Scammers

[Sounding]

On 8/2/2024 at 10:55 AM, GSW said:

 It is a shame that there seems to be so many scammers everywhere these days. I am starting to understand why we have to be so vigilant.

Indeed. I have some stuff for sale in a few places, and one of those platforms led to this communication.

There are a lot of red flags in this email.

Couldn’t tell me who he was;

Claimed no phone access yet email advises he was already talking to his courier to arrange collection the next day;

Broken English (not always, but a piece in the puzzle in this example);

Asking for the price again, yet the ad has a price, my first email listed the price, my second email made that price bold (maybe I played along for longer than I should have but I like to find out how these scams work);

Claims where he works, but the font is different, proving that info was copy and pasted;

“PayPal instant bank wire transfer service” really?;

Paying i to my bank account from his PayPal - then goods are collected, then PayPal dispute gets logged, I lose goods and money…;

In talks with his courier on Good Friday when nothing is open;

Claims he can arrange collection Easter Saturday…

Did I miss anything?

 

[Mrkropotkin]

I had one similar to this but on oil rig off the coast of NZ. The rig was genuine but she wanted me to pay courier fees to Hong Kong which she obviously would repay etc... Couldn't use phone etc for some silly reason. On it went... Eventually I suggested that being a scammer was sad and if she gave me her details I would give her 10$ for food.  No reply after that. I guess she had enough food. 

[muon*]

Yup, the whole thing reeks of scam!

[Kaynin]

Unfortunately online scamming has been going on for a couple of decades, but the banks and law enforcement have no interest in catching the offenders.  There are numerous reasons for this, but one main one is that banks profits far out weigh the financial loss for reimbursement.  However, more recently, due to the prolific increase in offending, it's costing so much more to the banks that they're paying attention. 

 

This behaviour could have been curtailed a very long time ago.  Despite the public campaigns that organisations such as banks roll out saying how hard they're working to protect their customers, it's just a facade.  For example, they could start by freezing accounts where the unlawfully obtained money is received in to, and the holder of the account has to present to their local branch with ID to sort it out.  Heck, they make me do that if I forget my online password...and yet they won't.

 

 

Anyway, it all falls back on to us, the public.  Yes this email is a scam.  The moment someone asks me to move to email to communicate, I sever ties.  I don't accept Paypal as payment anymore - a whole raft of limitations I've had to employ because this offending is rife.  

[purpleninja]

I must admit I did really enjoy the Beekeeper - especially the parts where the scammers got their just desserts.

 

Scammers ... it's worse than it's ever been and I see it getting progressively worse until the institutions are held at least partially accountable at which point they will roll out all sorts of protections for us

 

I'm all for personal responsibility - and the honey in so many scams is the "bargain" or "get rich quick" temptation, but they are getting more and more sophisticated in their scumbaggery!

Edited March 31, 2024 by purpleninja

[audiofeline]

I enjoy some of the videos by IT scam-busters who hack into the scammer's place of work and freak-out the scammer, while reversing lots of their scamming transactions. 

 

I recall a year or so ago India had a big natural disaster and Australia donated $millions in aide.  I have nothing against them helping India in their time of crisis, but I think there could have been a condition attached to India accepting the aid on condition they do a concerted effort to shut down scammers targeting Australia.  I wouldn't be surprised if scamming was one of the top income-generating industries for the country. 

 

[Kaynin]

Just to highlight my previous post, bank's do not take scams/frauds seriously.  They'll advertise that they're doing everything to protect your money, but it's a token effort.  There's so much more they could be doing.  Here's an example where unfortunately a victim found out the hard way -

 

https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/aussies-hunt-for-scammers-who-stole-14k/news-story/f62ce1892f513a90005f1f3c148861cc

[Kaynin]

Another example of a victim being victimised because financial institutions don't care about stopping these crimes.

 

https://www.news.com.au/finance/money/costs/aussie-takes-on-the-banks-after-scammers-stole-11k/news-story/0a3deeda566aeddc917dde421e3efbfe

 

 

As quoted by a previous victim “Why don’t (they) want to stop it happening?"  The answer is simple.  The financial institutions make so much profit, their losses through fraud aren't worth the effort.  The main take away?  You have to do everything to protect yourself, don't consider banks/lenders will have your back.

[Kaynin]

Interestingly ASIC is suing big bank HSBC.  They moved to civil jurisdiction years ago as the bourdon of proof is lower.  I hope they win, but I don’t have faith in their abilities.

 

So the article says HSBC lost $23 million over 5 years to a spoofing scam.  Sure they wpuld have lost more in other scam methods, but it’s chump change to them because they made $30.3 billion in pre-tax profit in 2023 alone.  Again, it’s why they’re not serious about stopping it, so scams are rife.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-12-16/asic-sue-hsbc-court-finance-banking-scam-customer-protection/104690472

 

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/business-68355809

 

[audiofeline]

15 minutes ago, Kaynin said:

...So the article says HSBC lost $23 million over 5 years to a spoofing scam.  Sure they wpuld have lost more in other scam methods, but it’s chump change to them because they made $30.3 billion in pre-tax profit in 2023 alone.  Again, it’s why they’re not serious about stopping it, so scams are rife...

Not quite right.  It was the HSBC customers who were scammed the $23M, the bank didn't lose that money.  Only the interest from it not being in their bank any more.  The bank allegedly didn't do anything to support their customers, and spent an inordinate amount of time giving the victims the run-around.  The banks have demonstrated clearly they aren't capable of self-regulation, and haven't changed their spots after the royal commission.  The government needs to enact a lot of very tight legislation to reign-in their cowboy behaviour.

[Kaynin]

11 hours ago, audiofeline said:

Not quite right.  It was the HSBC customers who were scammed the $23M, the bank didn't lose that money.  Only the interest from it not being in their bank any more.  The bank allegedly didn't do anything to support their customers, and spent an inordinate amount of time giving the victims the run-around.  

 

Not quite right.  The article remains silent on how much HSBC paid to customers as a result of their investigations.  If all customers were paid out their losses, then it has cost HSBC $23 million - and to my point, if paid out in full, that's chump change when compared against their profits.  Further, the allegation also includes that HSBC did nothing to protect customers (my main point in my previous posts), not just lack of support and giving them the run around.

Edited December 16, 2024 by Kaynin

[audiofeline]

15 hours ago, Kaynin said:

 

Not quite right.  The article remains silent on how much HSBC paid to customers as a result of their investigations.  If all customers were paid out their losses, then it has cost HSBC $23 million - and to my point, if paid out in full, that's chump change when compared against their profits.  Further, the allegation also includes that HSBC did nothing to protect customers (my main point in my previous posts), not just lack of support and giving them the run around.

And I was assuming that HSBC didn't pay the scammed customers, which is why I assume they didn't take the loss.  There is a lack of clarity in the reports, I hope the customers did get refunds from the bank.

I agree, giving customers the runaround isn't good practice, but there is no excuse at all for the banks not being proactive to protect customers and the bank's interest against scammers.  They need to be held accountable.   

[Kaynin]

12 hours ago, audiofeline said:

I agree, giving customers the runaround isn't good practice, but there is no excuse at all for the banks not being proactive to protect customers and the bank's interest against scammers.  They need to be held accountable.   

 

Exactly.  If the banks worked together and said we'll freeze the destination account when a scam incident is reported, and the holder of said account has to attend a branch to sort it out - imagine how much that would impact this offending.  They make me do this if they can't identify me over the phone, so it's not unreasonable, but they're not interested in addressing this issue nor genuine in their claims of protecting customers.