilor Terrence Kennedy commented on a scenario concerning the pardons. In this example, Councilor Kennedy explained how an individual’s records would still show the pardoned conviction. Despite the information mentioning the pardoned status, most people with marijuana convictions would not know about the changed status.

These pardons are only for simple marijuana possession. As such, they do not apply to other charges made in conjunction with possession, possession with intent to distribute, or any other higher-level charges in marijuana trafficking. According to Governor Healey, the pardon will take effect immediately.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post Massachusetts Pardons Charges for Simple Marijuana Possession appeared first on JDP.

Representatives from Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont’s administration have announced another delay. This delay affects the state’s Clean Slate law, once again preventing its full implementation from taking effect. As such, those hoping for automatic expungements from the Clean Slate law must wait longer.

This delay follows an announcement from three months ago about the law taking effect in January 2024. Had it begun, it would have expunged the misdemeanors and felonies of over 80,000 individuals. According to the representatives, the state has successfully cleared the records of approximately 13,600 people. This effort amounted to roughly 33,000 charges.

Of these 33,000 charges, approximately 30,000 expunged offenses are for misdemeanors, and the remaining are qualifying low-level felonies.

Under the Clean Slate law, offenses qualifying for automatic erasure include:

• Any unclassified (less than one-year imprisonment) or classified misdemeanor after a seven-year wait from the most recent conviction
• Class D, E, or unclassified (less than five years of imprisonment) felonies and any convictions for operating under the influence after a ten-year wait from the most recent conviction
• Have not received convictions of other crimes during this wait period

The automatic expungement applies to offenses with resulting convictions dated on or after January 1, 2020. Furthermore, individuals must complete all sentence requirements to qualify for the automatic erasure. Such requirements may include prison time, parole and special parole, and/or probation.

The state previously estimated that over 80,000 people would qualify for automatic erasures under state law, which would amount to roughly 178,000 offenses. Initially, it should have cleared by the end of January 2024. The data provided by the state shows how it has fallen short of the goal.

The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection is one of the agencies responsible for rolling out the Clean Slate law. As such, the Department reported details about the delays. According to the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection, the reasons for the delay include aging data systems and inaccurate data. The state previously thought it had cleared the long-running technology issues after its $8 million information technology upgrades, which finished in December last year.

The Lamont Administration announced that they expect another 65,000 individuals to see their records expunged in the upcoming weeks. The goal is to expunge all qualifying records from January 1, 2000, within the next 12 months. However, many have criticized the progress due to delays in information about the Clean Slate progress and obstacles.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post Connecticut’s Clean Slate Law Faces Another Implementation Delay appeared first on JDP.

Massachusetts legislators intend to pass legislation prohibiting employers from using credit reports for employment. As such, the Massachusetts House of Representatives recently passed a bill to amend the state’s consumer protection law. The bill is called “An Act Reducing Barriers to Employment Through Credit Discrimination” (H.1434) and will soon undergo review by the Senate. 

If passed into law, H.1434 would address employers’ requests for and acquired reports from consumer reporting agencies. In most cases, it would bar employers from obtaining a report with any bearing on an individual’s “credit worthiness, credit standing or credit capacity.” H.1434 includes background check providers and credit bureaus as consumer reporting agencies. In addition, employers cannot ask applicants or employees any questions about a report’s contents that could involve the above characteristics.

1. 1434 would also bar employers from using credit information for “employment purposes.” This ban includes considering applicants for employment and determining an individual’s suitability for retention, reassignment, or promotion. State law would consider violating these regulations as an unfair trade practice. As such, aggrieved individuals could qualify to recover attorney’s fees, costs, and double damages due to a willful or knowing violation.

The bill also provides some limited carve-outs for certain employers. For example, an employer may request and use a credit report for employment purposes after meeting either of the following conditions:

• Federal or state law, regulation, or the rules of a self-regulatory organization (as defined in 15 U.S.C. 78c(a)(26)) requires an individual to use a consumer report for employment purposes; or
• The position held or applied for by the employee or applicant requires national security clearance.

