Questions, answered plainly.

USA Scammers is an independent public register of scam, fraud and consumer-harm matters connected to the United States, built on evidence and investigative research.

We look into people, companies, court cases and schemes involving possible fraud, investment and crypto scams, impersonation, financial crime, corruption, regulator action and other issues where there is a genuine public-interest reason to do so.

Everything we publish rests on documents. Allegations, open cases and decided findings are always labelled separately.

No.

Appearing in a record is not a finding that anyone ran a scam or broke the law. Each record states plainly whether it concerns an allegation, a case still under way, a regulator or civil finding, or a criminal conviction — and grades the evidence, never the person.

Everyone named is presumed innocent unless and until a competent court or authority decides otherwise.

An investigation is a structured look at the evidence about a person, company, transaction, dispute or legal matter.

Depending on the case it may involve court research, lawsuit records, company filings, regulator records, government databases, ownership details, interviews, financial documents and lawful open-source (OSINT) research.

An investigation does not decide guilt or liability. Its job is to establish what the evidence supports and what is still disputed or unresolved.

An Investigation looks at one matter, question, transaction, pattern or event.

A Dossier is a broader, structured record about a person, company or organisation. It can bring together several cases, company links, allegations, findings, replies and sources.

A Report usually covers one defined matter or development.

None of these labels is a finding of wrongdoing.

Material investigations go through our research, verification and editorial review, and legal review where the matter calls for it.

Depending on the jurisdictions and issues involved, legal professionals in the United States and, where relevant, the United Kingdom and Asian jurisdictions may take part.

No internal review turns an allegation into a court finding.

Court filings, judgments, orders, regulator and agency decisions, government records, company filings, contracts, correspondence, transaction records, official databases and other relevant documents.

We may also consider interviews, evidence people send us, and lawful open-source research.

How much a document is worth depends on where it came from, whether it is genuine, its context and its legal status.

We check documents for authenticity, origin, who issued them, date, completeness, context and relevance.

Where we reasonably can, we trace important claims back to primary records — court documents, regulator decisions, official registries or the original paperwork.

An official filing is not treated as proof of every sentence in it just because it is official.

Open-source intelligence (OSINT) means gathering and analysing information from lawful open sources.

That can include government databases, company registries, court information, websites, archived web pages, public social-media posts and other publicly or lawfully available material.

OSINT findings are verified before we rely on them as important evidence.

We never hide a real conflict because one version makes a better story.

Where reliable sources disagree, the record may set out what each one shows, name the disagreement and say what is still unresolved.

If the evidence does not support a responsible conclusion, we say so.

Yes. We publish searchable records about people and companies where there is enough evidence and a legitimate reason to publish.

Records may include related court cases, lawsuits, regulator proceedings, company links and other documented matters.

Approved Research Members can also use The Scanner for deeper professional research, subject to access limits and lawful-use rules.

Our Dossiers, Investigations and Reports may refer to related court cases and cite the underlying records where appropriate.

Where available, a record may name the court, jurisdiction, case number, parties, filing date, stage reached and important orders or judgments.

We are not a replacement for an official court docket or government registry. Anyone doing legal work should check important details against the official source.

No.

A lawsuit, complaint, indictment, criminal charge or regulator investigation does not, on its own, prove the allegations are true.

We separate allegations, live proceedings, findings, convictions, dismissals, acquittals and reversals. That separation is at the heart of everything we publish.

Yes, where there is a proper evidence and public-interest basis. That may include alleged investment and crypto fraud, romance and impersonation scams, harm to investors and consumers, financial crime, bribery, corruption, sanctions, regulatory breaches, hidden ownership and related money flows.

Being investigated by us does not mean a person or company committed fraud or any other offence.

Every allegation is described according to its real evidential and legal status.

Yes, where appropriate.

Company research may cover registrations, directors, shareholders, declared beneficial owners, related entities, lawsuits, regulator activity and other documented business links.

We do not assume misconduct because a company has a complicated structure, operates in several states or countries, or has been in litigation.

We may look into an individual where there is a genuine public-interest matter and a proper evidential basis.

