Belgian Insurer Sues 11 Defendants for Scheme Involving Fraudulent VoIP Contracts
Defendants Telco Solutions, Telco Enterprise and Voister received VoIP minutes from Milan-based Golem under “misrepresented pretenses” and didn’t pay for them, alleged subrogee Belgian insurer Credendo-Short-Term Non-EU Risks in a fraud complaint Tuesday (docket 1:23-cv-24258) in U.S. District Court for Southern Florida in Miami.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The suit names 11 individuals and companies involved in an alleged scheme in which the defendants “fraudulently reinstated certain companies,” misappropriated corporate identities to enter into "fraudulent contracts for VoIP services,” incorporated “identically-named” companies to open escrow accounts to send and receive funds under the fraudulent contracts, and defrauded the plaintiff of over 1.4 million euros ($1.5 million).
Between 2018 and 2019, in concert with defendant Louis Arriola of Los Angeles, defendants Josias Mallen, Tristan Desechenes and Arismendi Santana, all of Miami; Hansel Hernandez of Jersey City, New Jersey; Bruce Salzman of Plantation, Florida; and Osmar Sepulveda of Clifton, New Jersey used telecom defendants Telco Solutions, Telco Enterprise and Voister “to steal, misappropriate or otherwise misrepresent the corporate identities of certain companies” and enter into agreements with Golem for traffic routing services, said the complaint.
Under each agreement, Golem would provide ongoing service, and each defendant would pay as services were used, the complaint said. The individual defendants induced Golem to enter the agreements by misrepresenting themselves to be officers of legitimate companies and by providing fraudulent financial statements for each telecom defendant, it said.
The telecom defendants made initial payments to Golem via escrow accounts at DealDefenders, a secure escrow service for the telecom industry, which “allowed payments to be made without revealing the ultimate source of the funds,” the complaint said. The defendants opened DealDefenders accounts by sending emails stating that Arriola had referred them and that they needed to open an escrow account though they didn’t have bank accounts at the time, it said.
The telecom defendants’ DealDefenders’ accounts were funded by defendant Wiztel USA. Wiztel transferred funds to telecom defendants, which then made payments to Golem and other third parties, “some of which are connected to Arriola and/or involved in similar fraudulent schemes,” the complaint said. After making several payments, telecom defendants “received VoIP minutes from Golem under misrepresented pretenses, but failed to pay for said minutes,” it said.
The “fraudulent scheme” is similar to one previously perpetrated by Arriola, said the complaint, citing 2006 contracts he entered, purportedly for Saint Gobain Corp. (SGC), for telecom services. Arriola made partial payments to the providers “to give the impression that SGC was conducting a legitimate business,” the complaint said.
One provider asked SGC about “unusually high international call volume appearing” on the account, which the fraudsters said was temporary, it said. SGC emailed the provider saying a check would arrive via FedEx; instead, the FedEx package had a blank piece of paper inside, leading the provider to cancel the SGC account, it said. Arriola pled guilty to one count of aiding and abetting mail fraud, was sentenced to 27 months in federal prison and 36 months of probation, and was ordered to pay $490,798 restitution to victims, said the complaint. That was the second time Arriola committed fraud, the complaint said.
In addition to fraud and conspiracy to commit fraud, Credendo alleges unjust enrichment. It seeks a judgment of 1.4 million euros ($1.5 million), plus pre- and post-judgment interest, attorneys’ fees and court costs. The defendants couldn't be reached for comment Wednesday.