Scam Calls from Area Code 765

Area code 765 covers central and east-central Indiana, with reported complaint locations including Lafayette, Bloomington, Goshen, Coatesville, and Cedar Grove. Across 254 distinct numbers, the code has drawn 521 total complaints since February 2026, with activity recorded as recently as June 2026. That volume places 765 at rank 279 out of 358 area codes overall, but among its geographic peer group it ranks 38th out of 47, suggesting it sits in the heavier half of comparable Indiana-rooted codes.

The single largest complaint category is dropped calls or no message, with 78 complaints, a pattern consistent with robocall systems probing for live recipients before routing to a human operator. Debt-reduction pitches targeting credit cards, mortgages, and student loans follow with 63 complaints, and impersonation calls posing as government agencies, businesses, or family members account for 43 more. Medical and prescription solicitations add 30 complaints, and vacation and timeshare offers round out the named categories at 18.

The highest-volume individual number is 765-222-3901, which has drawn 13 complaints and is categorized under vacation and timeshares. Two debt-reduction numbers also stand out: 765-337-6720 with 6 complaints and 765-418-6504 with 4. Beyond those, four numbers — 765-709-0918 with 7 complaints, 765-324-9542 and 765-945-5212 each with 5, and 765-796-8825 also with 5 — together account for 22 complaints with no category assigned to any of them.

The FCC holds 3 records tied to this code, and the mode of contact recorded there is live-voice calls, with 20 such instances logged. Complaints have also been filed by residents in Florida and California, indicating that spoofing or call-forwarding arrangements are extending the apparent reach of these numbers well beyond Indiana's borders.

The threat picture here is one of sustained, multi-vector pressure from a relatively small number of active lines. With 254 numbers generating 521 complaints over roughly five months, the per-number complaint rate is elevated, and the concentration of high-count numbers across debt, timeshare, and unclassified categories suggests coordinated campaigns rather than isolated opportunistic dialing. The ongoing recency status means this activity has not tapered.