Authentication of forwarded Natwest Email required

damnjet

SeanG79 wrote: »

If your "friend" is a mortgage advisor, one would assume that even if the email was fake, he would have closely copied an email previously received for an applicant he had assisted?

Why don't you just ask to view his inbox? Could save yourself a lot of trouble and frustration...

There are now other avenues of inquiries developing and i am trying to be as diplomatic as possible

If push comes to shove and it will have to be by some sort of legal means which i wish to avoid unless absolutely necessary

Hard lesson learnt

Candyapple

Given that this e-mail is dated Dec 2014, what's happened in the year since? Has this person paid you back anything / what excuses have they come out with?

Did you really lend them £35k without any form of paperwork written up at the very least? :eek:

damnjet

Candyapple wrote: »

Given that this e-mail is dated Dec 2014, what's happened in the year since? Has this person paid you back anything / what excuses have they come out with?

Did you really lend them £35k without any form of paperwork written up at the very least? :eek:

No, never loaned the full amount but still a sizeable five figure number of which i have received back very little.

Excuses are always family issues and things outside their control

rtho782

In the same way you say you are "not at liberty to disclose" more info, so will Natwest.

It's not even relevant. The purported natwest email makes no difference to your case no matter if genuine or fake. There is no law against me lying to you about how much money I have, am about to have, am borrowing, have been offered, etc. There is no rule against a debtor asking for more time because they have money coming in.

If there is a fraud case to answer, it's between him an Natwest as he has used their logo and held himself out to be them. It will have zero impact on the matter between yourself and the debtor.

Natwest will not (quite rightly) release any info. Even if they did, it would make no difference to you from a legal perspective.

damnjet

rtho782 wrote: »

In the same way you say you are "not at liberty to disclose" more info, so will Natwest.

It's not even relevant. The purported natwest email makes no difference to your case no matter if genuine or fake. There is no law against me lying to you about how much money I have, am about to have, am borrowing, have been offered, etc. There is no rule against a debtor asking for more time because they have money coming in.

If there is a fraud case to answer, it's between him an Natwest as he has used their logo and held himself out to be them. It will have zero impact on the matter between yourself and the debtor.

Natwest will not (quite rightly) release any info. Even if they did, it would make no difference to you from a legal perspective.

Not really, i am not at liberty to release any more information at this time because of the possibility of legal action being jeopardised., i have no clue who could be reading this thread.

What i have learnt from this is how easy it is for scamming fraudsters and generally dishonest people are effectively protected by current banking practices that have few if any procedures in place for people to make legitimate concerns regarding fraud other than to go to the police.

As for myself i have now confronted my debtor with all the discrepancies that they have been telling me, basically told them i think they are lying pieces of !!!! and of my plans to proceed with legal action

CHR15

damnjet wrote: »

As for myself i have now confronted my debtor with all the discrepancies that they have been telling me, basically told them i think they are lying pieces of !!!! and of my plans to proceed with legal action

That's what you should have done in the first place instead of thinking you are Judge Rinder assuming you can summons the bank and individuals to be interrogated by you (apart from calling him abusive names of course).

Gaz83

damnjet wrote: »

What i have learnt from this is how easy it is for scamming fraudsters and generally dishonest people are effectively protected by current banking practices that have few if any procedures in place for people to make legitimate concerns regarding fraud other than to go to the police.

But they do have procedures for people to make legitimate concerns regarding fraud.

You just don't like the fact that after you've made legitimate concerns that they won't involve you in their investigation.

You're not the Sweeney.

damnjet

Gaz83 wrote: »

But they do have procedures for people to make legitimate concerns regarding fraud.

You just don't like the fact that after you've made legitimate concerns that they won't involve you in their investigation.

You're not the Sweeney.

Please elaborate then how one go's about it from a 3rd party perspective without involving the police

jonesMUFCforever

damnjet wrote: »

Please elaborate then how one go's about it from a 3rd party perspective without involving the police

You can't - that is the point a lot are making to you.

Gaz83

damnjet wrote: »

Please elaborate then how one go's about it from a 3rd party perspective without involving the police

You are missing the point spectacularly.

What you're wanting is to report the matter to the financial institution and them to involve you in the procedure of what happens next. That's been explained to you countless times. If the institution feel someone is trying to defraud them, that is between them and the person carrying out the potential fraudulent activity. They're not going to invite you in for cosy little chats and explain to you how their investigation is going.

It's also been explained to you time and time again that if you believe someone is committing fraud against you, you can notify the police. But again, they will not involve you in any investigation.