Fake proof of payment

[Citizen X]

Probably too much effort for a too small chance of success?

I'm assuming that these guys use a SA banking account for you to reimburse the money, if so, then why doesn't the bank simply look into which of their very own employees opened that account(I'm assuming that fake ID's etc were used). In doing so, at the very least they can find common denominators i.e. same employees opening these suspicious accounts with these untoward transactions....

[adrianh]

Ag no man Vanash, think it through. The guy has a legit account. He has no money in the account and writes a cheque. He then deposits the cheque into the victims account. He sends a pod to the victim and the victim is lead to believe that the money is cleared in his own account. The victim releases the goods. Two weeks later the cheque bounces and the victim is left with no cash and no goods. For most businesses it is just too costly and time consuming to run down a guy that did them in for a couple of grand. You just eat the loss and vow not to deal with the con artist again.

[Citizen X]

Ag no man Vanash, think it through. The guy has a legit account. He has no money in the account and writes a cheque. He then deposits the cheque into the victims account. He sends a pod to the victim and the victim is lead to believe that the money is cleared in his own account. The victim releases the goods. Two weeks later the cheque bounces and the victim is left with no cash and no goods. For most businesses it is just too costly and time consuming to run down a guy that did them in for a couple of grand. You just eat the loss and vow not to deal with the con artist again.

I just think that since the banks are so meticulous and strict with us with any bank account i.e. FICA and updating your details, they in the best position to investigate the matter in the best interest of the public..

[adrianh]

There is nothing for the banks to investigate. The person writing the cheque simply says that he thought there was money in the account.

[flaker]

Let me relate a recent incident with an EFT. My understanding is that when a "genuine" (as opposed to the fake one in thread) EFT is received into an account, that account holder, once that amount reflects in his account has immediate & i mean immediate access to those funds. This is what i believe should be the case at all times. However This was not to be in this instance of a transaction through Standard Bank.
I had traveled a distance to view a motor vehicle for sale. A deal was struck at R70,000. My account is held at Nedbank & seller's account was with Standard. Nedbank has no facility of an instant EFT to a bank other than itself. If i was to make an EFT payment from my account into seller's account at Standard, then that credit only reflects in sellers account on the next business day, although my account at Nedbank is debited virtually immediately. Am not sure who sits with this money over-nite. This being so, seller will not release vehicle & rightly so.

I now telephonically ask my son to make an instant EFT payment from his ABSA account into sellers account. ABSA allows this at an extra charge to account holder of R65. This is done. Sellers cellphone beeps to say a credit of R70,000 is received. Seller is not sufficiently satisfied & wants to visit his bank to check on the authencity of this payment. I've left with no choice but allow seller to do this & accompany him to his bank.

We join a queue at the enquiry counter (at his instance) as he is not even satisfied on getting an ATM print out. The clerk checks his account on line. He pronounces that an amount of R70,000 has been received. The seller (account holder) queries if this credit or funds are cleared. Again, the answer is in the affirmative. Now Seller asks whether he can join the teller's queue and withdraw R10,000 of these cleared funds. He was told he could not do that. A senior manager also agreed that whilst funds were cleared, no cash withdrawal could be made.

I am understanably furious. Now seller will not release car until the bank says that he has actual access to this funds. Standard advises that a query form be filled and a reply whether funds are "cleared for withdrawal" be obtained from their head office. Now seller has the car & my moneys!! + a waste of an hour in the bank!!

To cut a long story short, seller called the next morning to advise his bank had called him to say that the funds were "cleared for withdrawal" and i was free to collect the car.

A waste of R65 + 2nd trip to fetch vehicle + time at bank + risk of seller having both car & moneys over-nite.

Standard Bank

[IMHO]

flaker, that highlights what I am talking about that an EFT is not as a sure thing as we think. The banks know it, but will not admit. Why else this refusal to let money be drawn? There is a loophole somewhere, the crooks is aware of it, the banks is aware of it, but us, the honest clients, not!

By the way, ABSA should then refund the R65. They did not deliver what they charged for. The understanding is that you pay the extra service fee so that the money is available immediately. Not only show in the account, but available and that means available as cash. The banks get away with murder!

[Dave A]

I'm assuming that these guys use a SA banking account for you to reimburse the money, if so, then why doesn't the bank simply look into....

Because if the person turns out to be traceable, this is how they got involved. At least, that's what they're going to say, or something similar.

[flaker]

By the way, ABSA should then refund the R65. They did not deliver what they charged for..

ABSA did their part. moneys were credited to sellers account & as Standard admits "cleared" funds. Standard Bank are the bad guys here