Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • be very wary upon what you see being recently posted on here 😎 regarding KIH.... all is not what it seems...  
    • 1st - all my posts on CAG are made not only in reply to the specific issue the topic starter makes but also in a general matter to advise any future readers upon the related subject - here it is kings interhigh online school. KIH lets take this topic apart shall we so readers know the real situation and the real truth...and underline the correct way to deal with KIH. https://tinyurl.com/ycxb4fk7 Kings Interhigh Online School issues - Training and Apprenticeships - Consumer Action Group - but did not ever reply to the last post.  but the user then went around every existing topic here on CAG about KIH pointing to the above topic and the 'want' to make some form of group  promoting some  'class action' against KIH . then on the 2nd march this very topic this msg is in was created. all remarkably similar eh? all appear to be or state..they are in spain... ....as well as the earlier post flaunting their linkedin ID, (same profile picture) that might have slipped through via email before our admin killed it.., trying to give some kind of legitimacy to their 'credentials' of being 'an honest poster'....oh and some kind of 'zen' website using a .co.uk  address (when in spain- bit like the Chinese ebay sallers) they run ... and now we get the father of the bride ...no sorry...father of a child at the uk-based international school in question posting ...pretending to be not the 'other alf... do you really think people are that stupid..... ................... nope you never owed that in the 1st place... wake up you got had and grabbed the phone - oh no they are taking me to court under UK jurisdiction...and fell for every trick in the book that they would never ever put in writing that could be placed in front of a court operating under their stated uk jurisdiction wherever you live. T&C's are always challengeable under UK law this very site would not exist if it were not for the +£Bn's bank charges reclaiming from 2006> and latterly the +£Bn's of PPI reclaiming both directly stated in the banks' T&C's were they claimed they were legally enforceable ...not!! they lost big time... why? a waste of more money if you've not got a court claim....... why not use them for a good outcome...go reclaim that £1000 refundable deposit you got scammed out of . people please research very carefully ...you never know who any of these people are that are posting about kings interhigh and their 'stories' they could even be one of their online tutors or a shill . don't get taken in. dx      
    • @KingsParent thank you for sharing your experience.  I also tried contacting the CEO but didn’t get very far. Do you mind sharing his contact details?  kind regards   
    • Thank you Rocky for the clarifications though they did cause a problem at first since an original windsccreen ticket was  of a different breach some time before. The current windscreen ticket only states that you were parked there for 6 minutes which is just one minute over the minimum time allowed as the Consideration period. There is no further proof that you parked there for any longer than that is there? More photographs for example? Moving on to the Notice to Keeper-it does not comply with the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 Schedule 4. First there is no parking period mentioned on it. there is the time 20.25 stated which coincides with the W/S ticket but a parking period must have a starting and finishing time-just one time is insufficient to qualify as a parking  period as required in Section 9 [2] [a] . Are there any different photos shown on the NTK comapared to the w/s PCN? Not that that would make a difference as far as PoFA goes since the times required by PoFA should be on the NTK but at the moment Met only appear to show that you stayed there for 6 minutes. Another failure to comply with PoFA is at S9([2][e] where their wording should be "the creditor will (if all the applicable conditions under this Schedule are met) have the right to recover from the keeper so much of that amount as remains unpaid; ". You can see on your NTK that they misssed off the words in brackets. Met cannot therefore transfer the charge from the driver to the keeper. Only the driver is now liable. Then their is the discrepancy with the post code on the NTK  HA4 0EY which differs from the post code on the contract and the Post Office Postcode Finder which both list it as HA4 0FY. As you were not parked in HA4 0EY the breach did not occur. In the same way as if you were caught speeding in the Mall in London, yet you were charged with speeding in Pall mall London [a street nearby] you would be found not guilty since though you were speeding you were not speeding in Pall Mall. I bow to Eric's brother on his reasoning on post 12 re the electric bay abuse  That wording is not listed on their signs nor is there any mention on the contract of any electric charging points at all let alone who can park there or use them. He is quite right too that the entrance sign is merely an invitaion to treat it cannot form a contrct with motorists. Also the contract looks extremely  short no doubt there will be more when we see the full Witness statement. As it stands there is no confirmation from Standard Life [or Lift !] on the contract that Savills are able to act on their behalf. Also most contracts are signed at the end of the contract to prevent either side adding extra points. So their percentage  chance of winning their case would be somewhere between 0.01 and 0.02.    
    • Owners of older vehicles tell the BBC of their anger that their cars' apps will stop working.View the full article
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 160 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Pensioner Defrauded by bitcoin scammer by phone of a lot of money.