H.1434 also contains an anti-discrimination provision. This section bars employers from taking adverse action against a person. The bill specified protections for those who have or intend to:

• File a complaint against a violation of the new regulations;
• Testify, assist, give evidence, or participate in an investigation of a violation; or
• Otherwise, oppose a violation of the regulations.

Should the state Senate and governor approve and sign it, H. 1434 may take effect as early as January 1, 2025. The legislation would become the most restrictive provision in the U.S. for credit reports concerning employment purposes. Employers should note that the regulations still allow them to use consumer reports. It applies only to “true credit reports.” For example, the bill does not prevent them from running criminal background checks or motor vehicle record searches.

 Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post H.1434 Bill Banning Credit Checks Passes Massachusetts House appeared first on JDP.

Vermont legislators have returned to discuss reforming the state’s existing expungement system. They will also discuss expanding the ability for residents to seal old criminal records. However, this attempt closely resembles a similar measure that Governor Phill Scott vetoed almost two years ago.

Vermont currently offers two methods for individuals to limit or remove access to their criminal records: expungement and sealing. Expunging records effectively eliminates the recorded criminal history, making it appear like it never happened. Sealing removes the record from public access, though certain agencies can still access it when permitted. During a House judiciary committee meeting, legislative counsel Michele Childs referred to criminal history as “all information documenting an individual’s contact with the criminal justice system.”

This new legislation (H.655) expands the list of offenses qualifying for sealing upon petition. It would also shift certain expungeable offenses to sealable. H.655 would also update who can access sealed criminal records and under what circumstances. Under H.655, the current dual process would change almost entirely to sealing criminal records, with few records qualifying for expungement.

The previous bill, H.534, which Governor Scott vetoed, would have expanded the number of offenses qualifying for expungement. Governor Scott explained that he rejected the bill due to several concerns. For example, he worried about expanding eligibility for sealing drug offenses as violent crimes associated with drugs spiked. Finally, Governor Scott commented that it contradicted legislation related to gun safety and the expansion of background checks.

H.655 attempts to follow up on a compromise suggested by the governor to resolve these concerns. Governor Scott announced, 

“To address these concerns, my administration proposed a uniform, simplified system of sealing – rather than erasing – criminal records. This approach would eliminate undue consequences related to housing, job, and education for those Vermonters who are not repeat offenders while also ensuring access for law enforcement and criminal justice purposes as well as for background checks necessary to ensure public safety and security.”

Because expungement makes it as if the records never existed, agencies, landlords, and employers will find it challenging to access expunged convictions. Expunging these records can also pose challenges for law enforcement and government agencies. Though sealed records remain, accessing them has proven difficult. As such, certain circumstances may allow interested parties to access the information. Accessing these records requires specific purposes, such as government-performed background checks.

Though the House has already approved H.655, it still awaits review from the Senate. Its future proves further uncertain, as it also needs the governor’s signature.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post Vermont Considers H.655 for Sealing and Expunging Records appeared first on JDP.

Hawaii’s state Senate has considered House Bill 1595 (HB 1595). This bill makes the state responsible for starting the expungement process for some convictions and arrests for minor drug offenses. However, the bill received significant modifications during a hearing with the Senate’s Committee on Judiciary.

The first draft of HB 1595 proposed a process for the state to start the expungement process. This process would apply to criminal records with arrests or convictions for third-degree promoting a detrimental drug. In addition, it would require the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center to file biennial reports with the legislature. This requirement would continue until the state finishes expunging all eligible records.

Hawaii decriminalized the possession of marijuana for less than three grams in 2019. As such, the state allows individuals to expunge relevant criminal records in some situations. However, the current law requires these people to start the process, correctly complete it, and afford it. Passing HB 1595 would change this process.

