Innocent 3rd parties

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: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:32 am

We do not involve innocent third parties into our baiting, do we ? We dont give lads anybody's real addresses, phone numbers (not even pizza delivery service or police station Very Happy

)...But what about sending them to Western union offices ? Isnt this involving third parties ? A lad comes there just because of us, and probably gets very angry there...maybe shouts at the WU's employees..who knows... Confused

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 8:43 am

I guess the ITP-rule was made to prevent putting ITPs at risk, probably meaning that the lad might show up and go all Charly Manson on them, as unlikely it may be.
Western Union is a place he goes frequently anyway, it's his money-source. He might get angry and shout at people to check again and again if the transfer with that MTCN really doesn't exist, but he most probably won't do anything stupid there, as it'll get him into quick and 100% risky free trouble.
Also I'm quite sure that he knows that the WU-people don't mean it personal when they tell for the 25th time that there really is no transfer with that MTCN.

So much to my interpretation of the ITP-rule.

*** BANNED *** Joined: 02 Jan 2006 Posts: 2021

Are we not providing much needed employment to the communities by increasing the number of visitors to th WU offices?, I think so, everyone take a well deserved pat on the back clapping

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:10 am

Is it true that the WU or moneygram or whatever agent is an "innocent third party"?

Just how many Charles Soludos got transfers today in a certain Lagos agent's office? And how many of the ID's presented were real? Do all agents alert authorities to suspicious activity? Has there ever been any agent offices shut down due to scammer activity?

I don't know the answers. So I won't speculate. That way I don't get sued for libel Razz

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:34 am

^^ That's a very good point. And it's a very good question by the OP.

There are innocent third parties, (Think FBI, Pedro's Pizza etc) and there are some people who are indirectly involved whether they like it or not. (And here I'm thinking Western Union).

Western Union branches in Lagos, for example, have lads at their doorstep at opening time every day of the year. And it's not baiters that are causing most of that traffic, it's scammers. So are we necessarily involving a third party in Western Union? My own view is no. When a clerk gets abused by a lad, you can call it collateral damage if you like, but I tend to think it falls short of involving ITPs.

Just my view of course.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:53 am

I remember this was discussed with a very famous WU outlet where we sent a lot of lads. I guess that we have a relaxed attitude to this problem. At least dealing with fraudsters is the job of people at the bank. And the effect (arrests) justified the collateral anoyance of ITP. But sending lads phonebombing the pizza-taxi next door (only because the pizza arrived cold the other day) would have only a tiny effect on the lads (a few cents for the phonecall) and a massive anoyance for the ITP. So I guess the ITP rule (like all rules) will need some indvidual discernment as the case arises.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 12:04 pm

Western Union are aware of the problem with scammers using their facilities yet they have done nothing to close the loop-holes or prevent the lads from getting hold of cash.

In my opinon, they are not therefore an ITP. If anything, they are guilty of complicity through thier non-action and incompetence.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 1:54 pm

Been thinking about that too .. I don't have much scruples sending them there though. Just a bit of hassle from time to time doesn't weigh up against the money they make through their mugu clients.

Quote:

Thanks for your mail again today,Please I want you to know that I have tried all the western unions in the city here

What goes for Lagos goes for Dakar, right? Laughing

Baiting Guru Joined: 04 Jan 2006 Posts: 3193

Here's a definition to consider:

An innocent third party is a third party who is involved in the bait in some other role than their normal day-to-day business.

For example, you could send the lads to the pizza shop, but only if it was to buy pizza.

The grey line appears when they are unable to complete that pizza transaction because they have a counterfeit free-pizza voucher. The general opinion seems to be that that is the lad's problem. So long as the shop only sees one or two bad vouchers they are going to blame the lads for it and no harm will be done.

Likewise, WU is only doing their job, and they are not going to lose money when we send a lad there with a bad MTCN or a bogus form. More likely they are going to have a good laugh at his expense.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 2:27 pm

^^^^

I like this deinition and subscribe it. Leaves grey lines like "Is it the job of to call the police whenever a guy with a fake free pizza voucher enters their office? Wink

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:01 pm

It's almost always the Lad who suggests Western Union.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 3:17 pm

You can't avoid playing the game with ITP or you have to bring the money over yourself, which I couldn't recommend to anyone.
By using the "normal" offices you keep the risk to a minimum for all parties. WU and MG have money there and they will have a safety system and possible even video. [they probably know the lad and play along anyway!] They should be prepared for anything and an angry lad isn't really a problem for them I think, there have been many Wink

I don't like to use real hotels or airports, but sometimes the story goes that way. All these people deal with the public on a daily base and should be prepared for anything. So I see no problem there, just don't give real names so their anger isn't directed to one innocent person.
I stick with banks and MG and use fake hotels, shops and other "needed" locations (with a pimp my phone backup) to wear them down.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 4:41 pm

I think thud419 sums it up as clearly as it is possible to make it. I have had Lads got to hotels looking for people who aren't there, going to Western Union for payments that have never been sent and to airports to collects goods that don't exist, but they will only be using the staff there to do their normal everyday job.