SOD'EM
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 133 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I hope this is in the right place.

My Auntie is 74 years old and is recovering from major surgery.

Although she is not stupid, she has done a stupid thing.

She received a phone call (mobile) from a nice sounding chap who was trying to get her to buy Bitcoin guaranteeing a profit. He phoned every day and gained her trust.

She eventually parted with £250, but within 2 days he rang her back and told her that her investment had more than doubled. He got her to download Anydesk to her phone, and he took it from there. He put £650 in her account and she was really happy.

He persuaded her to reinvest, but to leave the money in the account and he will do the rest.

To cut a long story short, he has taken out 4 large separate loans in her name from sainsbury's, mbna, zopa and nuvuna totalling £70,000.

The minute the funds for the loans were in her account he transferred them out to somewhere else. She now stands to lose her house because of it.

She banks with Natwest, but they are not interested at the moment. She also contacted Action Fraud and the Police and they say they can't help.

Is there anything else she can do?

She lives alone, and after surgery had to rehome her beloved pet, so she was in a very vulnerable situation.

I can't believe she fell for this, but I promised her I would help as best I can, and the people on here have been a massive help in the past. 

Thank You.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, 

 

Please can you tell me if she filed a complaint with Natwest? If so have they issued a final response letter?

Also you tell me he took out the loan in her name? Just to confirm she did not apply for it herself following his advice?

In terms of being able to help - in short I would say hopefully yes

Also dates for all of the events would be helpful (such as date he called, date each loan was taken etc)

 

 

Edited by jk2054

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • dx100uk changed the title to Pensioner Defrauded by bitcoin scammer by phone of a lot of money.

She told Natwest what had happened, but I'm not sure about a final response letter until tomorrow.

Up to now, as far as I am aware, they just told her to contact Action Fraud, who don't seem to want to help at all.

He applied for the loans without her knowing a thing about any of them. But he could do this because he had full

control of her mobile phone, and she didn't realise.

All Loans were taken out around June.

I will get dates as soon as possible. I know they will be important in the long run, but just for now I need to find out,

and hopefully reassure her there is something that can be done. She's devastated to say the least.

Thanks for your reply.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

if the loans were all funnelled through her Natwest Account and then withdrawn they (natwest ARE responsible under money laundering/Anti Fraud Acts.

these were tightened up upon a couple of years ago and they should have acted to prevent such, esp where there is now high level transactional history

even barclays freeze peoples accounts for +£5k going in/out now.

she is subject to identity fraud 

sadly and i'm not being funny here but, a confused/scammed oap and you are not the best mediums for accurate 3rd party Chinese whispers posts regarding info.

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey!

Thanks for that information. 

Firstly, has she contacted sainsbury's, mbna, zopa and nuvuna to explain what's happened? If not, she should do this ASAP. 

How long between the loans being paid into her account and being transferred to the scammers account? instantly, days, weeks etc.

You've told me she banks with natwest, just so I'm clear here, there were NO loans from natwest, only the loans from sainsburys, mbna, zopa and nuvuna were paid into her natwest acc is this right?

Also, you say they aren't interested, did she make a complaint? There should be a letter from southend on sea from a team called fraud complaints and she'll need the ref from that. can you check she has this? if she does then take it to the FOS. They usually uphold id fraud complaints. 

which remote access software was used? some will give you ip connections upon request with a police ref

  • Like 1

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hiya, any updates?

 

Don't want to push you but FOS are pretty tight on timescales for reporting fraudulent loans once recognised so would be helpful to know if that's been done.

  • Like 1

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks jk2054. The Software she downloaded was Anydesk (it's what most Scammers use nowadays).

She had no loans from Natwest, just the 4 I mentioned.

2 for £20k and 2 for £15k.

Her Bank account must have been getting monitored all the time because all the loans paid into her account and then transferred out were over 2 days.

The Police and Natwest told her to get in touch with Action Fraud, and this is the letter they replied with.

 

 

 

You recently made a report which we recorded under xxxxxxxxx

Home Office Counting Rules set out the circumstances under which we can record a crime and on this occasion the matter you reported to us cannot be classified as a police recorded crime.

Home Office Counting Rules for Fraud and Cyber Dependent Crime can be found online at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/counting-rules-for-recorded-crime.

You have indicated within your report that the misuse of your personal details or that of a company trading style played a part in the matter you are reporting.

The use of another person’s identity, often referred to as identity theft, is not a police recordable crime. Where the details are used to obtain goods or services, we can only record a crime on behalf of the person or organisation which was defrauded as a result of the misuse of an identity.

An example of a situation in which we could record a crime would be where details were used to obtain credit, the use of which left the provider of credit with a financial loss. In these circumstances we would record a crime for the provider of the credit and look to establish if there was scope for the matter to be investigated.

Whilst the misuse of your identity cannot be classified as a police recorded crime, we do recognise that identity theft can cause significant distress and inconvenience. For advice and support, please see www.actionfraud.police.uk/fraud_protection/identity_fraud.

What happens next?

Whilst we have not recorded this matter as a crime, we will still make use of the information you have provided. Information reports are utilised to enrich the overall intelligence picture which assists with the formulation and refinement of prevention strategies.

If you have any queries regarding this letter please visit www.actionfraud.police.uk/FAQ. If you would like more information on how to protect yourself from fraud and cyber crime, please see the guidance at www.actionfraud.police.uk/support_for_you. You can also register on our partner website www.actionfraudalert.co.uk to receive email alerts about new and emerging crime types.

Thank you again for taking the time to report this matter.

All transfers to the Scammers account were sent to a Chase account in the amounts of £20k x 3 and 1 x £10k. 

Someone from the same company 

NUXTRADE.COM

NuxTrade is the platform of choice for the modern trader. NuxTrade is where trading crypto, currency, and more, feels good to everybody. It’s that well done.

actually tried ringing her 3 days ago, trying the same scam. She thinks it may have even been the same bloke.

I'm confused about the Action Fraud reply because her details have obviously been used to obtain credit. She's very confused with all this

and it's hard getting info regarding phone calls made by her. It seems to me that Action Fraud are not aware that her details have been used to obtain credit.

I'm wondering if I can ring them on her behalf using the reference number they gave me.

 

 

 

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sadly anydesk wont be helpful here 

so I’d say first report to all the loan companies they were taken out without her permission in her identity. explain surgery delayed her notifying you and thus you notifying them

then complain to natwest they should have done more to block the payments. It was irregular for her and they didnt ask her to call them. New payee large numbers etc should have been flagged. DX mentioned a liability for natwest above so be sure to read that if you didnt already

You said natwest referred her to action fraud so send an email to natwest with the action fraud number and explain reported to action fraud and thats the ref they gave you when you reported it

my guess is almost all will come back and say not their issue.

My advice would then be 

CEOmail all of the banks/loan companies to try to get them to sort

Then take unsolved ones to FOS and tell them that it is urgent situation and she may lose her house.


FOS will treat it as a priority case and it should be investigated within a month.

 

Normally FOS are very good at upholding falling victim to scam complaints but some banks write them off. 

 

Others may advise differently, but the main route will likely be the same , loan company + bank complaints then FOS.

