WU clampdown: good news or bad?

By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics and access other forums reserved for members. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today by clicking here.

Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:19 pm

In a coincidence as a stall tactic I told a couple clown lads expecting their scholarship money soon that WU told me I had to fill out a bunch of forms warning me not to send money to Nigeria. I told them they have to receive their money from a secure courier by the name of All$tar. One of the lads emailed me back saying he understood he had just heard the same thing about sending money via Wu to Nigeria. So some lads may be privy to this.

I think this is great!! Just more delays and anguish to be delt out to lads!

Posted: Sat Nov 06, 2010 5:59 pm

^ That sounds just awful. Crying or Very sad

Thank goodness for S3curity Shi3ld who don't impose these ridiculous rules. Laughing

Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2010 12:07 am

This change will hurt the lads hopefully, but will give us some more ammo to make their life hell, oh goodie Twisted Evil

Posted: Sun Nov 07, 2010 6:05 pm

My attention was kindly drawn to this thread by evil_sheep.

Firstly, the level of corruption in Nigeria is so high, that it is very likely that a scammer will have forged documents accepted by his accomplice in the WU office. So I doubt if it will make much difference, but it may give you additional opportunities to bait them.

Turning to bank accounts, what I need is evidence that the account is being used either to launder money (ie it is offered to receive the proceeds of fraud) or to assist in the furtherance of fraud.

The former is relatively easy to prove, whereas the latter will require more detailed evidence.

When sending in details of accounts, please put yourself in the position of a skeptical bank official. Is there enough evidence to convince you? If so send the evidence to me and I will do what I can.

Posted: Mon Nov 08, 2010 8:41 am

^^^ Thank you for the Alan.

I hacked around one of my favourite forms that people might like to use on their lads who want a WU without banking information - there is an exception process but your lad will need an ability to draw trees and have read the unicorn version of the kama sutra Wink

http://www.scribd.com/doc/41513427

Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 9:46 am

Hehehe, here's a quick update:
I've shown the link to two lads by now, and upon reading it, they immediately abandoned their demand that I pay through WU, and furthermore, both gave me a piggy each.

Thank you, Western Union! Smile

Posted: Thu Nov 11, 2010 2:11 pm

With The Man around in this thread - I would like to pop a question:
What about bank accounts obtained by ASEM's?

They would usually be have less evidence with regards to the scam, that's the reason, I've been holding my horses a bit on that approach.

Can we just shoot of an account and include the opening mail?

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:03 pm

ASEMs are no problem. If you receive an ASEM and attempt to defaud the sender by suggesting that the money should be sent to your bank account, that is fraud!

Posted: Fri Nov 12, 2010 5:32 pm

^^ Thanks

I was merely thinking the other way around: I ASEM a lad instead of straight baiting his opening mail - How would that be?

Hello I'm New here! Joined: 16 May 2007 Posts: 17

^^ I think that's what Alan meant...

419Eater is my life Joined: 31 Mar 2009 Posts: 327

I find this whole thing interesting. Especially because not long ago, a lad I have who is currently located in Ghana INSISTED that I do NOT use WU to send him any money. He demanded I only use Money Grab. I couldn't figure out why he was so insistant on me NOT using WU. Lads generally don't care which one you use, as long as they get your money. Also, I've always had lads prefer WU, since they can check it online. Perhaps this lad in Ghana was going to have someone in Nigeria pick it up for him or something. Or perhaps they're going to do this in Ghana as well sometime soon? I don't know. Very interesting, though.

Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:33 pm

Sorry my English is not always correct. "You" equals any recipient not the baiter.

Posted: Sat Nov 13, 2010 9:47 pm

^^ That makes sense - Thanks!

No need to excuse for your English - I've got English as my second language, so it often sucks a bit too Confused

Posted: Thu Nov 18, 2010 9:05 pm

I told my lad about the new westy security measures and he coughed this up without blinking:

Quote:

Sir, here is the Driver’s License Number of MR MARK A***H our casher officer in charge of payment, the Number is , with Expiring Date of 30-12-2012. so kindly proceed immediately with the drivers license number as stated above and give it to them, so that they will immediately send the money to us as directed, tell them that you knows the person you are sending the money to, for they are only trying to know weather you know the person or not, that is guarding you against been defraud okay.

I don't know Mark from Adam so he had better make friends with me, if they want me to tell the westy staff that I know him. I'll need photo ID and a bank account as a minimum. Laughing

Elite Baiter Joined: 19 Apr 2008 Posts: 1301

Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that Moneygram is becoming the first option for lads recently? I hope so as lads tend to get rather irate at having to go to the MG office to get news of their payment.

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 10:48 am

You know what? This is pure gold. Cool

I'm now forcing my lad to put me in contact with the named receiver as Westy insist that I mustn't send wonga to anyone that I don't know. It says so on the site so there's no argument about that. And my lad isn't arguing though I know he would very much like to.

Until the receiver and I become bosom buddies, there is no way I'm sending a penny. Laughing

I want photos of him with the wife and kids. Holiday snaps.... Wink

WU clampdown: good news or bad?	View next topic View previous topic