Question from a reader:
I received a consultation from an acquaintance. Two years ago, they took a part-time job where they received 10,000 yen for each mobile phone contract introduced by a friend. At that time, they contracted a total of three phones, and it seems there was an agreement that the name would be removed from the acquaintance’s name after
three months. However, the name is still under the acquaintance’s name, and despite requests for cancellation or name change, there has been no progress. The acquaintance is worried that this might be used for fraudulent activities. It seems that the mobile phone bills are being transferred monthly, but if it is indeed being used for fraud, they are anxious that consulting the police might lead to them being treated as an accomplice. If they show the police their LINE conversations and other evidence to prove that they are only lending their name and are not involved in the fraud, is there a possibility that the acquaintance will have no issues and the perpetrator might be caught? There are four characters involved: the acquaintance, the man who introduced the acquaintance, Mr. B who contracted the phones at the mobile shop, and Mr. C with whom they are communicating regarding payments. The acquaintance only met Mr. B and Mr. C through this part-time job and only knows their LINE contacts and full names. Additionally, the acquaintance is worried that their workplace manager has found out about this issue, and they are concerned about causing trouble at work. If the police were to come, would it also affect their workplace? This has turned into a long message, but I would appreciate any advice you can provide.

Considering the Risks of Borrowing Names for Mobile Contracts

Recently, I have been receiving more consultations from acquaintances. In particular, issues related to borrowing names for mobile phones are surprisingly common risks that lurk nearby. In this blog, I would like to delve into this issue from a legal perspective based on the case of my acquaintance.

Overview of the Acquaintance’s Case

The acquaintance who consulted me contracted three mobile phones through a part-time job. The condition at the time of contracting was that the name would be in the acquaintance’s name, but it would be removed after three months. However, the name is still under the acquaintance’s name, and even after requesting cancellation or a name change, the other party has not responded at all. Additionally, the acquaintance has strong concerns that this name might be used for fraudulent purposes. At this stage, it is important to note that the acquaintance is only lending their name and is not directly involved in any fraud. Just because they borrowed their name does not mean that the act itself is immediately illegal. However, it is natural for anxiety to grow when the situation does not progress.

The Possibility of Fraud and the Acquaintance’s Position

As the acquaintance is worried, if it is indeed being used for fraud, the lender of the name could potentially be held responsible in some way. However, it is crucial to note that “intent” is a significant factor. It is important that the acquaintance did not lend their name with the intent to commit fraud and had trust in the other party. Here, the evidence in the acquaintance’s possession, specifically the LINE conversations, could become a very powerful tool. This can be used to demonstrate that the acquaintance is not involved in any fraud, so consulting the police is certainly not a waste of time.

Consulting the Police and Workplace Impact

The acquaintance is anxious that if they consult the police, they might be treated as an offender. This concern is understandable. However, the police will make a judgment after hearing the circumstances, so having evidence could actually work in favor of the acquaintance. Additionally, whether there will be an impact on the workplace is also an important point. If the police intervene, there is a possibility that they might contact the workplace. However, the workplace would only be troubled if the acquaintance were to become an offender, and if lending their name was based solely on trust, the impact on the workplace would likely be minimal.

Specific Action Plan

Here, I would like to propose a specific action plan for the acquaintance. 1. Organize Evidence: Gather and organize evidence related to communications with the other party, such as LINE conversations, contracts, and payment records. This will clarify their position. 2. Consult the Police: Consider consulting the police with the organized evidence. When consulting, it is crucial to calmly explain the situation. If possible, preparing a list of questions in advance will help the process go smoothly. 3. Consult Trusted Individuals: It may also be beneficial to consult the workplace manager or a trusted friend for advice. Having someone to support the acquaintance in dealing with this issue can be reassuring. 4. Consult a Legal Expert: If possible, consulting a legal expert could be another option. Especially if the expert is knowledgeable about the entertainment industry or name borrowing, more specific advice can be obtained.

Conclusion

The acquaintance’s case is a problem that many people may face in today’s society, where the risk of becoming involved in fraud lurks. Borrowing a name may seem simple at first glance, but there are unexpected risks behind it. How the acquaintance chooses to act will greatly influence the future developments of this situation. While it is understandable to feel worried, it is most important to take action without fear. By calmly organizing evidence and responding appropriately, there is a possibility that the situation can improve. Ultimately, what the acquaintance learns through this issue will have a significant impact on their future life.