Section 1681 ET SEQ, 604-615) Consumer Credit Reporting Act (California Civil Code Sec 1785.1-1785.34) and the Graham Leach Biley Act Section 313.15 (a)(2)(ii) and as such never engages in pretexting to to gain information.
Eisemann stated during the presentation that pretexting occurs when an individual will call up a bank or financial institution company and attempt to bluff his or her way into obtaining confidential information by pretending to be a certain customer.
Both attorneys utilized "pretexting" to gain access to something desired--either the surrender of a criminal or access to information.
(6) Pretexting is clearly not acceptable when it rises to the level of illegal activity, but its permissibility is unclear when the conduct is not criminal.
First, it will examine the many Rules of Professional Conduct potentially implicated by pretexting. Then it will lay out several broad trends that can be extrapolated from the myriad of opinions issued on this subject.
The American Bar Association (ABA) has not provided any direct guidance on the ethical implications of pretexting, although the language of several Model Rules of Professional Conduct (the "Rules") may be violated depending on the circumstances surrounding the pretexting.
ASIS was asked by investigators who are Society members to take an official position against legislation in California that would outlaw pretexting, described as the use of false, fraudulent, or fictitious information in the course of gathering personal information during investigations.
After study and discussion, ASIS leadership devised a position stating that ASIS supports the important work done by private investigators and urges California legislators to work closely with members of the private investigations community before passing a law to tally prohibiting the use of pretexting in investigations.
A federal law already has been enacted that prohibits pretexting to gain telephone information, such as cell phone records.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has announced that three Internet research companies have agreed to settle charges that they obtained private information about individuals under false pretenses--also known as pretexting. The companies advertised that they could obtain personal information such as bank account numbers, safe deposit locations, and stock information for a fee.
The fines were based on the amount of money made by the companies from their pretexting activities.