You must also understand that in a hotel, WU or at the airport the staff will be in their own environment and in the case of airports and WU, will undoubtedly have ready access to security. Equally no Lad will want to be seen to be a fraudster, and after the intitial turn down, is unlikely to want to make a big fuss, or he will be remembered as a likely scammer, or get banned.

Forever n00b Joined: 11 Jan 2006 Posts: 432

One could argue that WU is complicit in the crime perpetuated by the scammers, and as thus would not be considered an ITP. Although WU would like to appear as if it is addressing the problem, they really do very little in the way of preventing it. Is it their responsibility to do so? Perhaps not. After all, they are in business to make money, as are all businesses. So they assess the risk vs rewards of action or inaction, and make their business decisions accordingly.

We could also argue that we are merely assisting WU in identifying the criminals who are utilizing their services to perpetrate a crime. A WU attendant seeing an individual 10 or 12 times presenting a bogus MTCN will undoubtedly come to the realization that the individual is up to no good. Whether they act on it or not depends on whether the WU agent is indeed complicit or not. We all know that there are both good and bad WU agents out there.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 5:53 pm

The employers are not put in danger nor are they inconvenienced. They put a number in there system and listen to the lad rant about how the money should be there. They probably get a laugh out of it.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 6:14 pm

TheKnightWhoSaysNi wrote:

.But what about sending them to Western union offices ?

The lad does not have to lift his arse to check on a WU transfer. He can do it online from the internet cafe.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 9:55 pm

Quote:

The lad does not have to lift his arse to check on a WU transfer. He can do it online from the internet cafe.

Exactly. And I also bet that they have contacts inside MG as well to check for a percentage of the take whether or not the mugu has actually made the payment. Basically, they just pick up the phone. Which raises an interesting question...does getting them onto Moneygram really does gets them off their lazy arses?</cynicism>

Not quite a Newb Joined: 10 Mar 2008 Posts: 34

BobCat wrote:

Just how many Charles Soludos got transfers today in a certain Lagos agent's office? And how many of the ID's presented were real? Do all agents alert authorities to suspicious activity? Has there ever been any agent offices shut down due to scammer activity?

Bobcat summed it up in one.
Innocent Third Party
Check that first word there.
"Innocent".

Can you really say that about these companies in those countries?
Just a thought.

Posted: Tue Mar 11, 2008 11:51 pm

Slightlyoutofit wrote:

Western Union are aware of the problem with scammers

I was asked to leave a WU outlet in a local grocery store for trying to stop someone from sending money to Nigeria.

The manager was very adamant that I never return there again. Bloody WU bastards deserve whatever they get!

B

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 5:20 am

@ Tommo

This may be true for some of the high profile lads. I believe most will still have to stroll to the office.

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 9:54 am

@Betelgeuse

wow, really ? Shocked

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 11:56 am

@Betelgeuse

How could you have been sure it was in 419 business? Some people may send money to NG on totally legit purpose (e.g. to fund their relatives). It is obvious that breaking discretion is not wecome at a banks counter. So even if you have been right and tried in vain to warn a real victim ... i can understand their position. On the other hand, I used to think that Consumer Fraud Awareness Programme would have them to give senders some basic input on 419 schemes before the accept a payment to NG.

lost in translation Joined: 08 Aug 2007 Posts: 531

Actually, I encourage my lads to yell at the WU clerk and make a scene. Most wouldn't do it but if they did, the WU clerk would be sure to call the cops on them.

Elite Baiter Joined: 17 Sep 2004 Posts: 1269

Devils advocate, possibly, but I'm a customer service rep, and often, the workers at the bottom of the totem pole can't change things. Have them yell at the manager (not the supervisor), who CAN change things.

Posted: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:29 pm

Sure, WU is a third party but as Slightlyoutofit, said, WU is not innocent.

Quote:

Western Union are aware of the problem with scammers using their facilities yet they have done nothing to close the loop-holes or prevent the lads from getting hold of cash.