BBC News - Scam taken money - banks
Discussion
In the news this morning about a lady in Essex unfortunately scammed out of thousands - Usual story, telephone call from perps pretending to be bank...... Ok call us back if you don't believe, and then they use clever ploys so the victim believes they are calling the bank. Bank have refused to reimburse as not liable, so money LOST.
Here's my question... What is going on here? are banks, Police or fraud authorities not bothered because it's 'not their problem' ? It's already been reported that it went through several transfers via Lloyds Group, and correct me if I'm wrong, but THERE IS AN AUDIT TRAIL, so someone, somewhere in the banking system knows (or can be forced by legal means?) to reveal the whereabouts of all this money even if it's been split into smaller portions, until it then becomes cash, and is then more difficult to trace.
Looks like someone can't be bothered, it's some ladies life savings (not their's or their mother's!)
Here's my question... What is going on here? are banks, Police or fraud authorities not bothered because it's 'not their problem' ? It's already been reported that it went through several transfers via Lloyds Group, and correct me if I'm wrong, but THERE IS AN AUDIT TRAIL, so someone, somewhere in the banking system knows (or can be forced by legal means?) to reveal the whereabouts of all this money even if it's been split into smaller portions, until it then becomes cash, and is then more difficult to trace.
Looks like someone can't be bothered, it's some ladies life savings (not their's or their mother's!)
It can be traced, but at some point it will leave the country or get converted to cash and the trail will die.
A few years ago the method used by fraudsters was to recruit innocent (but stupid) fences to make international transfers - they would be told they are an "agent" for an international company and only had to spend a few hours a week making transfers and could keep 10% as a fee.
When the police turn up the only money left is this fee, and all they have is bank details in some foreign country that may also be a dead-end.
edit: BT are at least stopping one of the crucial elements: it used to be that after hanging up a landline phone the other side would stay connected - the frauster uses this by playing back a dial-tone and then impersonating the bank's systems. This was so various types of line transfer could occur, but they figured that so few people used phones like that they could discontinue the feature with little impact.
A few years ago the method used by fraudsters was to recruit innocent (but stupid) fences to make international transfers - they would be told they are an "agent" for an international company and only had to spend a few hours a week making transfers and could keep 10% as a fee.
When the police turn up the only money left is this fee, and all they have is bank details in some foreign country that may also be a dead-end.
edit: BT are at least stopping one of the crucial elements: it used to be that after hanging up a landline phone the other side would stay connected - the frauster uses this by playing back a dial-tone and then impersonating the bank's systems. This was so various types of line transfer could occur, but they figured that so few people used phones like that they could discontinue the feature with little impact.
Edited by Gareth79 on Saturday 7th February 16:08
sugerbear said:
At some point it will go via western Union to someone / somewhere outside of the UK, and then the trail ends.
I imagine that some agency somewhere is tracking the money and they have a fair idea of who it is going to.
I've heard this before - but are Western Union above the law? I can understand the reasoning that once it's turned to cash then the trail is almost impossible, but until that point the evidence should be there, and a bank must know who they gave the cash to!I imagine that some agency somewhere is tracking the money and they have a fair idea of who it is going to.
First of all it will go through one or more accounts, effectively laundering the money. They may be gullible fools that have been tricked into laundering by being offered a percentage to receive and forward the money. In those cases I hope they are prosecuted (ignorance not being an excuse). WU run a legitimate business, I am sure they follow all the regulations in the countries they operate in.
First of all it will go through one or more accounts, effectively laundering the money. They may be gullible fools that have been tricked into laundering by being offered a percentage to receive and forward the money. In those cases I hope they are prosecuted (ignorance not being an excuse). WU run a legitimate business, I am sure they follow all the regulations in the countries they operate in.
DonkeyApple said:
I am struggling to see what it has to do with her bank.
She should have been more careful with her money.
The point is she hung up the phone and then dialled the banks phone number. She should have been more careful with her money.
Why wouldn't you believe you were talking to someone at the bank?
