Four Massachusetts men have been indicted in federal court in Boston in a scheme that prosecutors say ran more than $12.2 million in stolen U.S. Treasury checks through banks and credit unions around Metro Boston, plus more than $1 million in other bank frauds. The U.S. Attorney’s Office announced the charges on September 24, 2026. The defendants are presumed innocent.
The second indictment is the one most readers should pay attention to. It describes, step by step, a scam that reaches people’s phones every day: a text that looks like it is from your bank, then a call from someone posing as the bank’s fraud department who asks for a code. Below is what prosecutors allege, and what federal law says about who bears the loss if it happens to you.
Who is charged
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, a federal grand jury indicted:
- David Obeng, 24, of Dedham;
- Lynley Joseph, 26, of Brockton;
- Lindsley Georges, 33, of Everett; and
- Shaunsayh Addo, 33, of Leominster.
Each is charged with one count of bank fraud conspiracy and one count of money laundering conspiracy. A second indictment charges Obeng alone with wire fraud conspiracy, five counts of bank fraud, two counts of money laundering and one count of aggravated identity theft.
After initial appearances, Joseph and Addo were released on conditions. Obeng and Georges were held pending hearings. Prosecutors said Georges was convicted of money laundering in federal court in Massachusetts in January 2022 and was on federal supervised release when the new conduct allegedly occurred.
The Treasury check scheme
According to the first indictment, as summarized by prosecutors, the defendants coordinated the theft and deposit of at least $12.2 million in Treasury checks between 2023 and 2026. Each check had been issued to its real payee and then altered to be payable to a shell company the defendants controlled. Each defendant allegedly directed deposits at banks or credit unions in and around Metro Boston in exchange for a cut.
Prosecutors say the money was then moved to hide where it came from, including through cashier’s checks, the purchase of $310,000 in luxury watches, and a $425,000 real estate loan secured by property on Nantucket.
For people expecting a federal check, such as a tax refund, the practical point is that a stolen check is usually cashed by someone else under a different name. If a Treasury check you were expecting never arrives, contact the issuing agency.
The “fraud department” scam
According to the second indictment, Obeng and others got into victims’ bank and retirement accounts by:
- Sending texts made to look like they came from the victim’s bank, asking the victim to confirm a recent purchase.
- Calling victims while posing as bank representatives and fraud investigators.
- Persuading victims to read back codes needed to authorize withdrawals, “under the guise of verifying their identities.”
- Using that access to move money into accounts the conspirators controlled.
Prosecutors also allege that Obeng and others recruited people to walk into bank branches posing as customers, open accounts, move fraud proceeds into them, and withdraw the money in cash.
The code is the whole scam. A one-time code sent by your bank is how the bank confirms that you, and not someone else, are authorizing a login or a transfer. A real bank employee does not need you to read that code back to them. Anyone who asks for it is trying to use it.
If it happens to you: what federal law says
For consumer bank and credit union accounts, electronic transfers are governed by the Electronic Fund Transfer Act and its rule, Regulation E, 12 C.F.R. part 1005. Three parts of it matter here.
1. A transfer made by a scammer who tricked you can still be “unauthorized.” Regulation E defines an unauthorized transfer as one “initiated by a person other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which the consumer receives no benefit.” It excludes transfers by someone the consumer gave the access device to. But the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s official interpretation of that definition says: “An unauthorized EFT includes a transfer initiated by a person who obtained the access device from the consumer through fraud or robbery.”
2. Being fooled is not “negligence” that increases your liability. The official interpretation of the liability section says: “Negligence by the consumer cannot be used as the basis for imposing greater liability than is permissible under Regulation E.” Its example is writing your PIN on your debit card.
3. Speed matters. Your liability depends on when you report. Under 12 C.F.R. § 1005.6(b):
- Report within two business days of learning of the loss or theft of your access device, and your liability is capped at $50 or the amount taken before you reported, whichever is less.
- Report later, and the cap generally rises to $500.
- Report an unauthorized transfer on your statement within 60 days of when the statement was sent. If you do not, you can be liable for transfers after that 60 days that the bank shows would not have happened if you had reported.
- If the delay was due to “extenuating circumstances,” the bank must extend those time limits “to a reasonable period.”
- Notice can be given “in person, by telephone, or in writing.”
One important gap: wire transfers. Regulation E does not apply to “any transfer of funds through Fedwire or through a similar wire transfer system that is used primarily for transfers between financial institutions or between businesses.” If a scammer talks you into sending a wire yourself, these protections generally do not reach it. That is one reason scammers so often push victims toward wires.
What to do right away
- Hang up and call the number on your card or statement. Never use a number from a text or the caller.
- Report in writing as well as by phone, and keep a copy with the date. The two-business-day and 60-day clocks run from dates you will want to prove.
- Change your online banking password and codes and ask the bank to flag the account.
- Report it. The U.S. Attorney’s Office in Massachusetts listed a benefit-fraud line, 1-855-SCAM-MA-1 (855-722-6621).
The charges and penalties
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, bank fraud and bank fraud conspiracy carry up to 30 years in prison and a fine of up to $1 million. Money laundering conspiracy carries up to 20 years. Aggravated identity theft carries a mandatory two years, consecutive to any other sentence. Actual sentences are set by a judge under the federal Sentencing Guidelines and the statutes.
Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kristen Kearney and Seth B. Kosto are prosecuting. The investigation involved the IRS Criminal Investigation, the FBI and the U.S. Postal Inspection Service. All four men are presumed innocent, and the details above are allegations.
Frequently asked questions
Who was charged in the $12 million Treasury check scheme?
David Obeng, 24, of Dedham; Lynley Joseph, 26, of Brockton; Lindsley Georges, 33, of Everett; and Shaunsayh Addo, 33, of Leominster, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston, which announced the indictments September 24, 2026. They are presumed innocent.
Is my bank required to refund money a scammer took after I gave them a code?
Often, yes, for electronic transfers from a consumer bank account. Under Regulation E, a transfer by someone who obtained your access device “through fraud” is an unauthorized transfer, and your negligence does not increase your liability. Your liability depends on how fast you report: generally no more than $50 if you report within two business days.
Are wire transfers covered by Regulation E?
No. Regulation E excludes transfers through Fedwire or similar wire transfer systems used primarily between financial institutions or businesses. A wire you send yourself is generally not protected by these rules.
Will my bank ever call and ask for a verification code?
A legitimate bank uses a one-time code to confirm that you are the one logging in or authorizing a transfer. According to the indictment, the scammers posed as fraud investigators and asked victims for exactly those codes. Hang up and call the number on your card.
Sources: U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts press release, “Four Massachusetts Men Arrested and Charged for Fraud, Money Laundering Schemes,” September 24, 2026, as published by the Department of Justice and reported by the Fall River Reporter. The indictments themselves were not reviewed. Regulation E text (12 C.F.R. sections 1005.2(m), 1005.3(c)(3) and 1005.6) read at ecfr.gov; official interpretations (comments 2(m)-3 and 6(b)-2) read at consumerfinance.gov. Coverage of other account types, such as brokerage or some retirement accounts, may differ. General information, not legal or financial advice.