Safe Speed Forums

Last month while I was away on a two-week holiday in France, I became the latest victim of identity theft and card crime. An unknown criminal party had acquired my Visa Debit card details, and started making online purchases using my debit card account. By the time I discovered the fraud, early in the second week of the holiday, the criminal had spent £650 of my money, and a further £50 had been debited to my account by the time I was able to put a stop to it. I had to make a (very expensive) phone call to my Bank in Britain, who cancelled my card. I was impressed by the bank’s service and efficiency – I got all of the total £700 refunded to my account shortly after returning home. A new Visa debit card was waiting there for me, along with some letters from the bank enclosing various forms which needed to be signed and returned.

Also waiting for me were two letters (one from a major superstore and one from a catalog/mail order company) advising me of the successful opening of store credit accounts which I had not applied for. I returned the paperwork to the mail order company as their phone system was too tedious to deal with. But I was able to speak to a Credit Controller of the superstore, and advise him that the account application was fraudulent. This came as no surprise to him, as a delivery address given in the application was nowhere near where I live, and I had no history of using my debit card in that area – he was not allowed to give out the address.

I suggested that he pass details of the fraud, together with that address, to the police, and they would be able to visit the property and make the appropriate arrests. To my astonishment, he said there would be “no point in doing that – the police won’t be interested”. And why not? “Because this sort of crime is so rife that the police haven’t the resources to deal with it”. I wish I’d suggested that this crime is rife BECAUSE the police do nothing about it.

I was regaling my girlfriend with this tale of woe, and she said she’s had a similar thing happen – a major store had called her to check the delivery address for an order they thought she’d made, and then found that she had not ordered the merchandise at all, and that criminals were involved. She had exactly the same thing happen – the address could not be given out, and the police did not act. My GF is quite a fiery little madam, and went round to the local nick for an explanation. The bloke behind the desk “couldn’t do anything” as he was not a police officer, but one of those community bods. Asked why the police could not do anything, his reply was that they “were too busy” and “could not raise the necessary paperwork”.

And then...

Just last week I had nothing better to do than watch “Police Camera Action”, sad man that I am! There was Alastair Stewart, crowing about the latest technology the police have at their disposal in the “fight against crime”. This arsenal of high tech weaponry is being deployed in the War on Motorists and includes a control room with a vast array of CCTV monitor screens, and radio links to the police and mobile patrols. Stewart was singing the praises of the system, pointing out that officers can be mobilised to a "crime" scene in as little as 30 seconds.

And the crime being targeted in this segment of the programme? Motorists’ illicit use of bus lanes.

This country is seriously f---ed up. A criminal enterprise involving hundreds of millions of pounds each year goes unchecked, but piffling offences are deal with by an iron fist. Right now, I’m having one of those “beam me up Scotty” moments.

I totally agree with you, but I won't comment further because I'll find myself going into "rant" mode. My kids already think I would be a natural for "Grumpy Old Men" and I'm not even that old.

However, this country is becoming sicker by the day. The perspectives of those in authority are so warped that they're indescribable.

I know an officer who works for the DCPCU. His view is that the major problem lies with the companies who are only too willing to open accounts, even when faced with information which makes it clear that application is probably fraudulent. The OP gives an example where an account was opened even though the address given was nowhere near his home address. Rather than blame the police, who clearly didn't know about his problem because no one had bothered to tell them, why didn't the OP complain to the MD of the company that issued a card even when they had good reason to suspect the application?


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/08/13 ... e_busters/

http://www.dcpcu.org.uk/

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

I agree that some stores seem to have a somewhat cavalier attitude towards the setting up of new credit accounts, but that was only part of the problem. Besides, the superstore credit controller indicated to me that further final checks would have been made prior to the account being activated. For one thing, the criminals did not know my date of birth, and I would think this would have raised a flag at some stage in the approval process.

Fisherman seems to be saying that the police are absolved from any duty to bring the perpetrators of this fraud to justice, merely because some measure of blame can be apportioned to the superstore and mail order company. This in no way alters the fact that the perpetrators acquired my debit card details unlawfully, and then committed the illegal acts of making purchases using these details, and stole £700 worth of goods and services before they were stopped. That was still a crime whether or not the perpetrators had in addition applied for store accounts using my card details.

If I were to find a wallet in the street, and subsequently ran up a large bill on a debit card found inside it, what defence would I have in claiming that it wasn't really my fault because the owner of the wallet had been careless in leaving it lying in the street?

