Recent experiences withdrawing a few thousand in cash

BooJewels

MattMattMattUK said:

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

I've seen you post this attitude before and to be honest, I personally find it quite offensive.  My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.  By the time they'd got her to go to the bank to take out the money she was a wreck.  She was 92, 4'7" tall and frail and they held her on a call on her mobile in her pocket the entire journey from her house, walking to the bank, standing at the counter and until she was home. They said they were in a car watching her and presumably looking at street view, even described where they were parked and that they could see her.

The bank did do their due diligence and tried very hard to prevent her from taking that cash out - but they'd given her a fully rehearsed tale to tell as to why she wanted it - which involved me and a controlling husband and getting away money.  None of us hold the bank liable and we certainly didn't expect them to cover the loss and didn't make any sort of claim to that effect - their conduct at the time and later was fabulous.  But please don't call victims like this stupid - these dirty rotten scammers got their money through nothing short of menaces.  I feel physically sick when I think what they put her through - I would have given them the dosh myself to have prevented her going through that, in a heartbeat.

kaMelo

BooJewels said:

MattMattMattUK said:

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

I've seen you post this attitude before and to be honest, I personally find it quite offensive.  My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.  By the time they'd got her to go to the bank to take out the money she was a wreck.  She was 92, 4'7" tall and frail and they held her on a call on her mobile in her pocket the entire journey from her house, walking to the bank, standing at the counter and until she was home. They said they were in a car watching her and presumably looking at street view, even described where they were parked and that they could see her.

The bank did do their due diligence and tried very hard to prevent her from taking that cash out - but they'd given her a fully rehearsed tale to tell as to why she wanted it - which involved me and a controlling husband and getting away money.  None of us hold the bank liable and we certainly didn't expect them to cover the loss and didn't make any sort of claim to that effect - their conduct at the time and later was fabulous.  But please don't call victims like this stupid - these dirty rotten scammers got their money through nothing short of menaces.  I feel physically sick when I think what they put her through - I would have given them the dosh myself to have prevented her going through that, in a heartbeat.

No one is trying to downplay the impact being scammed has on people, from feeling foolish to being scared these are real and of course they deserve support.

But the fact remains that every type of bank scam reaches a point where alarm bells should be ringing loudly. The consequences of some people failing to hear them is that carrying out banking transactions are now much more onerous for everyone

GeoffTF

BooJewels said:

My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.

Why did she talk to a cold caller who claimed to be from a courier? She should have hung up straight away. Talking to the cold caller for 2+ days beggars belief. Calling her stupid would not be not helpful, but if people behave like that, it is not easy to help them.

Bigwheels1111

Trust nobody, is the simple answer.

BooJewels

GeoffTF said:

BooJewels said:

My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.

Why did she talk to a cold caller who claimed to be from a courier? She should have hung up straight away. Talking to the cold caller for 2+ days beggars belief. Calling her stupid would not be not helpful, but if people behave like that, it is not easy to help them.

Thank you for your kind and supportive words.  He wasn't from a courier company - that's the type of scam it is - in that at the end of it, they send a courier to collect the cash.  She spoke to two people - one claiming to be from the fraud department of her bank and the other claiming to be a Detective Chief Inspector in the fraud department of the county constabulary.  The Police obviously investigated and I got a call back after a few weeks with a progress report - they'd taken 18 people in the county on the same day, they'd traced the phones used to a specific street in London and said it was one of the most complicated frauds of that nature they'd seen - with elements that they'd not seen before.

BooJewels

kaMelo said:

BooJewels said:

MattMattMattUK said:

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

I've seen you post this attitude before and to be honest, I personally find it quite offensive.  My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.  By the time they'd got her to go to the bank to take out the money she was a wreck.  She was 92, 4'7" tall and frail and they held her on a call on her mobile in her pocket the entire journey from her house, walking to the bank, standing at the counter and until she was home. They said they were in a car watching her and presumably looking at street view, even described where they were parked and that they could see her.

