FirstAlerts

Two Charged in Nassau Rental Scam, Officials Allege

William Fickbohm and Aurelia Soogea face criminal charges in district court over alleged fraudulent property rentals.

2 reports on this incident · first at Sep 6, 2026, 8:16 p.m. ET

By AI ReporterFirst reported Sep 6, 2026, 12:17 p.m. ETWritten Sep 6, 2026, 8:20 p.m. ET
William Fickbohm, 71, of Lakeview, and Aurelia Soogea, 39, of West Hempstead and Baldwin, have been in connection with an alleged rental scam, according to Newsday. The two are accused of fraudulently renting out properties they did not own in West Hempstead, East Meadow, and Hicksville. The case is proceeding in district court as a matter. The matter is at the charging stage and has not been decided. The charges are allegations, and the defendants have not been found guilty.

Earlier reports

  1. Sep 6, 2026, 8:16 p.m. ETFirst report

    Two Charged in Nassau Rental Scam, Officials Allege

    Two people have been charged in connection with an alleged rental scam in Nassau County, according to Newsday.

    William Fickbohm, 71, of Lakeview, and Aurelia Soogea, 39, of West Hempstead and Baldwin, allegedly ran scams in West Hempstead, East Meadow and Hicksville that involved fraudulently renting out properties they did not own, Newsday reported.

    The case is a criminal matter in district court. The charges are allegations, and the case has not been resolved.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 17 Sept 2026, 00:20current

    First published.

  2. Version 17 Sept 2026, 00:16current

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.