That can involve confirming identity, lawsuit history, relevant company links, regulator matters and other lawfully obtained records.

We do not publish allegations just because someone asks us to investigate another person.

No. We are not a police force or prosecutor and we have no government powers of criminal investigation.

We may carry out public-interest research into documented criminal allegations, charges, cases, convictions and related matters where it is legally and editorially appropriate.

Criminal guilt is decided by the proper legal process — not by USA Scammers.

We may report on pending criminal cases where publishing is lawful and justified.

Open cases need special care. A charge is never presented as a conviction, and we take account of reporting restrictions, contempt rules, privacy law and the other legal duties of each jurisdiction.

Where a case is unresolved, the record says so clearly.

Yes. You can send evidence about a person, company, organisation or scheme through our evidence-submission form.

Include the underlying evidence wherever you can — court documents, government records, company filings, contracts, receipts, messages or other supporting material.

Sending something does not guarantee an investigation or publication.

Use the Submit Evidence form and describe what happened factually.

Name the person or company involved, the state or country, any court or regulator case you know of, the key dates and how you are connected to the matter. Upload supporting documents if you have them.

Never knowingly send fabricated, altered or unlawfully obtained material. Every submission is reviewed and verified.

No. We are a research and reporting project, not a law firm, recovery service or government agency, and we cannot recover money or act for you.

If you have lost money, contact your bank or payment provider and report it to the police and the relevant authorities as soon as you can. Be wary of anyone who contacts you offering to recover lost funds for a fee — that is a common follow-up scam.

You are still welcome to send us your evidence for review.

The Scanner is our restricted research system for approved professional users.

It supports deeper research into people, companies, company links, legal proceedings and related records. Access may be open to verified lawyers, government officials, law-enforcement staff, investigators and other approved professionals.

The Scanner is an investigative research tool. It does not decide guilt, liability or legal status.

Professional users can apply for Research Membership.

Approved members may get permission-based access to The Scanner, unpublished research, advanced entity research and professional support, depending on their role and authorised purpose.

Research Membership: on application. Every application is subject to approval.

We do investigative and evidence research, not ordinary consumer background checks.

Our work may look at lawsuits, company links, regulator records, ownership structures and other documented information where there is a proper professional or public-interest purpose.

Approved users may also have access to restricted professional research through The Scanner.

Approved legal professionals may use our records and, where eligible, The Scanner to support litigation research, legal due diligence, entity and company research and evidence analysis.

We are not a substitute for independent legal advice, official court records, formal discovery or any verification a particular case requires.

Approved government and law-enforcement professionals may qualify for restricted access to our research systems.

Access depends on review, permissions and the legal requirements that apply.

Giving research access does not mean we endorse any investigation, allegation, prosecution or government conclusion.

Whether any report, underlying document or other material is admissible is decided by the rules of evidence and procedure and by the court or tribunal concerned.

We do not claim that publishing something on this website makes it admissible.

In litigation, rely on qualified counsel to decide how evidence should be authenticated, introduced or challenged.

We may offer research and evidence-analysis support to eligible professional users.

But our verification does not replace the authentication a court, regulator or other authority requires.

Professional users remain responsible for meeting the legal requirements of their own matter.

No.

We do not accept payment, gifts, favours or anything else in return for suppressing, removing or materially changing accurate reporting.

Anyone can challenge a record with evidence. If reliable evidence shows a record is wrong, incomplete or seriously out of date, it may be corrected or updated under our Corrections Policy.

Evidence can change the record. Money cannot.

Tell us exactly which Dossier, Investigation or Report you mean, the statement you dispute and why you believe it is wrong.

Send supporting documents wherever you can.

Verified dismissals, acquittals, reversals, corrected official records, cases of mistaken identity and other important developments are all considered.

You do not need to buy Research Membership to ask for a correction.

A dismissal is an important legal development and is reflected wherever it affects an existing record.

Whether earlier reporting stays up depends on the circumstances, the law and whether it is still relevant. An earlier report may have been accurate when published even though the case later changed.

Where older material remains, the later outcome is shown prominently enough that nobody is misled.