 

If you need help with that or need help with responses banks gave then please post here

  • Like 1

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have contacted Action Fraud on her behalf through their website, and they have sent me the exact same reply. They are not treating it as a crime.

The letter states that it can only be classed as a crime if her details have been used to obtain CREDIT. Is 4 loans totalling £70k not CREDIT?

I put all the details of the loans in my report to them, yet they still come back with this pathetic reply.

Fuming is not the word.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

and a loan is not credit eh? :crazy::crazy:

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I need Action Fraud to say that a crime has been committed. Then we can contact all the other companies involved. If Action Fraud say no crime has been committed, then I can't see anybody else listening.

It's clearly a Crime, and I need them to acknowledge that.

I think I will ring them

instead.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's great, but I can't see how any of the companies involved will take it seriously if Action Fraud can't even acknowledge a crime has been committed.

According to Action Fraud, taking loans of £70k out in somebody else's name is not a crime. Go figure 😕

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

that person did not do it, it was identity fraud.

natwest are responsible here under the lack of their application of the anti fraud rules . ...IMHO FOS will eat them for breakfast.

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks DX. and JK. As Natwest were trying to pass the buck, she ended up putting the phone down on them (not very clever I know).

I've told her to make an appointment with them, and I will go with her.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you write with a formal complain that they have broken the Money Laundering rules and the Anti Fraud rules that they MUST abide by under the FCA regulations and bcobs etc etc.

they allowed £70k of external loans to pass into and immediately out of account within a matter of days without questioning the account holder once in person.

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Got an appointment with Natwest tomorrow. I will keep you updated afterwards. He opened a Chase account in her name to transfer all the money.

The statements show that it's gone to a business (Xshop Ou xc02 68037526 gbp).

Also, new reply from Action Fraud.

I am sorry to hear you have been a victim of crime. Thank you for taking the time to report to Action Fraud. Your report has been sent to the National Fraud Intelligence Bureau (NFIB) for review.

Experts at the NFIB will examine the information you provide. Where possible, the information is also matched against other available data in order to enrich and corroborate the details of the fraud.

An assessment will be made as to whether there are viable lines of enquiry that would enable a law enforcement body, such as the police service, to investigate. The NFIB aim to provide you with an update on your report within 28 days.

Please be assured that by contacting us you are giving the police vital information they need to protect you and others. The information you have provided may be used to disrupt criminal activity and inform prevention advice and campaigns.

You should keep safe any evidence which you feel may be important. We continuously assess the content of individual and linked crime reports, if you set up an online account, you can use this to add additional information.

That's bit better I suppose.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m sorry and I feel bad for cont going back to it.

You only want a ref number from AF, that’s it.

They’re useless after they give ref

  • Like 1

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SOD'EM said:

Got an appointment with Natwest tomorrow.

is this in person, phone WHY?

dx

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

WHY = WHAT HAVE YOU.

record the conversation on your phone they cannot refuse

and dont hold back

they HAVe broken just about every rule in the 2 codes i quoted.

and sending an email or txt to the same phone/device is not a good enough check to see if its actually the account holder.

they should have contacted her in person by PHONE and spoken to her each time.

money laundering rules !!

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Natwest have started a full investigation, but stated that they think they have just been used a Mules, so may not be responsible (I don't really know what they mean by that).

All 4 Loan Companies, have put the accounts on hold until Natwest have finished their investigation.

Letters to FOS should be done this week.

 

 

If all else fails, kick them where it hurts and SOD'EM;)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thank you for the update

firstly for your assurance natwest did break the rules and they are responsible

they are doing their usual not our fault approach

did they give you a timescale for their "investigation"

also bit confused on the bit where you said you are writing to the FOS this week - You'll need natwest to finish before you can appeal to FOS. Also for FOS use their online form not post one, their post one is super slow so you'll need to put that contact on hold unfortunately

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

Have we helped you today?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group The National Consumer Service

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...