$38M Medicaid Scam
Pakistani-American businessman charged in $38 million adult day care scam in Brooklyn
A Pakistani-American businessman, Pervez Siddiqui, and seven associates face charges for an alleged $38 million Medicaid fraud scheme. The scam, which involved adult day care facilities in Brooklyn, disguised funds as 'laddu' payments to conceal the fraudulent activity. According to the indictment, recruiters, including Shazia Bibi, Abdul Aziz, Shair Ali, Zebun Ahmed, Josna Begum, Saira Khatoon, and Atia Shahnaz, were paid kickbacks for signing up seniors and their families for the program.
The defendants allegedly submitted claims for social services that were never delivered, and falsified attendance records and sign-in sheets to support the billing. In some cases, the facilities claimed to have more participants than they were legally allowed to accommodate. The indictment also alleges that administrative billing operations were run from Pakistan, while fraudulent proceeds were transferred through shell companies disguised as payments for gifts, dividends, medicine, and 'laddu'. Seniors and their families were offered monthly cash payments of about $500 in exchange for allowing the facilities to use their Medicaid information.
The $38 million scam is just one example of the widespread fraud that plagues the Medicaid system. In a separate case, the Justice Department is suing the New York State Department of Health and a company operating a $10 billion home health program for the state, alleging that the company is improperly keeping part of the care payments as part of a fraud scheme. The lawsuit, filed in the Eastern District of New York, accuses Public Partnerships LLC of perpetuating the fraud. The case highlights the ongoing efforts to combat Medicaid fraud and protect taxpayer dollars.
The investigation into the $38 million adult day care scam is ongoing, and the defendants are facing charges for their alleged roles in the scheme. The use of 'laddu' payments to disguise the fraudulent activity is a unique aspect of the case, and highlights the creative ways that scammers will try to conceal their activities. As the case moves forward, it is likely that more details will emerge about the scope and complexity of the scam. The alleged fraud occurred over several years, with the exact dates not specified in the indictment. However, the indictment does provide details about the individuals involved and the methods they used to perpetuate the scam.
The $38 million Medicaid scam is a significant case, and the allegations against Pervez Siddiqui and his associates are serious. The case is a reminder of the importance of vigilance in preventing Medicaid fraud and protecting the integrity of the system. The Justice Department and other law enforcement agencies are working to combat Medicaid fraud and hold those responsible accountable. In another case, an Arkansas woman was recently convicted of Medicaid fraud, highlighting the ongoing efforts to combat fraud in the system. The conviction serves as a reminder that those who engage in fraudulent activity will be held accountable.
As I reflect on the $38M Medicaid scam, I firmly believe that immediate action is necessary to prevent such fraudulent activities in the future. My thesis is that without stringent regulations and oversight, these scams will continue to drain our healthcare system. If nothing changes, the true winners will be the scammers themselves, who will reap millions of dollars in ill-gotten gains, while taxpayers and legitimate healthcare providers are left to foot the bill. It is our responsibility to demand accountability and ensure that our healthcare system is protected from such blatant abuse.
Cross-reference independently — do not take our word for it.
Disclosure: NewsAnarchist uses AI-assisted reporting with web search. Always verify primary sources linked above.
This article is produced by NewsAnarchist's AI reporting system, not a human staff reporter. It's built from the primary source cited above (a regulator's enforcement action (SEC, FTC, DOJ), a company's own SEC filing, a court record, or the wire/trade-press reporting linked in the body) and reports what that source states, attributed to it — it is not a recommendation about any company's stock or products, and does not verify a company's disputed denial beyond what the record shows. Part of our Corporate Watchdog hub. Found an error? Tell us.