The bank did do their due diligence and tried very hard to prevent her from taking that cash out - but they'd given her a fully rehearsed tale to tell as to why she wanted it - which involved me and a controlling husband and getting away money.  None of us hold the bank liable and we certainly didn't expect them to cover the loss and didn't make any sort of claim to that effect - their conduct at the time and later was fabulous.  But please don't call victims like this stupid - these dirty rotten scammers got their money through nothing short of menaces.  I feel physically sick when I think what they put her through - I would have given them the dosh myself to have prevented her going through that, in a heartbeat.

[snip]

But the fact remains that every type of bank scam reaches a point where alarm bells should be ringing loudly. The consequences of some people failing to hear them is that carrying out banking transactions are now much more onerous for everyone

But it also rather depends on your sphere of experience as to what is credible or not.  My aunt didn't know anything about the internet - Street View must have been used (I went on it later myself and talked to her over the phone and described the scene etc. to illustrate how they'd done that) and the very concept of that would be alien to her.  There will be a point in the future where certain types of fraud won't be possible, or will evolve, because the people who could be taken in by it are literally a dying breed.  My aunt (born in the 1920s) was of an era where she trusted if someone said they were Police or Bank Managers and would feel obligated to do what they asked of her.  

LHW99

These s*ds that target the elderly and vulnerable need some kind of severe sentence that actually makes them think, rather than the slap on the wrist and low level of fines compared to what they are pocketing (IMO).

I used to tell my mum to say to anyone phoning that she told them she'd have to ask her son / daughter because they always dealt with that, and to put down the phone and to keep the chain on the door if anyone came she didn't know. Luckily she was sufficiently compos (and possibly life experienced) to realise and do it. If you are old and vulnerable that isn't guaranteed, unfortunately.

MattMattMattUK

BooJewels said:

MattMattMattUK said:

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

I've seen you post this attitude before and to be honest, I personally find it quite offensive. 

That is your prerogative, but the reality is most cases involve people willingly handing over/transferring their money to a third party, then expecting the bank, which means means it's other customers and shareholders, having to pay out for that.

BooJewels said:
My late aunt...

That is an unfortunate story, but it does fall back to the pattern of a confidence trick, the criminals convince someone that they are a person who can be trusted and then get that person to hand over money/goods.

BooJewels said:

GeoffTF said:

BooJewels said:

My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.

Why did she talk to a cold caller who claimed to be from a courier? She should have hung up straight away. Talking to the cold caller for 2+ days beggars belief. Calling her stupid would not be not helpful, but if people behave like that, it is not easy to help them.

Thank you for your kind and supportive words.  He wasn't from a courier company - that's the type of scam it is - in that at the end of it, they send a courier to collect the cash.  She spoke to two people - one claiming to be from the fraud department of her bank and the other claiming to be a Detective Chief Inspector in the fraud department of the county constabulary.  The Police obviously investigated and I got a call back after a few weeks with a progress report - they'd taken 18 people in the county on the same day, they'd traced the phones used to a specific street in London and said it was one of the most complicated frauds of that nature they'd seen - with elements that they'd not seen before.

Those kind of schemes are not that uncommon now, the scale of the operation might be large, the logistics of organising the different couriers etc. shows a reasonable degree of planning and organisation and that seems to be more and more prevalent amongst criminals gangs, they find something that works and they scale it up, after they have got a chunk of money they then shut down that operation and move onto the next, the money gone (out of the country), the SIM cards binned etc. Some of it is done with cash, potentially targeted at an older demographic, the rest are push payments, where the money is transferred through a series of mules until it leaves the country, is spent or withdrawn as cash. 

BooJewels said:

kaMelo said:

BooJewels said:

MattMattMattUK said:

GazzaBloom said:

Maybe I'm being cynical but I suggest the banks are stepping up their diligence to reduce the amount they lose to repaying customers back who have be defrauded. Self interest rather than genuine care for their customers plight.

Either way the end result is that the cost of some people's stupidity is currently passed onto those who are sensible enough not to throw their money away. Because of that I am glad the banks are introducing enough due checks that they are absolved of responsibility, because that absolves the likes of you and I from having to pay for the consequences. 

I've seen you post this attitude before and to be honest, I personally find it quite offensive.  My late aunt was done for £6k in a courier scam and she wasn't stupid, she was terrified.  They tied up her phone to prevent her calling out and spoke to her for many hours over a 2 day+ period.  By the time they'd got her to go to the bank to take out the money she was a wreck.  She was 92, 4'7" tall and frail and they held her on a call on her mobile in her pocket the entire journey from her house, walking to the bank, standing at the counter and until she was home. They said they were in a car watching her and presumably looking at street view, even described where they were parked and that they could see her.

The bank did do their due diligence and tried very hard to prevent her from taking that cash out - but they'd given her a fully rehearsed tale to tell as to why she wanted it - which involved me and a controlling husband and getting away money.  None of us hold the bank liable and we certainly didn't expect them to cover the loss and didn't make any sort of claim to that effect - their conduct at the time and later was fabulous.  But please don't call victims like this stupid - these dirty rotten scammers got their money through nothing short of menaces.  I feel physically sick when I think what they put her through - I would have given them the dosh myself to have prevented her going through that, in a heartbeat.

[snip]

But the fact remains that every type of bank scam reaches a point where alarm bells should be ringing loudly. The consequences of some people failing to hear them is that carrying out banking transactions are now much more onerous for everyone

But it also rather depends on your sphere of experience as to what is credible or not.  My aunt didn't know anything about the internet - Street View must have been used (I went on it later myself and talked to her over the phone and described the scene etc. to illustrate how they'd done that) and the very concept of that would be alien to her.  There will be a point in the future where certain types of fraud won't be possible, or will evolve, because the people who could be taken in by it are literally a dying breed.  My aunt (born in the 1920s) was of an era where she trusted if someone said they were Police or Bank Managers and would feel obligated to do what they asked of her.  

This is where education is important, but then banks are heavy on this, every one time code says not to share with anyone, including the police, there are warning leaflets sent out with statements, there are messages on online banking, the bank staff make these things clear for large cash withdrawals etc. The protections are there, the information is regularly and clearly communicated, I am not really sure what more can be done if people ignore that, short of removing their ability to control their own finances. 

Now I do agree that the police need more resources, the police have not recovered from the Conservatives cutting 20k police officers, worse still they lost a lot of experienced officers at that point, so whilst the officer numbers are now the same, the skills and experience are still lower overall. The population has also grown 8% over that period, the police have to complete more admin than they did in 2010 and the reality is many parts of crime are totally ignored, with the police only able to adequately respond to the most serious instances. The UK has around 150k police officers, estimates of the requirement to adequately deal with crime, law and order place that number at 280-340k, depending on what level of crime we are willing to accept, so we have less than half the number of police officers we need, the ones we do have are under resourced and they are dealing with increasingly violent, often international criminals, who disappear with the proceeds of their crime relatively quickly. The prison estate is also far too small, too lax and too "soft", with sentencing too lenient because of that. 

What that has lead to, at least for low and medium level financial crime, is the burden being passed to the banks, but also the oddity that the banks are required in many cases to insulate the victim against the impact of their own actions. 

mongoose2009

very soon you wont be able to do any transaction in cash over £1000 under an circumstance

they will SAY its about fruads and scams but really

its all about getting you used to the CBDC and a cashless society

if you dont toe the line youll be locked out of society

all the CB have put papers out about it its in the plan so not a conspracy theory

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/the-digital-pound

The digital pound

We are looking at the case for issuing a digital pound. This type of money is known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC)

eskbanker

mongoose2009 said:

very soon you wont be able to do any transaction in cash over £1000 under an circumstance

they will SAY its about fruads and scams but really

its all about getting you used to the CBDC and a cashless society

if you dont toe the line youll be locked out of society

all the CB have put papers out about it its in the plan so not a conspracy theory

https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/the-digital-pound

The digital pound

We are looking at the case for issuing a digital pound. This type of money is known as a central bank digital currency (CBDC)

It is a conspiracy theory to make the leap from CBDC investigations to a cashless society 🙄

The BoE has been looking into CBDC for ages - their paper celebrates its fourth birthday today - and the current page includes:

If we introduced it, it would not replace cash. We know being able to use cash is important for many people. That’s why we will continue to issue it for as long as people want to keep using it.