No I am not.

I quoted a police officer who knows far more about this sort of thing than I do. His view was that criminals are only too well aware that, most of the time, they will get away with this sort of crime, partly because the companies don't do enough checks and partly because they don't always bother to tell the police that an offence has taken place. He has personally dealt with cases where he decided not to pursue a specific case due to lack of evidence, only to catch the same person much later on when a different company takes the trouble to gather and pass on evidence. On returning to the first case he then finds that there was sufficient evidence but the company couldn't be bothered to pass it on.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

None whatsoever. But the person who lost the card could limit his liability for the loss by telling the card company as soon as he realises he has lost it.

Defeating plastic card crime depends on all links in the chain doing their job properly. If any part fails to do that, the parts further up the chain can't do theirs.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Understood, and agreed.

But I think there are (at least) two forms of card misuse. Card abuse, and card crime.

• Card or credit abuse would be where the legitimate cardholder runs up a large debt on a credit card or some other line of credit, with no possibilty of repaying the money in accordance with the terms of the credit agreement. Very often, credit has been extended to unworthy consumers, and the lending organisation really has no-one to blame for the loss but themselves. In situations like this, I agree that the police and law enforcement would have no role to play.
• Card crime would be where a criminal party illegally assumes the identity of someone else, whose financial details they purloin to use in fraudulent financial transactions for their own advantage.

In the case involving my girlfriend that I mentioned in my original post, there had been no wrongdoing on her part, nor on that of the card company or retailer. The retailer was preparing to deliver some merchandise which they believed to have been ordered by my GF. The fraud came to light when the retailer phoned her to check whether she wanted the goods delivered to her home address, or to the address which had been supplied by whom we now know to be a fraudster. A crime had been committed, and said crime was reported to the police. But despite being notified of the crime and even having at their disposal the address where the perpetrators were likely to be found, the police chose not to act.

Wait until the DVLA issue your license (with an added middle name) to an address you have never lived at, the individual who applies for it subsequently gets disqualified from driving until they take a retest, and the first you know about it is when you are stood in the dock charged with disqualified drivng (due to the fact you haven't retaken a test because it wasn't you to start with).

The above started in 2003 for me, since then I have been arrested over 20 times (my vehicle is on ANPR as belonging to a disqualified driver), appeared in god knows how many courts (always acquitted though), and still the incompetent c**ts can't sort the records out.

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

I wonder how much these companies are covering up their own negligence in not bothering to pass details on to the police.

O/T example, but when I left a certain company, I had my my possession hundreds of job sheets that included their customers full names, addresses, card details and signatures. You can't trust anyone.

The card companies themselves have a lot to shoulder too... it would be fairly easy for a customer to place voluntary restrictions on a card, eg regional, purchase limits, daily limits, exemptions for certain companies, and so on to customize their cards to reflect their general spending habits- for other purchases you'd ring the card up beforehand to authorize it- and it'd devalue card crime possibly to the point of worthlessness.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction

You can probabaly do a lot of this already.

I have "withdrawn" the cash machine facility on all my cards. I am sure I could request other restrictions.

Of course, the card companys wont like this to be to widly practaced since restrictions are likly to reduce legitimate card use and therefore the amount of comission that the card companys make

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

I worked out quite a while ago the police council and government are only interested in the crimes where there is some fine money or the crime is against the state road tax buslanes etc

The system of law, as it currently exists in the UK, Is largly the product of the Norman invasion (Yes, it really goes that far back)

The "Norman" law served three main purposes.

1) protect the ruling classes and their interests

2) protect and secure the revenue stream

3) Keep the revolting Saxons in their place.

(Protecting the revolting saxons from each other is way down on the list of priorities unless doing so also serves one of the 3 items of interest above!)

Little has changed in nearly 1000 years!

It is worth noting that when the peasents revolted and stormed London they knew who ther REAL enemies were. Instead of engaging in random violence they headed streight for the Law courts where they removed and destroyed court papers. (They also hanged the lord chancellor and the lord of the treasury, and i believe, any lawyers who were unable to ecape in time. Ahh Happy days!)

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Dusty, I like your style......
BTW, I took out a card which I use mainly only on the internet or for small purchases only, I specified a limit of £500, never to be raised without my say so..

Cases in point gleaned from the interweb!

