Swift moves to protect against bank/phone fraud in wake of Bangkok man's 900K loss

[gdgbb]

On 23/08/2016 at 10:02 AM, deepcell said:

wow! really? Another day I was trying to update my phone number with Santander, and it was not possible, should be done in person in the agency. Wife transfer money from her account via phone call and all she was asked was her id number(idcard) and account password, she uses KrungThai Bank.

 

That can only be because your wife signed an indemnity to allow her to make transfers over the phone, nothing to do with any bank shortcomings.

[Hawk]

1 hour ago, Moonlover said:

Hawk, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. I am not saying that he could not have obtained this info, clearly he somehow did. I am merely saying that the info could not have been obtained from the SIM and that collusion is likely.

 

Obviously you have not read the newspaper article, the guy tricked the victim into giving him what he needed by pretending to be in the process of doing business with the victim.

[gdgbb]

On 23/08/2016 at 10:31 AM, Whyamiandwhatamidoinghere said:

I ever gave a phone and sim to my friend.  She later relieved me of 10,000 baht and disappeared. That number was Suay so I went to AIS and told them I wanted a replacement Sim, since had proof I bought that Sim and my ID. When I put the Sim in my phone I started getting phone calls and messages from her friends. It also gave me access to her line chat and whatsapp. Hehe. Got my phone and money back once all of her boyfriends and I had a conference at Gulliver's Pub. Sorry to those to ruin their clandestine operations. But good people need to heed my post. 

I wonder how that happened? 

 

When a new SIM is issued the one it is replacing is cancelled even if the same phone number is being re-used otherwise the possessor of the old SIM would still have access to that phone.  If that didn't happen there would be no point in issuing a new SIM, so you couldn't have had access to her phone unless she still had access to yours.

 

Sorry to spoil your made up story.

[skippybangkok]

I wonder how that happened? 

 

When a new SIM is issued the one it is replacing is cancelled even if the same phone number is being re-used otherwise the possessor of the old SIM would still have access to that phone.  If that didn't happen there would be no point in issuing a new SIM, so you couldn't have had access to her phone unless she still had access to yours.

 

Sorry to spoil your made up story.

Agree

For a telco, the write off of regular subscription fraud might be 500-1000 baht. The processes are designed for that in mind, not for someone who needs to protect 1 million baht life savings

To me it's like complaining about the collapse of a 10 story building for which the foundation was intended for only 3 stories





Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Moonlover]

21 hours ago, Hawk said:

 

Obviously you have not read the newspaper article, the guy tricked the victim into giving him what he needed by pretending to be in the process of doing business with the victim.

Thank you Hawk. If you care to look back to my earlier missive, you will find that I said exactly that. To save you the bother of looking it up I'll re-quote myself:

 

None of the above information would be available on the new SIM that the perp obtained from True. There had to be collusion with other parties to enable him to access the victim's account. Maybe even with the victim himself, knowingly or unwittingly.

 

I think I'll call that topic closed.

[MobileContent]

On 8/23/2016 at 10:57 AM, timewilltell said:

I think it may be helpful to understand the Thai mentality regarding fraud and blame here. As a victim of fraud myself where I had a 30 year lease cancelled and two businesses stolen through fraud I can tell you that it is incredibly easy. Not only that but the courts do not seem to want to lay responsibility on anyone.

 

To transfer land or cancel a registered lease or car you need a proxy. Anyone can be the proxy - as stupid as you like. A proxy is a simple form which is signed supposedly by the grantee and two witnesses. It is not signed by the person acting as proxy and the courts place NO responsibility on the proxy to check with the person giving it that the signature is correct. In fact no one has to check at all, nit even the land office  So anyone can write one up, transfer your land or cancel your lease. No one will be held  to blame unless the person receiving the property has not paid for it. And they will have long since disposed of the property or money to prevent you getting any back since they planned the feaud in the first place 

 

If it is a company is being transferred then in contrast to the land office you will need the proxy certified by a lawyer at least, that it is indeed the signature of the person giving the proxy and the lawyer verifies he has checked the identity and that the grantee has signed in front of the lawyer. In one court case the lawyer was found guilty as the proxy form was a fraud and in a second case in identical circumstances the court took the evidence of the lawyer admitting he did not witness the signature and deduced it was careless so not criminal despite a specific law covering professionals verifying forged documents.  This shows the importance placed on fraud and responsibility and countering fraud in Thailand and the weak attitude of the courts towards it.

 

The victim is not protected as responsibility is avoided by anyone pretty much regardless of circumstance with an ' I didn't know' defence. And even if you win the court case - which is horribly expensice - you can forget getting your costs and often even your court fees are not recoverable 

 

So I am not surprised that neither bank nor phone company feel responsible and feel they can just walk away and dump the mess at the victims feet. Not surprised he had to deminstrate outside police hq and expose phone company and Bank in a viral social media expose which is the only way the bank was persuaded to offer even partial compensation. 

 

Thailand simply does not care about fraud and makes little to no effort to bring criminals to justice, happy to leave the victims devastated.

 

You are spot on. I was a shareholder of a Thai company in which I held around 30% and when it was time to sell the shares they had been transferred to a Thai person that worked in the company as well. The only difference was that it was a farang that cheated me out of the shares (around 3.5 million Baht) but it is so easy to cheat someone out of assets in Thailand.

[timewilltell]

On 23/08/2016 at 0:41 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

Did you know that before leasing property and opening businesses in LOS, or did you not do any research?

Sorry, but all that has been well known by anyone spending more than a two week holiday in LOS.

I understand that you feel agrieved at your loss, but Caveat Emptor is the watchword in Thailand, and has been for as long as I have been visiting.

 

Not for nothing have I and many others been warning not to invest/ spend/ give any more than one can afford to lose in LOS.

 

Not trying to attack you personally, but anyone else reading this might take the advice and save themselves a whole heap of regret.

 

No I certainly did not know that and yes I did research.  I am happy that people like me who post of their trials and tribulations provide the necessary information to people like you. There was little information available when I started my companies and took my lease here. Perhaps you should remember that access to and the amount of information has expanded rapidly in the last decade. 

[Rc2702]

On 23/08/2016 at 2:37 AM, pkspeaker said:

still dont understand what happened.. he got a new simcard as if the old phine card had been lost.. didn't the victims phone immediatly go offline, or rather cant they tell that the simcard is still responding to the network as the victims phone would still be on.. and what is this 'password'. when i wire money from a desk like that picture shows i need the passbook and my passport id... ?

Agreed the process does not make sense. How can a sim card give you all that access  Surely he needed to know a lot of other pedigree data on the guy to access the accounts? Do the banks have the same process in call centre similar to mcdonalds when ordering mcdelivery? Phone number verifies the person?