Beware this email fraud scam when buying a vehicle in South Africa

[|tera|]

Cash is king. It's quite easy to withdraw in a day or two if you transfer it between 10 accounts and banks typically don't even bother investigating once money has left the original account because it always leads to a dead end. And FICA is a joke. It's so easy to get around and with such a large informal housing base it's not even required to be fully implemented. Once they get to the person holding the account they have no info to give them.


Debit cards are easier to do and I don't know why you were even told it can't be done. It typically takes 2-3 days to be debited and then you also don't get paid immediately plus as long as the service is kept alive there's always additional money coming in.

Whether it's the norm or not that FICA is a joke, I still wouldn't rule it out. Yes, banks probably don't investigate on their own. In a case like this article I don't see why they wouldn't investigate if it's brought to their attention.

According to the article, the client and provider settled on 50/50 ownership of the problem. I don't understand how this could be done, without even seeing if the banks could find the culprit(s).

Also, regarding my case. The money was deducted from my account and reflected with the website I bought the product with. I contacted them as well and they also responded that the money will be reversed to my account. Due to explicit bad reviews and scam reports online, I then made sure to contact my bank to get the refund. I didn't trust them to have the product as described or that they would deliver it.

As I said, the bank initially said I couldn't do it. The reason is probability just uninformed consultants.

 

[supersunbird]

Whether it's the norm or not that FICA is a joke, I still wouldn't rule it out. Yes, banks probably don't investigate on their own. In a case like this article I don't see why they wouldn't investigate if it's brought to their attention.

According to the article, the client and provider settled on 50/50 ownership of the problem. I don't understand how this could be done, without even seeing if the banks could find the culprit(s).

Also, regarding my case. The money was deducted from my account and reflected with the website I bought the product with. I contacted them as well and they also responded that the money will be reversed to my account. Due to explicit bad reviews and scam reports online, I then made sure to contact my bank to get the refund. I didn't trust them to have the product as described or that they would deliver it.

As I said, the bank initially said I couldn't do it. The reason is probability just uninformed consultants.

It didn't take you many days to realise it, unlike this case, so move along with your narrative that the money can be reversed from that or any account.

And about investigating it, why this one and not all the other 1000s a month (might even be 10s of thousands a month)?

 

[Swa]

Whether it's the norm or not that FICA is a joke, I still wouldn't rule it out. Yes, banks probably don't investigate on their own. In a case like this article I don't see why they wouldn't investigate if it's brought to their attention.

According to the article, the client and provider settled on 50/50 ownership of the problem. I don't understand how this could be done, without even seeing if the banks could find the culprit(s).

Also, regarding my case. The money was deducted from my account and reflected with the website I bought the product with. I contacted them as well and they also responded that the money will be reversed to my account. Due to explicit bad reviews and scam reports online, I then made sure to contact my bank to get the refund. I didn't trust them to have the product as described or that they would deliver it.

As I said, the bank initially said I couldn't do it. The reason is probability just uninformed consultants.

It's not something that can be investigated. Even if you manage to do it where the money isn't withdrawn it would cost you way more than what you lost.

 

[|tera|]

It's not something that can be investigated. Even if you manage to do it where the money isn't withdrawn it would cost you way more than what you lost.

What is the reason for cost?
You pay your bank for services rendered. They should do it on your behalf.

 

[|tera|]

It didn't take you many days to realise it, unlike this case, so move along with your narrative that the money can be reversed from that or any account.

And about investigating it, why this one and not all the other 1000s a month (might even be 10s of thousands a month)?

I have no narrative. If the issue is because it is due to waiting days, then there must be a reason for it.

This thread isn't about 10000 other cases. The fact that they could be investigated as well doesn't change either.

Sounds like you just want me to shutup and not have a conversation about this.
In that case, don't reply to my posts.

 

[Swa]

What is the reason for cost?
You pay your bank for services rendered. They should do it on your behalf.

It takes hundreds of thousands to do a proper forensic investigation and examine the trail. Either you or the bank has to foot the bill for this and I can't see how it's reasonable to put the burden on them for something that isn't in their control.

 

[|tera|]

It takes hundreds of thousands to do a proper forensic investigation and examine the trail. Either you or the bank has to foot the bill for this and I can't see how it's reasonable to put the burden on them for something that isn't in their control.

Just to make it clear again. I'm talking about this. I have no agenda or narrative.

I don't see why a forensic investigation needs to be done?

A simple investigation to see where the money was originally transferred to and who the account owner is shouldn't be a big issue.

It's assumption and speculation to think this or any case would take tons of money to check into.

 

[Swa]

Just to make it clear again. I'm talking about this. I have no agenda or narrative.

I don't see why a forensic investigation needs to be done?

A simple investigation to see where the money was originally transferred to and who the account owner is shouldn't be a big issue.

It's assumption and speculation to think this or any case would take tons of money to check into.

So who does the investigation? Is that not a forensic expert?

Assuming they didn't withdraw the money where do you think it is? They won't just leave it in an account linked to them. These scams can be routed through hundreds of accounts and each one has to be manually vetted and examined often ending in an international one. It's not like they haven't tried before but it usually ends up in a dead end unless you pay big money.

 

[|tera|]

So who does the investigation? Is that not a forensic expert?

Assuming they didn't withdraw the money where do you think it is? They won't just leave it in an account linked to them. These scams can be routed through hundreds of accounts and each one has to be manually vetted and examined often ending in an international one. It's not like they haven't tried before but it usually ends up in a dead end unless you pay big money.

As I said. It's assumptions.
If you don't check, you won't know.
There isn't a guarantee that it was sent through 100 accounts or only one.
I don't think I'm making an invalid statement here. It's pretty logical.

 

[supersunbird]

I have no narrative. If the issue is because it is due to waiting days, then there must be a reason for it.

This thread isn't about 10000 other cases. The fact that they could be investigated as well doesn't change either.

Sounds like you just want me to shutup and not have a conversation about this.
In that case, don't reply to my posts.

You have been told already that its been days yet you go on about your case which wasn't days, the money is long transferred on and most likely withdrawn cash from the subsequent accounts, there would be no money to recover from the account it was initially transferred to. The reason for it being days, yes, the people involved on both side assumed it had been transferred to the right account and those can takes days to reflect, that's the reason.

This thread isn't about the other cases, but there are many and the police don't investigate them, unless they are a very big amount (even a R100 000 doesn't cut it). I would love if the police investigated each and every case like this one to the end, arresting and sentencing and jailing (the account mules too) all those involved. The banks can only investigate up to a point if they want to, they cannot arrest anyone.

As I said. It's assumptions.
If you don't check, you won't know.
There isn't a guarantee that it was sent through 100 accounts or only one.
I don't think I'm making an invalid statement here. It's pretty logical.

Well, we know how they operate, having read about it, and how we would do it if we were criminals, it would be a rank amateur scammer that leaves the money where it can be recovered by the originating bank.

 

[|tera|]

You have been told already that its been days yet you go on about your case which wasn't days, the money is long transferred on and most likely withdrawn cash from the subsequent accounts, there would be no money to recover from the account it was initially transferred to. The reason for it being days, yes, the people involved on both side assumed it had been transferred to the right account and those can takes days to reflect, that's the reason.

This thread isn't about the other cases, but there are many and the police don't investigate them, unless they are a very big amount (even a R100 000 doesn't cut it). I would love if the police investigated each and every case like this one to the end, arresting and sentencing and jailing (the account mules too) all those involved. The banks can only investigate up to a point if they want to, they cannot arrest anyone.



Well, we know how they operate, having read about it, and how we would do it if we were criminals, it would be a rank amateur scammer that leaves the money where it can be recovered by the originating bank.

I don't disagree with you said, except when you said I'm going on about my case. I am not going on about it and merely compared it to this case.
You asked a question about my case and I answered. It's hardly going on about it.

My personal view is that if this was my money, I would still attempt to get it checked into by the bank first, before making it a SAPS problem.

If I'm incorrect with my view then I accept it.

 

[Swa]

As I said. It's assumptions.
If you don't check, you won't know.
There isn't a guarantee that it was sent through 100 accounts or only one.
I don't think I'm making an invalid statement here. It's pretty logical.

It's not assumptions. The costs are known. These things were tried and they cost more than what they are worth. How are banks going to know which cases to follow? It would be a stupid criminal if they left it in an account where it could be gotten to and in that case it would be easy to recover but every time this is done the money is gone. In this case they even made both parties think the transaction was made so they got more time to do it.