The Lemon Fool

Details a a little sketchy as yet, but a friend of mine was having some building work done, the contractors email was hacked, and an email sent from the hacker purporting to be from the builder requesting a deposit into a Barclays account. Friend sends the money. Builder says no money recieved, is shown bank transfer and email, and they realise what's happened. Money has been sent to fraudsters account, not the builders.

How would you suggest she approaches this ?

Very similar to this story ...

[sorry for the lack of a proper link - the boards currently won't allow me to post links]

Daytona wrote:How would you suggest she approaches this ?

No suggestions about how to get the money back, but if paying a large sum by electronic banking, it must make sense to test the waters by paying a small sum and getting confirmation of its safe receipt.

Here's the proper link now ... https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/mar/04/fraud-scam-email-barclays-lloyds

AllYourBase wrote:Here's the proper link now ... https://www.theguardian.com/money/2016/mar/04/fraud-scam-email-barclays-lloyds

I have heard of a case where it was somebody's solicitor who was impersonated, and the deposit for a house purchase ended up in the wrong hands.

My solicitor recently had his email hacked and fake messages were being sent out in his name. He was smart enough to detect this and to notify his clients quickly so no harm was done, as far as I know.

Daytona wrote:Details a a little sketchy as yet, but a friend of mine was having some building work done, the contractors email was hacked, and an email sent from the hacker purporting to be from the builder requesting a deposit into a Barclays account. Friend sends the money. Builder says no money recieved, is shown bank transfer and email, and they realise what's happened. Money has been sent to fraudsters account, not the builders.

How would you suggest she approaches this ?

It is most likely too late, as the fraudsters will not have left the monies there for any time whatsoever, but has the friend contacted the bank concerned?

She should also report the fraud to ActionFraud (the Police) via http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/report_fraud (which should take you or her to http://www.actionfraud.police.uk/report ... -questions)

That having been said, it is likely the "deposit" is lost.

I had a warning via email from Devon and Cornwall police about this today .

This is a message sent via Devon and Cornwall Alert. This information has been sent on behalf of Action Fraud (National Fraud Intelligence Bureau)

Payment diversion alert
Fraudsters are emailing members of the public who are expecting to make a payment for property repairs. The fraudsters will purport to be a tradesman who has recently completed work at the property and use a similar email address to that of the genuine tradesman. They will ask for funds to be transferred via bank transfer. Once payment is made the victims of the scam soon realise they have been deceived when the genuine tradesman requests payment for their service[/i]

PinkDalek wrote:She should also report the fraud to ActionFraud

Good luck with that. The chances of you obtaining any useful help from them are about 10,000 to 1 unless it's over about £100,000 that's involved, which I'm assuming it isn't. The vast majority of online fraud is just ignored by the Plod.

I was involved in a slightly similar situation a couple of yars ago, though it only involved the princely sum of £205. If you want to read the saga it's here - http://boards.fool.co.uk/ck-on-a-missio ... e#13023765

In that case I succeeded in obtaining repayment, though the bank said they were doing so on a `goodwill' basis, i.e. without admitting any legal liability.

However, it's worth trying. Sadly, it's generally only people who kick up a fuss who get compensated.

If they refuse to pay up then it's always worth trying the media. Tony Hetherington in the Mail - http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/colu ... unday.html or Jessica Gorst-Williams in the Telegraph - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/pers ... graph.html are both quite effective, though I personally find it quite vomit-inducing how large companies who have fobbed off perefctly legitimate grievances for months suddenly decide to cough up once the media get onto them, particlarly when they send a bunch of flowers or a box of chocolates to show what nice people they really are!

The ActionFraud report suggestion was for their records and I know your views on them from your prior posts elsewhere.

I hope you are not suggesting no-one should report fraud to them. Whether or not they investigate is not wholly relevant to their intelligence gathering process.

Agreed on your other suggestions, of course.

PinkDalek wrote:I hope you are not suggesting no-one should report fraud to them.

No, it obviously can't do any harm, and I suppose the reports may have some vague statistical value.

The point I was making is that their name implies that they will actually take some action to help a fraud victim, whereas the chances of the report ever being investigated. let alone prosecuted, are virtually zero.

It pi**es me off that people who trust the police and the government dutifully fill in their fraud reports in the naive expectation that they will receive some help, when they won't. I've had several clients and friends who were victims of fraud, and they all reported the crime to ActionFraud.

Every one of them believed that the police actually cared about their case - which was in every case serious, at least to them, and in some cases devastating - and that the police would do something to help them.

In all too many cases they heard nothing at all.

For these people to discover that the police basically couldn't be bothered was adding insult to injury.

It would be far more honest, and cause less distress to vulnerable people if they just told the truth - "If you are the victim of fraud it's extremely unlikely that you will receive any help at all from the police, and it's virtually certain that you will never see any of your money again."

Ironically, ActionFraud might well be described as a fraud on the public.

Clitheroekid wrote:

PinkDalek wrote:I hope you are not suggesting no-one should report fraud to them.

No, it obviously can't do any harm, and I suppose the reports may have some vague statistical value.

The point I was making is that their name implies that they will actually take some action to help a fraud victim, whereas the chances of the report ever being investigated. let alone prosecuted, are virtually zero. ...

Yes, I do understand your concern and we've had this discussion briefly before https://web.archive.org/web/20160513104 ... sort=whole where my conclusion was it appeared to be down to viable lines of enquiry and a matter of resources. If people don't report fraud then the stats will be even more worthless and I imagine might result in a reduction in those limited resources.

In view of the recent topic drift mention both on here and at the "Biscuit Bar" I'll stop there, especially as I know full well our respective hearts are in the right place (hopefully) and further discussion on this aspect won't help the OP's friend.

Clitheroekid wrote:I was involved in a slightly similar situation a couple of yars ago, though it only involved the princely sum of £205. If you want to read the saga it's here - http://boards.fool.co.uk/ck-on-a-missio ... e#13023765

Many thanks Clitheroekid, that was precisley the kind of information I was hoping for

My experiences of InactionFraud, both on this issue and previously, match yours.

I'll let you know the outcome.

Clitheroekid wrote:I was involved in a slightly similar situation a couple of yars ago, though it only involved the princely sum of £205. If you want to read the saga it's here - http://boards.fool.co.uk/ck-on-a-missio ... e#13023765

As that link may cease to be valid within a few weeks and is well worth having on record, here's an archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20140801052111/http://boards.fool.co.uk/ck-on-a-mission-13023765.aspx?sort=whole

Gengulphus

There was a recent case which received quite a bit of publicity on Moneybox and in The Times whereby it was eventually proved that the fraudster's bank had been negligent in opening the account and the victim received full recompense.

Regards,

Leither.

Leither wrote:There was a recent case which received quite a bit of publicity on Moneybox and in The Times whereby it was eventually proved that the fraudster's bank had been negligent in opening the account and the victim received full recompense.

Given that the endlessly tedious AML regulations impose significant identity requirements on anyone opening an account, it seems to me that any Bank that doesn't perform this due diligence effectively should be on the hook for any losses that are the result of that account opening.

Is it really that easy for a Russian hacker to open an account at your local NatWest, and then close it a week later?