I’m not saying this couldn’t happen, but this justdoesn’t ring super true to me. How would the user know who the “identified individual” was, how they found the husband’s information, or who they called (the “friend”) at his company that’s apparently in control of his employment? That’s a lot of convenient coincidences that, even of they are true, would hardly be easily accessible information to make such a confident accusation.
If the employer is an University or something like that in a smaller state, and they called specifically about a policy change or something happening at the department of education, it could be relatively easy to happen, especially if they gave their name when calling the representative (which I guess you would).
I’m not saying this couldn’t happen, but this justdoesn’t ring super true to me. How would the user know who the “identified individual” was, how they found the husband’s information, or who they called (the “friend”) at his company that’s apparently in control of his employment? That’s a lot of convenient coincidences that, even of they are true, would hardly be easily accessible information to make such a confident accusation.
If the employer is an University or something like that in a smaller state, and they called specifically about a policy change or something happening at the department of education, it could be relatively easy to happen, especially if they gave their name when calling the representative (which I guess you would).
That’s a lot of assumptions.
Your face is an assumption
truepeoplesearch.com
give it a go. Try searching your name, number, address and see what you get.
It doesn’t ring true because of the vagueness of the post.