Scam Afternmath
Discussion
Following on from Dedshott’s thread about his father being scammed I thought I’d share a very similar experience & share out some learnings from it. I was in two minds to post this, not that there’s a shame or sense of embarrassment, but when we listened to the You & Yours programme that Dedshott’s father participated in, and it absolutely struck a chord, in terms of what happened, and the similarity in the victim’s profiles.
Apologies - this is a bit of a long post, but if it helps other in some way to avoid this type of thing, or help to sweep up simillar, then it was worth it.
Last December my wife and I discovered one of our elderly relations was a victim of an investment scam, which sadly runs into a vast and catastrophic sum of money.
Previously I would have been in the camp of ‘how could anyone fall for this type of thing’, however having seen the sophistication of this and the manipulation by the scammers, it’s clear that we should all be wary of how easily elderly relatives can be duped.
When an seasoned police officer dealing with the case is visibly upset, you know it’s bad.
Briefly, the scam itself was an investment. There were several characters, from the company itself, along with the ‘regulator’ and fellow shareholders. The fellow shareholders profiles were all socially engineered, using information collected – previous business contacts in common, geographic locations that brought familiarity, etc.. As in Dedshott’s case the next payment became the focus, as time pressures and twists and turns of the elaborate plot unfolded. Bogus websites were in place for the investment company and the regulatory body looking after this type of investment. Phones numbers were spoofed to geographically look correct. It was, without doubt sophisticated, highly manipulative and well planned.
Being international transfers, the scam itself lives outside of the voluntary code that some of the banks have signed up for in 2019.
The ensuing pantomime of dealing with the bank to discover how these international payments could have, in the main, gone unchallenged was eye opening. Discovering that the bank hides behind warnings that are, at best a ‘procedural indemnity’ for themselves is quite shocking.
In the few instances where payments were challenged, and our relative described the reason for the payment, the red flags were clearly there, but not recognised or challenged.
We have dived deep into this and gathered ridiculous amounts of information. We’ve worked back and ‘dismantled the scam itself to understand how it worked, and all the different psychological tactics that were used. It’s sophisticated, and it’s shocking. In the end it has left someone who is well educated, and experienced in financial matters emotionally broken and on medication. Add to that on-going cancer treatment, and it’s a pretty miserable situation.
At the point of discovery we were heartened to have power of attorney in place. The problem was it wasn’t set up with this exact scenario in mind. A husband and wife may be primary POA’s for each other and another person is their secondary POA. If both husband and wife are simultaneously unable to handle their affairs the secondary POA can’t step in until the other primary formally revokes their status. This has to be done formally (through the Office of the Public Guardian) before the bank will accept the paperwork. The bank failed to tell us that a third party mandate could be signed as a temporary measure. This lost time.
When trying to recall payments, ensure that the bank note that the reason for recalling the money is due to suspected crime – initially they didn’t. Otherwise if the beneficiary bank account is still active you will be merely ‘knocking’ the scammers door, as the request will be on a ‘best endeavours’ basis. It’s odd- on that the money is gone, however the beneficiary bank will be unable to freeze an account unless there is reasonable grounds or a crime report. In this case, every single transaction recall had to be repeated, and unsurprisingly resulted no recovery.
Listening to the audio recording between customer and the bank was quite difficult. The red flags were there to see, and the missed opportunities were numerous. The systems and training are obviously lacking.
The things we have learned:
1) The emotional effects of this type of crime are more far reaching than we could imagine, and the victim’s ability to start to sort it out is potentially hugely diminished.
2) Having Power of Attorney in place isn’t a guarantee you can hop into the hot seat. If there’s a problem, use a third party mandate
3) When you report a scam, the bank will be busy noting everything you say to try and get themselves off the hook.
4) Do a Data Service Access Request on the bank and gather all documents and audio recordings. Verify these and be sure that you have all recordings and information. We have made three requested and still keep dredging more material.
5) Do not underestimate the work required to investigate this and get to the bottom of what has happened. The bank will too easily palm the blame onto the victim.
The biggest learning point is that the bank has had no interest in discovering more about the scam or how it operated. Without that desire to learn, I can’t see how systems can be strengthened to protect vulnerable customer. In my opinion, that means the bank is happy to continue as is, being part of the problem.
It’s a bit like Ford’s Pinto in the 70’s and product liability. Until there’s a sure fire financial implication to the business, it will do nothing to improve the situation, but instead see it’s customers as expendable.
Imagine each time there was an aviation accident, where the airline just shrugged our shoulders, and swept the wreckage under the carpet. That's a how the bank has treated this.
So where does this leave us?
Having received the final letter, the next step is the Financial Ombudsman. It’s appauling that we have to go through that step, but it’s clear the bank looks at it as a best case scenario, we walk away and worst case scenario the Ombudsman finds against the bank, and we see a refund.
Until the banks, telecoms, and internet service providers take steps to improve the environment, the scammers will thrive in the current eco-systems that the industry has created.
..and we will be waiting for the wave of 'Recovery Room' scammers to follow on behind.
Apologies - this is a bit of a long post, but if it helps other in some way to avoid this type of thing, or help to sweep up simillar, then it was worth it.
Last December my wife and I discovered one of our elderly relations was a victim of an investment scam, which sadly runs into a vast and catastrophic sum of money.
Previously I would have been in the camp of ‘how could anyone fall for this type of thing’, however having seen the sophistication of this and the manipulation by the scammers, it’s clear that we should all be wary of how easily elderly relatives can be duped.
When an seasoned police officer dealing with the case is visibly upset, you know it’s bad.
Briefly, the scam itself was an investment. There were several characters, from the company itself, along with the ‘regulator’ and fellow shareholders. The fellow shareholders profiles were all socially engineered, using information collected – previous business contacts in common, geographic locations that brought familiarity, etc.. As in Dedshott’s case the next payment became the focus, as time pressures and twists and turns of the elaborate plot unfolded. Bogus websites were in place for the investment company and the regulatory body looking after this type of investment. Phones numbers were spoofed to geographically look correct. It was, without doubt sophisticated, highly manipulative and well planned.
Being international transfers, the scam itself lives outside of the voluntary code that some of the banks have signed up for in 2019.
The ensuing pantomime of dealing with the bank to discover how these international payments could have, in the main, gone unchallenged was eye opening. Discovering that the bank hides behind warnings that are, at best a ‘procedural indemnity’ for themselves is quite shocking.
In the few instances where payments were challenged, and our relative described the reason for the payment, the red flags were clearly there, but not recognised or challenged.
We have dived deep into this and gathered ridiculous amounts of information. We’ve worked back and ‘dismantled the scam itself to understand how it worked, and all the different psychological tactics that were used. It’s sophisticated, and it’s shocking. In the end it has left someone who is well educated, and experienced in financial matters emotionally broken and on medication. Add to that on-going cancer treatment, and it’s a pretty miserable situation.
At the point of discovery we were heartened to have power of attorney in place. The problem was it wasn’t set up with this exact scenario in mind. A husband and wife may be primary POA’s for each other and another person is their secondary POA. If both husband and wife are simultaneously unable to handle their affairs the secondary POA can’t step in until the other primary formally revokes their status. This has to be done formally (through the Office of the Public Guardian) before the bank will accept the paperwork. The bank failed to tell us that a third party mandate could be signed as a temporary measure. This lost time.
When trying to recall payments, ensure that the bank note that the reason for recalling the money is due to suspected crime – initially they didn’t. Otherwise if the beneficiary bank account is still active you will be merely ‘knocking’ the scammers door, as the request will be on a ‘best endeavours’ basis. It’s odd- on that the money is gone, however the beneficiary bank will be unable to freeze an account unless there is reasonable grounds or a crime report. In this case, every single transaction recall had to be repeated, and unsurprisingly resulted no recovery.
Listening to the audio recording between customer and the bank was quite difficult. The red flags were there to see, and the missed opportunities were numerous. The systems and training are obviously lacking.
The things we have learned:
1) The emotional effects of this type of crime are more far reaching than we could imagine, and the victim’s ability to start to sort it out is potentially hugely diminished.
2) Having Power of Attorney in place isn’t a guarantee you can hop into the hot seat. If there’s a problem, use a third party mandate
3) When you report a scam, the bank will be busy noting everything you say to try and get themselves off the hook.
4) Do a Data Service Access Request on the bank and gather all documents and audio recordings. Verify these and be sure that you have all recordings and information. We have made three requested and still keep dredging more material.
5) Do not underestimate the work required to investigate this and get to the bottom of what has happened. The bank will too easily palm the blame onto the victim.
The biggest learning point is that the bank has had no interest in discovering more about the scam or how it operated. Without that desire to learn, I can’t see how systems can be strengthened to protect vulnerable customer. In my opinion, that means the bank is happy to continue as is, being part of the problem.
It’s a bit like Ford’s Pinto in the 70’s and product liability. Until there’s a sure fire financial implication to the business, it will do nothing to improve the situation, but instead see it’s customers as expendable.
Imagine each time there was an aviation accident, where the airline just shrugged our shoulders, and swept the wreckage under the carpet. That's a how the bank has treated this.
So where does this leave us?
Having received the final letter, the next step is the Financial Ombudsman. It’s appauling that we have to go through that step, but it’s clear the bank looks at it as a best case scenario, we walk away and worst case scenario the Ombudsman finds against the bank, and we see a refund.
Until the banks, telecoms, and internet service providers take steps to improve the environment, the scammers will thrive in the current eco-systems that the industry has created.
..and we will be waiting for the wave of 'Recovery Room' scammers to follow on behind.
I find myself conflicted about these situations. How much does greed outweigh common sense and stop people really questioning things.
Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Banks give warnings about scams with monotonous regularity, how far do we have to go protect people from their own bad judgement.
It's not just old people or greedy people, just as it always has been.
Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Banks give warnings about scams with monotonous regularity, how far do we have to go protect people from their own bad judgement.
It's not just old people or greedy people, just as it always has been.
eldar said:
I find myself conflicted about these situations. How much does greed outweigh common sense and stop people really questioning things.
Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Banks give warnings about scams with monotonous regularity, how far do we have to go protect people from their own bad judgement.
It's not just old people or greedy people, just as it always has been.
Im with you on this one, I currently work for a bank, and we do as much as we can to prevent our customers be the victims of fraud, we ask them for the reason for the withdrawal, which alot of the time is met with, "what has it got to do with you, its my money" we read them information about people contacting them and advising them to lie to the bank in order to steal their money.Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Banks give warnings about scams with monotonous regularity, how far do we have to go protect people from their own bad judgement.
It's not just old people or greedy people, just as it always has been.
The issue is, that there is very little that the bank can do, if a customer chooses to transfer their money to a bogus company, or to a scammer, as long as they are questioning the customer, and alot of customers dont do enough to make sure that the company they are transferring the money to is legitimate, they see the interest rate, or the return, and they dont then bother to look into it further, or read the terms of the account.
And you advise that what was said to the bank should have brought up red flags, but your looking at this with alot of emotion, what was said to the bank that you think would flag up that this was part of a scam?
eldar said:
I find myself conflicted about these situations. How much does greed outweigh common sense and stop people really questioning things.
Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Agreed. Eventually this constant paying out to scammed folk believing in a "too good to be true" offer might cause the end of free consumer banking.Why should bank shareholders and customers and the public bale out the victims? Why them rather than burglary victims?
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
Im with you on this one, I currently work for a bank, and we do as much as we can to prevent our customers be the victims of fraud, we ask them for the reason for the withdrawal, which alot of the time is met with, "what has it got to do with you, its my money" we read them information about people contacting them and advising them to lie to the bank in order to steal their money.
The issue is, that there is very little that the bank can do, if a customer chooses to transfer their money to a bogus company, or to a scammer, as long as they are questioning the customer, and alot of customers dont do enough to make sure that the company they are transferring the money to is legitimate, they see the interest rate, or the return, and they dont then bother to look into it further, or read the terms of the account.
And you advise that what was said to the bank should have brought up red flags, but your looking at this with alot of emotion, what was said to the bank that you think would flag up that this was part of a scam?
I see where both of you are coming from, and in fairness, I would have previously have a very simillar perspective. However, I think the vulnerability aspect of customers plays a big part, and it's that which the scammer plays on very efficiently. The issue is, that there is very little that the bank can do, if a customer chooses to transfer their money to a bogus company, or to a scammer, as long as they are questioning the customer, and alot of customers dont do enough to make sure that the company they are transferring the money to is legitimate, they see the interest rate, or the return, and they dont then bother to look into it further, or read the terms of the account.
And you advise that what was said to the bank should have brought up red flags, but your looking at this with alot of emotion, what was said to the bank that you think would flag up that this was part of a scam?
I'd have been genuinely satisfied to listen to audio and hear the bank that smurfsarepeople describes, helping to protect a customer. In that scenario I'd have raised my hands and admitted defeat. However, the bank I heard defintely wasn't that bank.
With regard to emotion. Perhaps, at the start, my emotional response would be higher, but when you've lived and breathed this for 4 months, and found a new revelation every time we find more information, it all becomes very matter of fact as the situation beomes really pretty fatiguing.
As an example, here's the description of the payment transcribed from recordings. This is for payment one.
To give it context, read this as a confused sounding 70 year old.
"“Ah well I’m paying an international settlement agent in the Philippines, erm erm doing some shares transactions but I am actually selling a block of shares and I am actually due to receive a substantial sum of money but as part of that exercise I have to pay a small deposit, a temporary deposit and there’s no point, I’m actually dealing with a Japanese bank erm erm who are actually going to remit me a 6 figure sum of money but as part of this whole exercise I have got to make a payment, a US dollar payment which you know is this £6,183.51 in Sterling but so that it what it is, it is a perfectly legitimate transaction.”
It didn't really solicit any digging deep, it was then a case of reading out the standard scamming warning, and unlock the account. I'd go as far as saying the descision to unlock the account was made before hearing any details, and reading the scam warning.
In the commercial world more than one person would make the decision to approve a payment - 4 eyes or more.. In the personal world it's just the person on their own making the descision. The bank is the thing between the personal banking customer and the scammer.
I think the big point is that the warnings that are typically read out are insufficeint to 'break the spell' of the scammer. The scammer puts pressure on the victim to make the payment. This is part of their tactics, which manipulates the victim into seeing the conversations with the bank in an irrational sense(anyone reading this thead is doing so with a rational mindset). This is the part that the banks are not adapting to counter, hence the scammers are thriving.
An awful situation for all the victims. Sadly, all too common.
The transcript from the call, certainly seems a little dodgy, but the caller appears to be happy that he knowns what he wants and is content to proceed. 70 isn't exactly old, these days.
What would the bank be expected to do?
I suspect the problem is how do you isolate a potentially suspicious transaction, representing a minute percentage of the total transactions without damaging confidence in the payments system?
The transcript from the call, certainly seems a little dodgy, but the caller appears to be happy that he knowns what he wants and is content to proceed. 70 isn't exactly old, these days.
What would the bank be expected to do?
I suspect the problem is how do you isolate a potentially suspicious transaction, representing a minute percentage of the total transactions without damaging confidence in the payments system?
I think the fintech part can identify the potentially dubious payments, but the human ellement is where training for awareness is probably the bigger issue, and has the gratest potential for failure.
Only 3 payments were flagged out of 13. These are all international, and the victim had no history making international payments prior to this. Suddenly in a space of 18 months there's hundereds of thousands flowing out.
I did ponder that where the bank is concerned about a potentially dubious payment, should they push the customer to contact Action Fraud. Once the cusotmer has done that they get a verification code from Action Fruad to give to the bank to confirm they have taken advice.It would certainly help the bank indemnify themselves, but more importantly it might stop transactions occuring in the first place. The flaw there is the Which? doesn't seem to rate Action Fraud all that highly with regard to it's effectiveness.
Setting the above aside, I do believe that more targeted questions to a customer could quite easily unpick their due dilligence.
Another aspect that I find hard to understand is that this particular 'investment company' is flagged on the FCA scam list in late 2019, but still it's fake website and regulator website are active. While the authorities may have trouble identifying the scammers, I'd have thought that disrupting thier activities by dismantling their apparatus would be a good start. Seeminlgly not.
If I run the scammer websites through a plagurism website it handily identifies other websites with identical text, which unsuprisingly show up with the same regsitration details, also regisitered in Panama.
I firmly believe it would be possible to identify a decent proportion of these scams without disrupting day to day payments or causing inconvenience. Credit card issuers are quite used to the liabilities they have with regard to transctions, and develop their systems to protect their interests,
Only 3 payments were flagged out of 13. These are all international, and the victim had no history making international payments prior to this. Suddenly in a space of 18 months there's hundereds of thousands flowing out.
I did ponder that where the bank is concerned about a potentially dubious payment, should they push the customer to contact Action Fraud. Once the cusotmer has done that they get a verification code from Action Fruad to give to the bank to confirm they have taken advice.It would certainly help the bank indemnify themselves, but more importantly it might stop transactions occuring in the first place. The flaw there is the Which? doesn't seem to rate Action Fraud all that highly with regard to it's effectiveness.
Setting the above aside, I do believe that more targeted questions to a customer could quite easily unpick their due dilligence.
Another aspect that I find hard to understand is that this particular 'investment company' is flagged on the FCA scam list in late 2019, but still it's fake website and regulator website are active. While the authorities may have trouble identifying the scammers, I'd have thought that disrupting thier activities by dismantling their apparatus would be a good start. Seeminlgly not.
If I run the scammer websites through a plagurism website it handily identifies other websites with identical text, which unsuprisingly show up with the same regsitration details, also regisitered in Panama.
I firmly believe it would be possible to identify a decent proportion of these scams without disrupting day to day payments or causing inconvenience. Credit card issuers are quite used to the liabilities they have with regard to transctions, and develop their systems to protect their interests,
Bogsye said:
I think the fintech part can identify the potentially dubious payments, but the human ellement is where training for awareness is probably the bigger issue, and has the gratest potential for failure.
Only 3 payments were flagged out of 13. These are all international, and the victim had no history making international payments prior to this. Suddenly in a space of 18 months there's hundereds of thousands flowing out.
I did ponder that where the bank is concerned about a potentially dubious payment, should they push the customer to contact Action Fraud. Once the cusotmer has done that they get a verification code from Action Fruad to give to the bank to confirm they have taken advice.It would certainly help the bank indemnify themselves, but more importantly it might stop transactions occuring in the first place. The flaw there is the Which? doesn't seem to rate Action Fraud all that highly with regard to it's effectiveness.
Setting the above aside, I do believe that more targeted questions to a customer could quite easily unpick their due dilligence.
Another aspect that I find hard to understand is that this particular 'investment company' is flagged on the FCA scam list in late 2019, but still it's fake website and regulator website are active. While the authorities may have trouble identifying the scammers, I'd have thought that disrupting thier activities by dismantling their apparatus would be a good start. Seeminlgly not.
If I run the scammer websites through a plagurism website it handily identifies other websites with identical text, which unsuprisingly show up with the same regsitration details, also regisitered in Panama.
I firmly believe it would be possible to identify a decent proportion of these scams without disrupting day to day payments or causing inconvenience. Credit card issuers are quite used to the liabilities they have with regard to transctions, and develop their systems to protect their interests,
I agree the various authorities seem spectacularly ineffective. This is a major contributory factor.Only 3 payments were flagged out of 13. These are all international, and the victim had no history making international payments prior to this. Suddenly in a space of 18 months there's hundereds of thousands flowing out.
I did ponder that where the bank is concerned about a potentially dubious payment, should they push the customer to contact Action Fraud. Once the cusotmer has done that they get a verification code from Action Fruad to give to the bank to confirm they have taken advice.It would certainly help the bank indemnify themselves, but more importantly it might stop transactions occuring in the first place. The flaw there is the Which? doesn't seem to rate Action Fraud all that highly with regard to it's effectiveness.
Setting the above aside, I do believe that more targeted questions to a customer could quite easily unpick their due dilligence.
Another aspect that I find hard to understand is that this particular 'investment company' is flagged on the FCA scam list in late 2019, but still it's fake website and regulator website are active. While the authorities may have trouble identifying the scammers, I'd have thought that disrupting thier activities by dismantling their apparatus would be a good start. Seeminlgly not.
If I run the scammer websites through a plagurism website it handily identifies other websites with identical text, which unsuprisingly show up with the same regsitration details, also regisitered in Panama.
I firmly believe it would be possible to identify a decent proportion of these scams without disrupting day to day payments or causing inconvenience. Credit card issuers are quite used to the liabilities they have with regard to transctions, and develop their systems to protect their interests,
Liability is also going to be an issue, which would rule out action fraud, i believe.
The bit I'm uneasy about is flagging the banks as the bad guys in this, they - including shareholders and customers - are also victims. The real criminals are seemingly ignored.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
This email covers it very well - saw a lot of scams on FB and other places... remember these guys ar doing this all the time, they have hooned the process on what works and tailored it very well adapting it and fixing as they went along with every victim and there will have been many. all so easy to be taken ineldar said:
The bit I'm uneasy about is flagging the banks as the bad guys in this, they - including shareholders and customers - are also victims. The real criminals are seemingly ignored.
Yes, because they are out of reach - so the victim goes for the next best option. It's like environmentalists targetting carrier bags because they can't do anything about Russia.The OP has done a vast amount of research and found a great deal - great credit - but can the bank reasonably be expected to do that before sending the money?
I'm very sorry it happened and hope the money can be recovered, but I would consider it a bonus not an expectation. Good luck.
It’s a very difficult situation, and understandably you’re upset.
With all banking transactions come ‘friction’.
You wanting to move your money as you wish, when you wish, to who you wish, with as little interference from the bank as possible realistically. This is the majority of transactions, and what customers want.
On the other side you have the friction the bank needs to create. Money laundering and fraud concerns. Stopping scams. Knowing more about why you are transacting. There are countless threads on here of people complaining about banks blocking their transactions, or asking questions about deposits.
The bank can only do so much against countless attacks created by fraudsters. I agree that the transcript of the conversation has red flags. But it could also potentially be heard as a sophisticated investor making a transaction they are fully aware of, and do not want to be questioned on.
A sudden increase in international transactions is also a red flag. But how many people have situations that warrant this legitimately? Buying a property abroad and the costs of initial upkeep/work. A spouse or child moving abroad to study/work needing money. A new partner who lives abroad... hundreds of thousands of situations where freezing that transaction or contacting each customer to find out if they are being scammed would either ruin the customer relationship, or cause so much excess work.
It’s a horrible situation, and believe me the banks are working to try and stop it where they can, but I don’t believe the blame lies wholly with the bank. You have one specific situation, they have thousands a second. They cannot cover all possibilities.
You did all the right things, and it is eye opening once you start to understand just how sophisticated these scams are. Unfortunately there are unscrupulous people out there who will always steal for a living. And others will always lose money to these people. And eventually someone will be left with the loss caused by the unscrupulous.
With all banking transactions come ‘friction’.
You wanting to move your money as you wish, when you wish, to who you wish, with as little interference from the bank as possible realistically. This is the majority of transactions, and what customers want.
On the other side you have the friction the bank needs to create. Money laundering and fraud concerns. Stopping scams. Knowing more about why you are transacting. There are countless threads on here of people complaining about banks blocking their transactions, or asking questions about deposits.
The bank can only do so much against countless attacks created by fraudsters. I agree that the transcript of the conversation has red flags. But it could also potentially be heard as a sophisticated investor making a transaction they are fully aware of, and do not want to be questioned on.
A sudden increase in international transactions is also a red flag. But how many people have situations that warrant this legitimately? Buying a property abroad and the costs of initial upkeep/work. A spouse or child moving abroad to study/work needing money. A new partner who lives abroad... hundreds of thousands of situations where freezing that transaction or contacting each customer to find out if they are being scammed would either ruin the customer relationship, or cause so much excess work.
It’s a horrible situation, and believe me the banks are working to try and stop it where they can, but I don’t believe the blame lies wholly with the bank. You have one specific situation, they have thousands a second. They cannot cover all possibilities.
You did all the right things, and it is eye opening once you start to understand just how sophisticated these scams are. Unfortunately there are unscrupulous people out there who will always steal for a living. And others will always lose money to these people. And eventually someone will be left with the loss caused by the unscrupulous.
Edited by Greshamst on Monday 22 March 08:09
It is very sad, my grandparents 'got done' a few years ago - the scam was nowhere near as sophisticated as the one described here but it was still enough to take a little over £15k before finally the bank got suspicious and put a stop to it.
It was right before highstreet banks became very "scam cautious" and a few factors all came into play, the financial loss was one thing but the shame experienced by my Nan was gutting. She was so embarrassed and it was heartbreaking to see. Police and bank pretty much said straight away that the money is gone and you'll never see it again, out of that shame she refused to follow it up at all... so that's that. She also lost faith in her local branch, she'd had a personal relationship with many of the branch workers for years because my Mum used to work there before she died and as a result I think there was a little too much 'trust' in either direction during the transactions (it was all done over the counter).
It was right before highstreet banks became very "scam cautious" and a few factors all came into play, the financial loss was one thing but the shame experienced by my Nan was gutting. She was so embarrassed and it was heartbreaking to see. Police and bank pretty much said straight away that the money is gone and you'll never see it again, out of that shame she refused to follow it up at all... so that's that. She also lost faith in her local branch, she'd had a personal relationship with many of the branch workers for years because my Mum used to work there before she died and as a result I think there was a little too much 'trust' in either direction during the transactions (it was all done over the counter).
Afaik Action Fraud don't / can't deal with cases less than £100k due to the sheer volume of scams. As there seems to be very little interest from anyone (neither the Banks or the Rozzers) for these "low value" scams + absolutely no comeback for the scammers it seems that it will carry on unabated.
TX.
TX.
Thanks all for your different perspectives and thoughts - great food for thought, and sorry to hear of others with freinds or relatives that have been caught out in this type of thing.
In some ways it seems analogous to Ralph Nader's book "Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile"
Sure, you could drive most of the cars quite safely, but just avoid having an accident, being rear ended in your Ford Pinto or doing a swift u-turn in your Corvair. Ford only recalled the Pinto once it became punatively expensive to the business.
In this case we have a system that has flaws, but no one seems very concerned to sort them, even although it has been claimed that scams and fraud are a threat to our national security.
If personal banking transactions were subject to the kind of comeback as credit card transactions it would be interesting to see what might happen.
To the point about focusing on the banks. It's really our only place to be able to. We could go to the payment regulator, the FCA, Action Fraud, NFIB, but that's all quite retrospective, and thus far I have little feeling that they will do much.
The scammers need to be starved of oxygen, and so the starting point is the ellaborate network of bank accounts that they open to then starburst the money back through. What is apparent is that new fintech based challenger banks allow ease of access to create accounts to drive money around the system. In this case one of the challenger banks behaviour would have been a PSR-breech. At what point does a bank or the banking system become complicit in this? If I open an account or move large sums of cash, I seem to need to jump through hoops of fire, in yet scammers can open countless bank accounts on false identities.
None of this is particularly rocket science from what I can see, and the capability is there to counter big chunks of this. It does require a joined up approach, which seems to be lacking. Currently we are allowing scammers to become extremely well financed which will allow them to become increasingly more sophisticated and always be that step ahead.
On another point, I spent some time analysing the times that emails were received at. When put on a graph, these all fitted into the UK working day really nicely. My thought was that this scam may well look international, but more than likely is UK/European in it's operation & control.
In some ways it seems analogous to Ralph Nader's book "Unsafe at Any Speed: The Designed-In Dangers of the American Automobile"
Sure, you could drive most of the cars quite safely, but just avoid having an accident, being rear ended in your Ford Pinto or doing a swift u-turn in your Corvair. Ford only recalled the Pinto once it became punatively expensive to the business.
In this case we have a system that has flaws, but no one seems very concerned to sort them, even although it has been claimed that scams and fraud are a threat to our national security.
If personal banking transactions were subject to the kind of comeback as credit card transactions it would be interesting to see what might happen.
To the point about focusing on the banks. It's really our only place to be able to. We could go to the payment regulator, the FCA, Action Fraud, NFIB, but that's all quite retrospective, and thus far I have little feeling that they will do much.
The scammers need to be starved of oxygen, and so the starting point is the ellaborate network of bank accounts that they open to then starburst the money back through. What is apparent is that new fintech based challenger banks allow ease of access to create accounts to drive money around the system. In this case one of the challenger banks behaviour would have been a PSR-breech. At what point does a bank or the banking system become complicit in this? If I open an account or move large sums of cash, I seem to need to jump through hoops of fire, in yet scammers can open countless bank accounts on false identities.
None of this is particularly rocket science from what I can see, and the capability is there to counter big chunks of this. It does require a joined up approach, which seems to be lacking. Currently we are allowing scammers to become extremely well financed which will allow them to become increasingly more sophisticated and always be that step ahead.
On another point, I spent some time analysing the times that emails were received at. When put on a graph, these all fitted into the UK working day really nicely. My thought was that this scam may well look international, but more than likely is UK/European in it's operation & control.
Terminator X said:
Afaik Action Fraud don't / can't deal with cases less than £100k due to the sheer volume of scams. As there seems to be very little interest from anyone (neither the Banks or the Rozzers) for these "low value" scams + absolutely no comeback for the scammers it seems that it will carry on unabated.
TX.
Unfortunately (depending on how I view this) this is comfortably past the threshold for Action Fraud to be interested. TX.
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
And you advise that what was said to the bank should have brought up red flags, but your looking at this with alot of emotion, what was said to the bank that you think would flag up that this was part of a scam?
In the case of my mother in her late seventies, she was scammed by somebody claiming to be from her bank who needed her to move money out of her account for security reasons. This got flagged online and the scammer coached her through what to say to the branch she visited ("it's an internal fraud, you can't tell them I'm asking you" etc etc) When she went into the branch she was asked why she was moving the money, and she said "it's for my granddaughters house purchase" - they waved it through and she lost a five figure sum.
Had the branch manager she was in the room with just probed at all around that reasoning they might have got her to 'confess' that her only grandchild was three years old...
aspender said:
In the case of my mother in her late seventies, she was scammed by somebody claiming to be from her bank who needed her to move money out of her account for security reasons. This got flagged online and the scammer coached her through what to say to the branch she visited ("it's an internal fraud, you can't tell them I'm asking you" etc etc)
When she went into the branch she was asked why she was moving the money, and she said "it's for my granddaughters house purchase" - they waved it through and she lost a five figure sum.
Had the branch manager she was in the room with just probed at all around that reasoning they might have got her to 'confess' that her only grandchild was three years old...
Exactly how my grandparents got done, they thought they were assisting in a bank internal investigation and were given a script to give to the bank over the phone/counter etc.When she went into the branch she was asked why she was moving the money, and she said "it's for my granddaughters house purchase" - they waved it through and she lost a five figure sum.
Had the branch manager she was in the room with just probed at all around that reasoning they might have got her to 'confess' that her only grandchild was three years old...
I've been in that frustrating situation sat in a strangers living room trying to figure out where my money went when doing a bank transfer to buy a car, so I can see both sides. The fact that bank accounts don't seem to have any kind of follow up/traceability is what I find very odd. Paypal can recover funds if an eBay sale goes south, so why doesn't the mainstream banking system have that sort of mechanism?
anonymous said:
[redacted]
We have been on the other end of this, where the scammers used OUR details for the sale of items.Again, the banks were NOT interested at all, even when the full details were finally brought to their attention.
Not a Ferrari, but HGV's, Trailers, Skips, Plant and machinery, they targeted various businesses around the country, all by email, NO phone number supplied, stating that they urgently needed to sell their ''equipment'' and were looking for a cash buyer, apparently all the items were cheap, but only so they looked a bargain, not unrealistically.
Various companies paid money to the scammers as their 'deposit' with the balance to be paid by cash on delivery, (many tens of thousands in some cases), but of course there was no item in existance.
We were only made aware of this when a sensible buyer realised it was a scam after he had done checks on ''US'' (the company apparently selling), and found we were actually a holiday cottage with a turnover of £20k and assests of £10k.
He contacted us to explain his worries, the in the following weeks, we were inundated with requests for more information about the products or when the items were to be delivered.
We even had one company take us to court for failure to supply 7 x artic loads of pallets, he would not listen to any sense, fortunately we were insured and he lost a couple of thousand more on legal costs.
It finally ended after one prospective customer strung them along and managed to get a phone number, bank details and names, all passed to us
We found the bank in question, who could give no explanation at all, as to how someone with a completely different name, i.d, and address had been able to open a Ltd company account in our business name. They had passed all security checks at the bank, - somehow, and the bank simply washed their hands of the problem by closing the account. No help to the people who had paid in the money.
As for stress and lives ruined, yes all very easy to happen, we were on the local police register for immediate call out with armed police (who DID kindly attend on more than one occasion), when we were getting visits from ''customers'' who came to our home collect their items, armed with crowbars dogs and death threats. Our address was on companies house at the time. !
Now a couple of years on , we still have NO idea how/why our business was picked, but still worry it could happen again.
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff