Identity Theft - Victim’s Perspective
ITRC 6th Annual Study Released

San Diego, CA:  The Identity Theft Resource Center® (ITRC) released a significant report today on the impact of identity theft victimization:  Identity Theft: The Aftermath 2008.  With six years of victim responses and shared experiences, this information provides a unique insight into the crime that may not apparent to other parties.

ITRC firmly believes that only a collaborative effort, that includes identity theft victims, subject matter experts, business, law enforcement and government, will provide us with the tools needed to thwart identity thieves.  Unless we adopt a policy of “it is us” against the criminals, the criminals will continue to win.  In this report, identity theft victims help to explain the gaps they encountered in victim’s rights, interactions with various agencies, and the needs of victims of identity theft crimes.

The following are highlights of The Aftermath 2008 study.  The report is based on 43 questions covering 15 major categories and includes 23 tables and graphs. The full report and all tables can be found on the ITRC website:  www.idtheftcenter.org

Prevalence of Types of Identity Theft Crimes:  In 2008, financial only identity theft crimes were reported by 73% of the respondents, slightly less than in 2007.  Criminal only identity theft crimes represented 5% and governmental issues, which may involve employment, benefit fraud, tax fraud or someone using a fraudulent driver’s license as an identifier, accounted for 2%.  The rest were combination cases:  financial and criminal (6%), financial and governmental (9%), and a combination of all three types (5%).

Medical Identity Theft:  In 2008, ITRC introduced a set of questions to monitor this issue.  More than 2/3 of those responding to these questions reported that medical providers billed for services received by the imposter.  Another 56% were contacted by a collection agency or billing department for those services.  One-third of the respondents said there is now another person’s information on their medical records and 11% were denied health or life insurance due to unexplained reasons.

Moment of Discovery:  This year only 34% of respondents discovered identity theft due to an adverse situation, down from 82% in 2007.  This is a significant change in the manner by which the victim discovered the crime.  Proactive measures in discovering the crime, by both businesses and victims, jumped from 8% in 2007 to 45% in 2008.

Uses of Victim Information:  For the past six years, opening new lines of credit has remained the most frequently occurring financial crime.  In 2008, 67% of the victims were in this category.  Charges on stolen credit cards and debit cards without a PIN also ranked high on the list.  This is more than double any preceding year.  As predicted by ITRC, check fraud grew to 17% in 2008, increasing from the 12% in 2007.  Criminals also took out various types of loans using personal identifying information.  Mortgages and 2nd mortgages (33%), car loans (22%), personal loans (32%) and business loans (8%) were among those types of loans reported.

Costs to Victim:  Respondents in 2008 spent an average of $739 dollars in out-of-pocket expenses for damage done to an existing account.  In reference to new accounts, respondents spent an average of $951 compared to $1,865.27 in 2007.

Cost to Business:  In 2008, the average loss in goods and services to businesses, as reported by survey respondents, was $90,107 compared to $48,941 in 2007.  This study only includes respondents who contacted the ITRC in 2007 and is not necessarily indicative of a national business loss average.

Victim Hours Repairing Damage: In 2008, victims reported spending an average of 58 hours repairing the damage done to an existing account used or taken over by the thief.  In cases where a new account was created, respondents reported an average of 165 hours to clean up the mess.  This information is current only at the time of the survey and may not indicate final totals.

Inability to Clear Negative Records:   In 2008, many victims reported that the factors complicating their ability to clear negative records involved issues beyond their control: inability to get a police report, credit accounts being reposted on credit reports, fraud alerts are being ignored, and the inability to prove innocence even with a police report.  These factors may indicate system failures by various entities involved in resolving the victim’s case.  Other situations appeared to be more consumer/victim related such as: I gave up (too many hours), don’t know how to clear my report, and family related issues.

Secondary Effects:  The levels of denied credit and credit card cancellations are at all time high at 70%.   The ability, or inability, to get a job and increases in insurance and credit card rates are difficult consequences facing many of the respondents in today’s economy.  In addition, there were reported difficulties in obtaining new lines of credit or loans by 45% of the survey respondents.

Emotional Impact:  In 2008, ITRC found more victims acknowledging short term feelings of feeling defiled (37%), betrayal (60%), a loss of innocence (21%), and a sense of powerlessness (63%).  ITRC long term emotional responses included: 30% felt unable to trust people, 4% felt suicidal, 25% were ready to give up the fight, and 10% believed that they have lost everything.

About the ITRC:  Established in 1999, the ITRC is a nonprofit, grant and donation funded organization that has conducted a similar study every year since 2003, noting changes in trends and patterns.  In 2004, it was presented with the National Crime Victim’s Service Provider Award by the U.S. Department of Justice and Attorney General.  It is a well respected voice of identity theft victims and works collaboratively with other entities to battle this crime.   If you’re a victim of identity theft, please call our toll-free victim assistance hotline at 888-400-5530.  www.idtheftcenter.org

- 30 -

This project was supported by Grant No. 2007-VF-GX-K038 awarded by the Office for Victims of Crime, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.  Points of view in this document are those of the ITRC and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice