Apr 3, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
IRS Issues Warning About Coronavirus-Related Scams and Schemes Associated With Economic Impact Payments
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that on April 2, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service issued an announcement urging taxpayers to be vigilant for a surge of calls and email phishing attempts about the Coronavirus, or COVID-19, as these contacts can lead to tax-related fraud and identity theft.
The IRS has advised taxpayers to watch not only for emails, but text messages, websites, and social media attempts that request money or personal information.
Coronavirus Tricks – Retirees Are Potential Targets
The IRS and its Criminal Investigation Division have seen a wave of new and evolving phishing schemes against taxpayers. In most cases, the IRS will deposit economic impact payments into the direct deposit account taxpayers previously provided on tax returns. Those taxpayers who have previously filed, but not provided direct deposit information to the IRS, will be able to provide their banking information online to a newly designed secure portal on IRS.gov in mid-April. If the IRS does not have a taxpayer’s direct deposit information, a check will be mailed to the address on file. Taxpayers should not provide their direct deposit or other banking information for others to input on their behalf into the secure portal.
The IRS also reminded retirees who do not normally have a requirement to file a tax return that no action on their part is needed to receive their $1,200 economic impact payment. Seniors should be especially careful during this period. The IRS reminds retirees – including recipients of Forms SSA-1099 and RRB-1099 − that no one from the agency will be reaching out to them by phone, email, mail or in person asking for any kind of information to complete their economic impact payment, also sometimes referred to as rebates or stimulus payments. The IRS is sending these $1,200 payments automatically to retirees – no additional action or information is needed on their part to receive this.
IRS Reminds Taxpayers That Scammers May:
- Emphasize the words “Stimulus Check” or “Stimulus Payment.” The official term is economic impact payment.
- Ask the taxpayer to sign over their economic impact payment check to them.
- Ask by phone, email, text or social media for verification of personal and/or banking information saying that the information is needed to receive or speed up their economic impact payment.
- Suggest that they can get a tax refund or economic impact payment faster by working on the taxpayer’s behalf. This scam could be conducted by social media or even in person.
- Mail the taxpayer a bogus check, perhaps in an odd amount, then tell the taxpayer to call a number or verify information online in order to cash it.
Reporting Coronavirus-Related or Other Phishing Attempts
Those who receive unsolicited emails, text messages or social media attempts to gather information that appear to be from either the IRS or an organization closely linked to the IRS, such as the Electronic Federal Tax Payment System (EFTPS), should forward it to [email protected].
Taxpayers are encouraged not to engage potential scammers online or on the phone. Learn more about reporting suspected scams by going to the Report Phishing and Online Scams page on IRS.gov.
Official IRS information about the COVID-19 pandemic and economic impact payments can be found on the Coronavirus Tax Relief page on IRS.gov.
Source: Internal Revenue Service, IRS.gov
Apr 2, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Class Action Lawsuit Filed On Behalf of All Persons in the United States Who Purchased or Leased Any Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (2015-Present) or Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport Vehicle (2017-Present) – Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. Investigating Consumer Claims on Behalf of Vehicle Owners and Lessees
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that a class action lawsuit was filed on March 31, 2020 against General Motors LLC in United States District Court, Northern District of California, on behalf of all persons in the United States who purchased or leased any Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (2015 to present) or Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport (2017 to present) vehicle designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, sold, warranted, and/or serviced by General Motors LLC (“GM”).
According to the class action complaint:
The . . . [v]ehicles are equipped with wheels (a.k.a., rims) that are prone to bending and cracking, necessitating costly repairs and replacements. In addition, cracked rims can cause puncture the tires, causing air leaks and tire blowouts (collectively, the “Rim Defect.”)
On information and belief, the Rim Defect occurs because Chevrolet in designing and/or manufacturing these specific [v]ehicles, which are sub-models of the Corvette line, used rims that are of a cheaper cast material, rather than forged. They also used less material than necessary in order to try to save unsprung weight (i.e., weight that is not borne by the cars’ suspension). As a result, the rims are not strong enough and crack under normal driving conditions. [Emphasis added.]
Additionally, the complaint alleges:
Despite access to aggravate internal data, GM has actively concealed the existence of the defect, telling customers in online forums that the wheels are not defective and that the cracked wheels are caused by potholes.
GM sells the Class Vehicles with a 3-year, 36,000-mile bumper-to-bumper warranty. However, when class members bring their vehicles to GM’s authorized dealerships requesting coverage for the Rim Defect, GM is systematically denying coverage. As a result, Class Members are paying thousands of dollars out-of-pocket to repair and replace the wheels.
The Rim Defect is material because it poses a serious safety concern. Cracked rims can cause the tire to fail and explode while driving, leading to a sudden loss of control at speed and a potential collision.
The Rim Defect is also a material fact because consumers incur significant and unexpected repair costs. GM’s failure to disclose material facts regarding the Rim Defect at the time of purchase is material because no reasonable consumer expects to spend hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars to repair or replace defective rims.
Had GM disclosed the Rim Defect, Plaintiff and Class Members would not have purchased the Class Vehicles, would have paid less for them. [Emphasis added.]
U.S. purchasers or lessees of any Chevrolet Corvette Z06 (2015-Present) or Chevrolet Corvette Grand Sport vehicle (2017-Present) designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed, sold, warranted, and/or serviced by General Motors LLC are encouraged to contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. to discuss potential legal claims.
Apr 2, 2020 | Securities Class Action Archive
Luckin Coffee Reports That COO and Other Employees Engaged in Certain Misconduct, Including Fabricating Certain Sales Transactions – Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. Investigating Securities Claims on Behalf of Luckin Coffee Investors
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making investors aware that on April 2, 2020, Lucking Coffee Inc. (“Luckin Coffee” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: LK) disclosed that the Company’s Special Committee overseeing an internal investigation reported to the Company’s Board of Directors “. . . that, beginning in the second quarter of 2019, Mr. Jian Liu, the chief operating officer and a director of the Company, and several employees reporting to him, had engaged in certain misconduct, including fabricating certain transactions.” [Emphasis added.]
According to Luckin Coffee:
The information identified at this preliminary stage of the Internal Investigation indicates that the aggregate sales amount associated with the fabricated transactions from the second quarter of 2019 to the fourth quarter of 2019 amount to around RMB2.2 billion. Certain costs and expenses were also substantially inflated by fabricated transactions during this period. The above figure has not been independently verified by the Special Committee, its advisors or the Company’s independent auditor, and is subject to change as the Internal Investigation proceeds. The Company is assessing the overall financial impact of the misconduct on its financial statements. As a result, investors should no longer rely upon the Company’s previous financial statements and earning releases for the nine months ended September 30, 2019 and the two quarters starting April 1, 2019 and ended September 30, 2019, including the prior guidance on net revenues from products for the fourth quarter of 2019, and other communications relating to these consolidated financial statements. The investigation is ongoing and the Company will continue to assess its previously published financials and other potential adjustments. [Emphasis added.]
On this news, Luckin shares dropped more than 80% in pre-market trading, thereby injuring LK investors.
Luckin Coffee investors who purchased, or otherwise acquired, LK securities and suffered losses are encouraged to contact either Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], [email protected], or John Kehoe, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 801, [email protected], to discuss the securities investigation or potential legal claims.
Apr 2, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. Faces Class Action Related To Dissemination of Certain Confidential Patient Data to Unauthorized and Undisclosed Third Parties As a Result of a “Phishing” Data Incident
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that a class action lawsuit was filed on April 1, 2020 against Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. (“Tandem Diabetes”) in United States District Court, Southern District of California, on behalf of all California citizens and all citizens who received medical care from Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. whose identities, personal data, and medical information were contained in an email account discovered on or about January 17, 2020.
