BEKO 32WLK530HID Silver 32 inch LCD TV [graded stock] - £100

withabix

This must have been a well prepared scam.

They have been taking orders as far back as April this year (if not before) and would appear to have been supplying goods initially from other suppliers using the money which was coming in from buyers.

They built up a level of trust and got themselves 'featured' on bargain-hunter websites before gearing up to take a large number of orders, all for delivery in late November and then scarpered with the cash.

Paypal and Google have been duped as well - good luck in trying to get your money back from them - Paypal are almost as bad as scammers themselves after all!

wendy05

this is worth a read ... http://www.hotukdeals.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1255742&postcount=2114


"Adias Varsukas......... is this his real name because when you say it quick it comes out as..... had-us-for-suckers."

pieandapint_2

I posted this somewhere else but thought it may be of use here too!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/working_lunch/4260806.stm

Informative website from BBC Working Lunch regarding Visa Debit Chargebacks

It's common knowledge that consumers can claim from their credit card provider in the event of a problem with their purchase.

But less well known is an obscure Visa rule which means that debit card transactions are often covered too.

Called 'chargeback', the process has been agreed to by all banks issuing Visa debit cards.

Regards
Dave

borosteve_2

If there is a silver lining to this cloud it must be that it is looking less and less likely that Poppycat will be sued for defamation.

slimcoley

you could always get your cheap tvs here
www.ygftc.com

TBeckett100

james2005 wrote: »

http://www.musthave100.co.uk/index.php?target=products&product_id=16467


what a bargain

Got to be "worst post" of the month,

withabix

slimcoley wrote: »

you could always get your cheap tvs here
www.ygftc.com

HOPEFULLY NOBODY WILL BE GULLIBLE ENOUGH TO DO THIS!!!

Poppycat

I never said anything that wasnt already available in the public domain nor did I actually state this was a con mealy implied things aren't always what they seem as in my post 25

In fact what showman said in post 27 "Paranoid Poppy strikes again"

I just had a feeling something wasn't quite right, it was a feeling that was all I rather be proved wrong because I hate people being duped that why I gave warning as did some others too.


Thanks Steve for the PM

borosteve wrote: »

If there is a silver lining to this cloud it must be that it is looking less and less likely that Poppycat will be sued for defamation.

showman36

Yes, Poppy you were right

Poppycat

I read your post above for a change showman. I just add I rather have been wrong though it gives me no pleasure at all nor do I want to gloat I would hate to be duped and I hope people do get there money back.

I will concede that it appears that the staff has also been conned by looks of it

I hope they get this guy, but looks like they are clever at covering there tracks and seems a well planned con.