New York Times Delivery Man Defrauds Company Out Of $227K With Fake Subscriptions

The Wall Street Journal's Law Blog reports on a $227,000 fraud scheme carried out against the New York Times.

A local newspaper distributor in La Crosse, Wisconin named Michael Holtet has been charged with one federal count of wire fraud for creating thousands of fake subscribers — all of whom curiously selected "Bill Me Later" — and running away with $0.55 per weekday paper and $1.10 per Sunday paper delivered to these fake subscribers.

From the Law Blog:

At the end of 2006, according to the complaint, the average number of daily home subscribers in La Crosse was 65 and the average number of Sunday Times subscribers was 103. However, starting around 2007, those numbers began to climb rapidly, and by the beginning of 2008, there was an average of approximately 2,781 daily subscribers and 2,818 Sunday subscribers. The complaint says that jump was due to Holtet, who, when all was said and done, had created about 8,500 fraudulent subscriptions.

While the blog does not spell out exactly how the scheme worked, it posts the PDF of the US Attorney's complaint, which lays out the following:

At the time of the events charged in the Complaint, individuals could subscribe for home delivery of the New York Times by registering through a website maintained by the NYT Company (the "Subscriber Website"). The Subscriber Website did not require a new subscriber to pay immediately for the subscription; instead, it allowed new subscribers to opt to be billed at a later date. If a new subscriber opted to be billed later, the NYT Company printed and mailed periodic invoices to the subscriber. Whether the new subscriber opted to pay immediately or to be billed later, delivery of the New York Times would start within a few days. The NYT Company, and not distributors like HOLTET, was responsible for collecting payment from all home delivery subscribers.

PDF of the complain embedded below via DocStoc (downloadable here):

Federal Complaint Against NYT Fraudster - Free Legal Forms

Comments

[BobSF94117]

No doubt this guy will be hailed as a domestic "hero" by Limbaugh, et al. for doing his bit to take down the Old Gray Lady.

[MiddletownHal]

How's the guy making money of this "scheme?" Did the "new subscribers" who opted to be "billed later" receive the paper? Pay for their subs? Where's the spaghetti for the WSJ's sauce?

[Triangle1]

I love how the story is about the NY Times, written by the Wall Street Journal, then copied and posted by the Huffington Post. Media cannibals. Every news source has the same 5 stories, unless it's negative press about yourself. No wonder we're stepping back to watch the collapse of newspapers. http://mespace.wordpress.com/

[mjjcpa]

This isn't even close to the fraud perpetrated on America by NY Times in recent years. They can't even give it away.

[MikeMidCity]

That's nothing .... they pay Bill Kristal and David Brooks more then that and them simpletons haven't produced anything worth a tinkers damn in five years.

[MPeter]

Good. The NYT deserves it. I am only sad that he will end up in slammer. The NYT has been trash for a long time, over-paying slobs who enabled Neocons to send us to war and underpaying the copy editors and deliverers. This scam suits them.

[truth101]

AS pointed out by comments on the original story, this account is
totally uninformative. In every scam there is an angle, a slice of
reality, which explains how the scam worked. This story tells us
nothing and thus appears to have been written by a total jerk AND OR
EVEN WORSE edited by an even bigger jerk at the competitor
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. EVERY PAPERBOY IN AMERICA
WANTS THE SCOOP on how this stic works....

[larry278]

Are you sure that R Murdoch wasn't behind this caper? Mr Murdoch has experience in circulation wars; he openly says that he wants to drive the NYT out of business. If the NYT has a number of $277.000 losses each year it could bleed the NYT dry. It might be a cruel & lingering death but its the media business. Journalistic ethics is an oxymoron.