If you aren't aware of the scam you would have no idea someone would be rerouting the call.
gregf40 said:
DonkeyApple said:
I am struggling to see what it has to do with her bank.
She should have been more careful with her money.
The point is she hung up the phone and then dialled the banks phone number. She should have been more careful with her money.
Why wouldn't you believe you were talking to someone at the bank?
If you aren't aware of the scam you would have no idea someone would be rerouting the call.
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
Surely if we have to blame a big business and try and get some money then the arguement is that her phone company facilitated a fraud through having security flaws?
But the real problem in this country is that too many people are completely ignorant when it comes to personal security.
DonkeyApple said:
And why is that the bank's fault? Seriously?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
As the OP, I wasn't putting direct blame on the banks for the loss, however the point I find difficult is how the evidence can be 'lost' in the banking system - Surely this isn't the case until it's turned into cash?I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
gregf40 said:
They carried out the transaction without her authorisation.
The security systems in place clearly aren't good enough if this can happen.
Arguably only because the old lady gave away the keys to her account (albeit defrauded into doing so).The security systems in place clearly aren't good enough if this can happen.
There's not a great deal that bank security systems can do to protect against someone giving the keys away, willingly or not, even if they had two factor security of some sort, it would slow the fraudsters down, but I bet there'd still be some cases where they'd managed to get the victim to hand over any two factor card readers and pins to a courier etc.
gregf40 said:
DonkeyApple said:
And why is that the bank's fault? Seriously?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
They carried out the transaction without her authorisation.I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
The security systems in place clearly aren't good enough if this can happen.
Fastpedeller said:
DonkeyApple said:
And why is that the bank's fault? Seriously?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
As the OP, I wasn't putting direct blame on the banks for the loss, however the point I find difficult is how the evidence can be 'lost' in the banking system - Surely this isn't the case until it's turned into cash?I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
Personally, I never speak to any bank on the phone. If it is important they will send a letter or I will go into a branch. If I get a call from the bank I always just ask them to put it in writing whatever it is.
Heard this on the radio at the weekend on my way to the beach, money matters/programme or something on R4.
It seems she reported it within 30 minutes. What alerted her was she recieved a similar phone call not long after her transfer, advising her about a neighbour that she had POA for and to transfer her accounts too.
The Bank did not act immediately from what I understood once she contacted them so perhaps it was within their grasp to sort it out but failed to act quickly? She informed the police at the same time.
All very sad and the way it happened it seems that 'but for the grace of god there go I' it could have happened to a lot of people, very very clever scam.
It seems she reported it within 30 minutes. What alerted her was she recieved a similar phone call not long after her transfer, advising her about a neighbour that she had POA for and to transfer her accounts too.
The Bank did not act immediately from what I understood once she contacted them so perhaps it was within their grasp to sort it out but failed to act quickly? She informed the police at the same time.
All very sad and the way it happened it seems that 'but for the grace of god there go I' it could have happened to a lot of people, very very clever scam.
DonkeyApple said:
gregf40 said:
DonkeyApple said:
And why is that the bank's fault? Seriously?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
They carried out the transaction without her authorisation.I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
The security systems in place clearly aren't good enough if this can happen.
They did carry out the transaction without her authorisation - that's a fact.
DonkeyApple said:
Personally, I never speak to any bank on the phone. If it is important they will send a letter or I will go into a branch. If I get a call from the bank I always just ask them to put it in writing whatever it is.
So you think it is unreasonable for someone to assume when dialling a banks phone number that they would get through to the bank?gregf40 said:
DonkeyApple said:
gregf40 said:
DonkeyApple said:
And why is that the bank's fault? Seriously?
I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
They carried out the transaction without her authorisation.I'm genuinely intrigued as to how any blame can lie with the bank.
The security systems in place clearly aren't good enough if this can happen.
They did carry out the transaction without her authorisation - that's a fact.
So, what is it that the bank has done to make them liable for her situation?
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff