Scam Afternmath

[Bogsye]

My next tip of the day for this:

If you receive a Final Letter from your bank, declining a refund, do another Data Subject Access Request and ask for the Complaint file itself.
This was useful to yield more information to match up how the decision was made versus the material that we have already harvested on previous DSAR's.

[Bogsye]

ninja_eli said:

And to answer why the scammers cannot be traced, what happens most often is the account is in the name of a mule. That mule thinks they are getting 10% of a business transaction (or they know they are in on a scam but hey) and then when they are caught they are unable to provide any details of the person they were working with (either they really don't know, or they're too scared to say).

The money often leaves via international payments (bounces around several accounts and then gets withdrawn) or it goes via cryptocurrency. Transferwise used to open accounts with just emailed in passport and proof of address, and gave access to the account right away, before the card arrived at the address. By the time the unwitting mule had worked out why they had a transferwise account arrive in the post, the scam had taken place. They don't remember opening an account at Transferwise, but it might not clock that the council emailing them to ask their for id and address proof wasn't really the council.

r.

The more I've heard about this aspect from ninja_eli and a Police Specialist the more the people who act as money mules, need to be treated the same as drugs mules.

This does seem to be one of the key things that needs to be tackled head on, and equate to jail time, to disrupt the flow of cash.

[Bogsye]

A really timely and 'on theme' article in the FT by Paul Lewis of Radio 4 Money Box.
'Banks must act to control fraud epidemic - Don't think you're too smart to get conned'

Possibly behind a paywall..
https://www.ft.com/content/ade560a5-f8cd-4eca-b8a0...

[Bogsye]

Thanks JCF - I agree, and your analogies did make me chuckle.

Paul has updated his blog - similalr to the FT article with a bit more detail
http://paullewismoney.blogspot.com/2021/04/banks-m...

Feels like the tide is turning slowly in that the sophistication of the crime is starting to be acknowledged more, rather than the victim being completely to blame. It's understanding that the victim's first error was to engage and poke their head above the parapet. There after it's a sustained, and organised attack by a predator.

[Bogsye]

It's taken the bank 62 days from telling us they are declining our claim for a refund to have still not passed the file to the Ombudsman.
They've even ignored Ombudsman requests for the file.

Today I was even more astounded that someone in the Complaints Team quesioned why someone that has been a victim of a scam should be considered as vulnerable?

The bank is pretending to be something that it clearly is not.