On 22/7, the Dong Nai provincial People's Court continued questioning 87 defendants in the fraud and embezzlement case at Loc Phuc Investment and Trading Joint Stock Company, led by Nguyen Huu Tuong (34 years old).

Tuong and his accomplices are accused of defrauding 165 customers, misappropriating 255 billion VND. In addition to the Loc Phuc Company's board of directors, the remaining defendants include floor directors, department heads, sales staff, legal staff, accountants, and hired "decoys."

During the questioning, many victims recounted how they were deceived.

Defendant Duong Thuy Hang, one of 14 "decoys" who tricked customers into buying Loc Phuc Company's projects. Photo: Phuoc Tuan

Defendant Duong Thuy Hang, one of 14 "decoys" who tricked customers into buying Loc Phuc Company's projects. Photo: Phuoc Tuan

‘Decoys’ fill the transaction floor

Ms. Thu (name changed), a real estate agent in TP HCM, said that in 2023, she needed to sell a house in Thu Duc, so she posted an advertisement online. Someone claiming to be a Loc Phuc Company employee called her, saying they had a customer in Hanoi who wanted to buy the house and made an appointment to meet at a hotel in District 1. However, when she arrived, she was told that "the customer had waited a long time and left", and was then invited to the company's headquarters the next day.

There, a woman - later identified as "decoy 2" - approached her, saying that the previous day she had just gone to see land in Dong Nai: "It's very beautiful, near Long Thanh airport, very crowded, many people have made deposits."

A moment later, a person introduced as a "Hanoi customer" (actually "decoy 3") walked in with a bag of about 900 million VND, placed it on the table, and said they wanted to buy Ms. Thu's house along with 4 adjacent plots of land from Loc Phuc.

"Decoy 2" immediately informed Ms. Thu that there were only 2 plots left and suggested she buy them back to sell to the "Hanoi customer" for a profit.

To trap Ms. Thu, "decoy 3" made a deposit to buy the house, but Loc Phuc's staff kept the money to transfer it to a deposit for 2 plots of land in Dong Nai. After signing a contract to transfer the ownership of 2 plots of land in Dong Nai for 5.7 billion VND, "decoy 3" found ways to delay, then disappeared, not buying Ms. Thu's house in TP Thu Duc nor the 2 plots of land as promised.

At this point, checking the papers, Ms. Thu discovered that the land title was not in the location the company had introduced, and the actual value was only half. After the police arrested Loc Phuc's employees, she learned that all the employees used fake names, fake papers, and the "customers" were also "decoys."

"I'm in the real estate business, and I was still scammed. Many families are in debt and their homes are broken. I request the Trial Panel to strictly handle this," Ms. Thu said in court.

The indictment states that "decoys" played an important role. When the company's employees lured customers, they would take them on a 52-seat bus to areas without actual projects in Dong Nai. There, in just about 30 minutes, the employees coordinated with the "decoys" to create a deposit scene. If the customer agreed, they would be taken back to the company by a 7-seat car to continue the "performance."

At the company, the employees arranged for the customer to meet another "decoy 2" - someone pretending to be a customer buying back the deposit, as previously advised. The "decoy" always carried a bag of money from 500 million to one billion VND, placed it on the table, and then set a condition: to sell the deposit, there must be a deposit contract or transfer with Loc Phuc.

After the customer signed the contract, the "decoy" would disappear or make excuses to refuse to buy back as originally promised. At this point, the customer discovered that the land was not in the right location and its value was only 1/3 of the purchase price. When complaining, the company shifted responsibility, blaming the customer for their own decision.

Defendant Duong Thuy Hang, one of 14 "decoys," confessed to being paid from 500,000 to 5 million VND per deal. "The defendant was assigned to go on the same bus with the customer, sitting nearby and chatting. When the employee signaled, they would make a deposit. The deposit money was provided by the company employee," Hang said.

A lawyer protecting the victims' rights questions defendant Duong Huu Duc, Sales Director of Loc Phuc Company, at the trial. Photo: Phuoc Tuan

A lawyer protecting the victims' rights questions defendant Duong Huu Duc, Sales Director of Loc Phuc Company, at the trial. Photo: Phuoc Tuan

In 2020, Tuong established Van Phuc Real Estate Investment and Brokerage Company Limited. From 4/2022 to 8/2023, Tuong hired Nguyen Van An (29 years old) to establish Loc Phuc Company and Green Link Real Estate Company Limited, headquartered in TP HCM, all funded and operated by Tuong.

Under Tuong's direction, Loc Phuc and Green Link Real employees spread false information, printing diagrams of non-existent projects in An Phuoc commune (formerly Long Thanh), Song Thao, An Vien (formerly Trang Bom), and Hung Loc (formerly Thong Nhat).

According to the indictment, to carry out the fraud, the defendants took pictures and selling prices of beautiful houses on social media, then adjusted the selling prices lower, claiming them as their own "goods," and posted them online. Sales staff bought personal information data to call and invite people to buy houses and land on the "trading floor." In addition, the company also hired people to pose as customers ("decoys") to approach buyers at company events to carry out fraudulent activities.

On the afternoon of 31/8/2023, when Loc Phuc Company was transporting dozens of customers back to the "trading floor" in An Vien commune, hundreds of investigators raided, subdued, and caught Nguyen Van An and 122 employees red-handed "performing" along with 20 hired people posing as customers ("decoys") competing to buy the project.

In previous trial days, answering the court, defendant Tuong denied his testimony at the investigation agency, saying that the fraudulent acts to sell goods were carried out by subordinates, and he only bought land and handed it over to employees to sell. However, the defendants who were floor directors and subordinate employees "objected," saying that Tuong's testimony was incorrect, and all policies and operating strategies were received from the "boss's" direction.

Phuoc Tuan