Hackers learned to legalize the money stolen by the courts

To legalize stolen funds, hackers use a system that provides legal payments on writs of execution. Banks are forced to execute court decisions even if they know the origin of the money in the account.

The Kommersant newspaper interlocutors announced another plan to withdraw funds with the help of worksheets. This time, hackers have learned to use court decisions to launder money, and they use real-time enforcement orders, thus benefiting from a completely legal system.

It looks like that. A dropper company is registered in advance with a nominative director who is in a state of sleep for a while. A legal firm carrying out a real activity enters into an agreement with it, which is a complicity with it. A real company sues for a claim on a drop-in-law corporation for legal services rendered, "wins" in court and receives a writ of execution.

The hackers, who replace the contact details of the beneficiary bank, transfer the stolen funds to the company's dropper account.

Having learned from the client that the theft had been committed, the issuing bank informs the receiving bank, which freezes the funds credited to the account one day. However, after that, the bank receives a real list of reports on the debt of the dropper company and is obliged to fulfill its obligations, even if it knows the origin of the funds.

"This is an effective new plan. To challenge it, you must recognize that the writ of execution is void, and that takes time, "said Alim Bishenov, managing partner of BMS Law Firm. According to him, the scheme has many nuances and the method of neutralization is only tested. The bankers interviewed by the newspaper said that in order to resist the fraudsters, the injured person must have the time to seize the funds on the dropper account, which is generally not possible. "Money pbades quickly on the writ of execution," the newspaper writes.

In April 2017, RBC was writing about a scheme to allow fraudsters to steal funds from large companies' bank accounts as a result of court rulings. It was not money laundering through the penalty of execution, but theft.

RBC interlocutors then said that large companies are selected as victims and their accounts are open in major banks. The fraudsters filed a lawsuit with the regional court. The statements included an amount not exceeding 500,000 rubles ($ 7,500). For disputes below this amount, justices of the peace make decisions in a simplified manner: individually, without calling the parties. The asylum seeker arrives at the bank with a brief execution and, more often than not, leaves – worth less than 500 000 rubles each – that the bank is obliged to & 000 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 run within a day, if its authenticity is beyond doubt. After that, the funds go from the account of the legal entity to the fraudster. Go