However, the Office of the Attorney General and the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation opposed the bill. As such, the state Judiciary recommended further study. This decision resulted in the committee’s acceptance of an alternative approach: a pilot program proposed by the Attorney General’s office.

The Attorney General’s office had several concerns about HB 1595. The office explained that the bill promoted a detrimental drug in the third degree. Doing so would remove its status as an offense, but would not remove it from the penal code. Another issue concerned the difficulty of locating individuals eligible for expungement. They argued the challenge came from lack of personal information needed in finding eligible individuals. Finally, the office worried that HB 1595 would apply to those arrested or convicted of possessing Schedule V substances other than marijuana.

The pilot program proposed by the Attorney General’s office would address these concerns. For example, it would define the eligibility to ensure only marijuana records qualified. The program would include individuals charged with marijuana possession under Section 712-1249 HRS. However, their arrest must have concluded in a non-conviction disposition to qualify.

The pilot program has since received the committee’s endorsement. As such, the pilot program would span 14 months with a manageable number of cases. To ensure they work within workable perimeters, the state will limit the pilot program to the island of Hawaii. It remains uncertain whether HB 1595 will move forward after Hawaii completes its pilot program.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post HB 1595 Advances to Hawaiian State Senate appeared first on JDP.

Cincinnati’s city council will consider a proposal to expunge certain criminal records. Former City Council member Tamaya Dennard suggested the proposal, hoping to help individuals with criminal records better reintegrate into society.

This proposal would address expungement for records concerning specific city ordinance violations. Council Member Denard also has a criminal record, accepting money for votes and facing arrest in 2020. She served time in prison for the offense and worked as the Center for Employment Opportunities director. This center is an agency that helps people with convictions find jobs. Since then, she commented on how she had the opportunity to re-enter society and acquire a successful career after returning.

As such, Council Member Denard questioned why others could not have similar success. She presented the proposal to the Law and Governance Committee, hoping to help individuals with low-level crimes on their records. If enacted, it would change how Cincinnati treats people with criminal backgrounds. For example, it would automatically expunge warrants and court no-shows after seven years have passed. It would also repeal mandatory sentencing for some convictions. Finally, she hopes it would end Cincinnati’s policy of not hiring individuals for five years after a conviction.

One of the council members, Scotty Johnson, supported studying the expungement plan’s viability. Furthermore, he stressed the importance of helping people trying to reintegrate into society. Prosecutor Melissa Powers also expressed support for the proposal. She voiced interest in developing these policies. Furthermore, she approved giving individuals second chances and the chance to be productive community members.

However, some have voiced disapproval of the proposal. Those disapproving of it believe that leniency on criminal records may reduce punishment’s deterrent effect. In response to this argument, Council Member Dennard stated that losing the ability to obtain housing or a job is already a punishment. As such, she feels it becomes a question of how much punishment individuals should get.

In one response to the “Part of deterrence is punishment” claim, Council member Dennard replied, “Is it punished to no end? Or at what point do you show mercy and say, ‘Okay, you suffered enough…'”

Enacting this proposal could help many individuals with eligible criminal records. The most significant aid comes from automatically expunging these records. This change would open more opportunities for jobs and housing for many individuals. It would also improve the ability of people with criminal records to get a job with the city by no longer refusing to hire them for five years after a conviction.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post Cincinnati City Council Considers Expungement Proposal appeared first on JDP.

The Governor of Massachusetts plans to pardon anyone convicted of simple marijuana possession in the state. According to the governor’s office, this could mean pardoning hundreds of thousands. However, the state does not have exact information on how many people qualify for the pardon. 

The governor’s office also explained that pardons do not apply to other marijuana-related charges. For example, those charged for driving under the influence will not qualify. Anyone with charges related to the distribution of marijuana will also face disqualification for the pardon.

Those who did not receive a pardon for marijuana convictions will find this information still in their background reports. As a result, potential employers or landlords may still access these records and use them when deciding the individual’s eligibility.

Governor Healey will be the second governor to pardon people for simple marijuana possession. This decision is in response to President Biden’s pardons for simple marijuana possession in Washington, DC. At the time, the President asked all state governors to do the same.

The first to follow President Biden’s example was the governor of Oregon. She pardoned people in her state with convictions for simple marijuana possession of no more than one ounce, resulting in over 47,000 pardons. In December of 2023, President Biden pardoned those with convictions for using or attempting to possess marijuana on federal land. He asked again for Governors to issue simple pardons. 

The Massachusetts Governor stated that pardons would be automatic for most individuals. As such, individuals do not need to do anything to update their criminal records. She also explained what to do when someone needs to prove they received a pardon before the state updates their records. Anyone may use an online form to request proof. She also encouraged those who felt passed over for a pardon to apply online for proof.

The plan has received widespread support among elected officials, criminal justice reform advocates, and others. Unfortunately, issuing these pardons may not be straightforward. For example, the plan must receive support from the Governor’s Council to approve the pardons. This council is an eight-member group tasked with reviewing pardons.

Following a vote to approve the measure, Governor Healey stated that the pardons would become effective immediately. However, updating an individual’s records may take longer to reflect the change. Governor Healey acknowledged that “Nobody should face barriers to getting a job, housing or an education because of an old misdemeanor marijuana conviction that they would not be charged for today.” As such, she voiced gratitude for President Biden’s actions and her desire to answer his call to action.

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post Massachusetts Governor Proposes Pardons for Marijuana Possession appeared first on JDP.

The Hawaii House of Representatives recently passed House Bill 1595 (HB 1595), which the Senate will soon review. This bill would create a state-initiated process to expunge eligible criminal records at no cost. According to the House, it would “expunge records of arrests and convictions for the offense of promoting a detrimental drug.” 

Hawaii already has an expungement program for people with non-convictions. There are programs for some first-time alcohol, property, and drug offenses as well. However, some have criticized the existing program due to its costs and the difficulty many allegedly face navigating it.

HB 1595 would automatically expunge eligible low-level marijuana possession cases at no cost to the individuals affected. This change also affects those with convictions for possessing three grams of marijuana. The bill would also automatically expunge these records, regardless of whether it is a first-time offense.

It currently costs $35 to apply for a first-time expungement and $50 for any expungements after the first. However, $10 of these applications are non-refundable. Other related steps include obtaining a court order and retaining an attorney. Unfortunately, these costs can make it difficult for some people to expunge their records. 

Should they overcome these hurdles, another step that significantly delays expungement requires the court to review the requested cases’ removal. According to Last Prisoner Project’s policy advisor, Frank Steifel, connecting court records with police agencies’ data is like “following the breadcrumbs.” Though necessary to ensure the courts expunge the correct cases, the process often takes months.

Passing HB 1595’s free state-initiated program would allow anyone qualified for an expungement to obtain one. According to HB 1595, the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center would identify cases made eligible for expungement within 30 days of its enactment. The data center must forward this data to the state courts, county police departments, state attorney general’s office, and county prosecuting attorneys. 

The attorney general’s office must issue expungement orders “annulling, canceling, and rescinding all criminal records, including records of arrest and any records of conviction.” The office must do so within 60 days of receiving the biennial reports. These records include arrests, convictions, pending charges, petty misdemeanor convictions, and civil violations. Within one year of receiving these orders, “the judiciary [must] seal or otherwise remove from its publicly accessible electronic databases all judiciary files and other information pertaining to each eligible case, including, where applicable, any records of arrest, indictment, trial, verdict, dismissal, or discharge.”

Disclaimer:

Information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only and should not constitute as legal advice. We recommend you contact your own legal counsel for any questions regarding your specific practices and compliance with applicable laws.

Source

The post HB 1595 Passes Through Hawaii House of Representatives appeared first on JDP.