According to the complaint:
On or about January 17, 2020, Defendant [Tandem Diabetes] determined that a large number of patients’ personal information was accessed by one or more unauthorized third parties through a “phishing” incident. The personal and private information of Defendant’s patients improperly disclosed. That information included, but is not limited to, patient names, social security numbers and other private, confidential patient information.
As a medical care provider, Defendant [Tandem Diabetes] was privy to Plaintiffs confidential medical information. As a custodian of the private health information of its clients, the Defendant is required by state law to ensure that such information is not disclosed or disseminated without the clients’ consent.
. . .
Defendants’ investigation has been unable to determine whether Plaintiff’s and the Class members’ personal information may have been accessed by one or more additional persons and to date has not disclosed the identity of the individual(s) who may have improperly accessed Plaintiff’s and the Class members’ patient information. Further, the information about Plaintiff and the Class that may have been inappropriately accessed have included Plaintiff’s and the Class members’ billing and insurance information, patient referral information, and appointment records. [Emphasis added.]
Have You Been Impacted by A Data Breach?
If so, please either contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], complete the form on the right or e-mail [email protected] for a free, no-obligation case evaluation of your facts to determine whether your privacy rights have been violated and whether there is a basis for a data privacy class action.
Examples of the type of relief sought by data privacy class actions, include, but are not limited to, reimbursement of identity theft losses and of out-of-pocket costs paid by data breach victims for protective measures such as credit monitoring services, credit reports, and credit freezes; compensation for time spent responding to the breach; imposition of credit monitoring services and identity theft insurance, paid for by the defendant company; and improvements to the defendant company’s data security systems.
Data privacy class actions are brought on a contingent-fee basis; thus, plaintiffs and the class members do not pay out-of-pocket attorney’s fees or litigation costs. Subject to court approval, attorney’s fees and litigation costs are derived from the recovery obtained for the class.
Apr 1, 2020 | Consumer Protection, Employment & Technology Archive
Tandem Diabetes Care Submits Data Breach Notification to California Attorney General
Kehoe Law Firm, P.C. is making consumers aware that Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. (“Tandem Diabetes”) submitted a data breach notification to the California Attorney General. According to the data breach notification:
On January 17, 2020, [Tandem Diabetes] learned than an unauthorized person gained access to a Tandem employee’s email account through a security incident commonly known as “phishing.” Once [Tandem Diabetes] learned about the incident, [Tandem Diabetes] immediately secured the account and a cyber security firm was engaged to assist in [the] investigation. [The] investigation determined that a limited number of Tandem employee email accounts may have been accessed by an unauthorized user between January 17, 2020 and January 20, 2020.
Through the investigation, [Tandem Diabetes] learned that [one’s] name was contained within one or more of the Tandem email accounts affected by the incident. The affected email accounts may have also contained [one’s] contact information, [one’s] Social Security number, information related to [one’s] use of Tandem’s products or services, and/or clinical data regarding [one’s] diabetes therapy. [Emphasis added.]
Have You Been Impacted by A Data Breach?
If so, please either contact Kehoe Law Firm, P.C., Michael Yarnoff, Esq., (215) 792-6676, Ext. 804, [email protected], complete the form on the right or e-mail [email protected] for a free, no-obligation case evaluation of your facts to determine whether your privacy rights have been violated and whether there is a basis for a data privacy class action.
Examples of the type of relief sought by data privacy class actions, include, but are not limited to, reimbursement of identity theft losses and of out-of-pocket costs paid by data breach victims for protective measures such as credit monitoring services, credit reports, and credit freezes; compensation for time spent responding to the breach; imposition of credit monitoring services and identity theft insurance, paid for by the defendant company; and improvements to the defendant company’s data security systems.
Data privacy class actions are brought on a contingent-fee basis; thus, plaintiffs and the class members do not pay out-of-pocket attorney’s fees or litigation costs. Subject to court approval, attorney’s fees and litigation costs are derived from the recovery obtained for the class.
