We have a situation where check fraud is ocurring. The suspect has used four different names, however one in the majority of the 50+ checks. About ten different addresses, with about equal consistency among a few. No SSN. Multiple drivers license numbers on the checks. Phone numbers, DOB and occupation unknown to us however local law enforcement believes the names most frequently used is the actual name.

Is this suspect known or unknown?

If known, how do you complete Part II?????

What I would do is put all the names as the subjects and then explain it in the narrative. If you can tie a name with an address or social list those together and then the rest of the addresses mention it in the narrative. That way if law enforcement does a name search, those names you listed would come up. That is my opinion.

IMO, I would say that the customer is unknown for determining whether or not the reporting threshold ($25,000) has been met. If the threshold was met, I'd check the box for "suspect information unavailable" and detail everything you know in the narrative. I think that the most I would put in Part II is the name that you and law enforcement believe is the actual name, but even with that, you're not 100% certain.

I agree. I would document as "unknown" and reference the suspicion about the actual name in the narrative along with other details of the suspicious activity.