(Items of news I have read recently, unfortunastly I can no longer find the links)

Case #1 A serial Mugger of elderly women whose final victim died a week after her assault! (cause of death unspecified)

Case #2 A "Hit and Run" taxi driver (not clear whether he was unlicenced or not, though he was Asian, so it is likly) who dragged his victim several hundred yards while attempting to escape!

Case #3 A Man who faked his death in order to get an early payout on a modest life insurance policy (Note, his estate would have got the money anyway, but only after he had died)

Guess who got the longest sentance??

(You can guess who got the shortest too! )

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

I wish I'd worked that one out by March 2007

_________________
What makes you think I'm drunk officer, have I got a fat bird with me?

The problem is that the courts are so tiresome in constantly refusing to convict without evidence. In cases like #1 it is necessary to prove that the death resulted from the mugging in order for the court to take it into account when sentencing. In cases like #2 the courts would not be allowed to take the view that the driver was unlicensed because of the colour of his skin. I have never dealt with anything like #3 so can't comment.

_________________
I am not a lawyer and can't give legal advice. I do have experience of the day to day working of courts and use that knowledge to help where possible. I do not represent any official body and post as an individual.

Its about time the courts used some common sense and convicted serious attacks on individuals with a sentence that would make these people refrain from doing it again. It does not need to be prison a flogging would suffice. At the same time they should then dismiss the ludicrous arrest and appearance in court of someone being arrested on the say so of scum accusing them of hitting them in self defence and at the same time dismiss all speeding cases unless there can be proof of dangerous or careless driving based on road conditions. Also, I suppose get rid of the bin police, smoking police, litter police, the stupid we will leave your bin behind with the wrong rubbish in etc,.

(There are many examples of the above daily in our newspapers.)

Perhaps then the country may be worthwhile staying in. It would appear that what SteveK wrote is about right.

If the courts can;t change things then who can. They are supposed to be independent and not political muppets.

Now now Mr Fisherman, that is not the point And you know it!

Case #1 involves a vicious serial predator who, regardless of the actual cause of death of his last victim, clearly cares little about whether he harms his elderly victims or not. Indeed, somebody that I would be happy to see hanging from a rope!

Case #2 involves somebody who had an accident and made a snap (albeit bad) decision to attempt to escape the consequences of it.

Funnily enough, I would actually be more sympathetic towards him if he HAD been an unlicensed cabby. Such is official attitude towards “Motoring offences” it is likely that he would have been more than a little fearful that he would receive little justice and still have the book thrown at him even if his victim had a history of depression and a note in his pocket saying “I am going to kill myself by jumping in front of an Asian taxi”

Case #3 involves an individual who defrauded an insurance company. Now, I KNOW this isn’t a “Victimless crime” but what He “stole” was basically the premiums that he WOULD have paid between the time of the fraud and the time of his eventual death (which, if you think about it is likely to be a LOT less than the actual insurance payout!)

Now this is a crime (and a fairly serious one too I admit since it is a crime of “Dishonesty”). It also involves wilful premeditation and execution, which puts in some ways in similar character to that of case #1 (and unlike case #2, which was likely to be more of a spontaneous reaction). However, unlike case #1, it did NOT involve any direct threat to any particular individual and certainly did not involve any intent to do harm (or to be wreckless of any harm caused) to any individual. To that extent it IS “victimless”.

If ever there was an offence that deserved “Community service” this surely is one (1000 Hrs would not seem unreasonable to me) and yet this is the case that attracted the longest sentence of the three! Bizarre, especially when one considers that the cost of this guys imprisonment would cost several times the sum he effectively stole!

Even more bizarre, the offence that historically seems most likely to attract “community service” is case #1! The guy who is a serious and wilful threat to those around him! Though in this case he was imprisoned, but his sentence was still the shortest of the three and THAT was only after the sentence had been increased on appeal!

But then, that is the point of my original comment! Scumbag #1 was just a case of one “revolting Saxon” beating on another! What’s more, he was only beating on old ones; the Government doesn’t really care if they get killed. They don’t work, pay little tax and its less pensions and healthcare to pay for!

OTOH what really bothers them is the prospect of missing out on all that insurance premium tax and upsetting their friends in the bildeberg group!

So the insurance guy is the one that gets to do hard time!

The cabby just fell in the middle somewhere!

_________________
"The road to a police state is paved with public safety legislation"

Just read this on BBC News. I think it shows exactly what is wrong with our police forces and the public perception of them. This perception is then tagged onto all state institutions.

Back to proper policing and reliable justice.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7603520.stm

Have a look, views of actual police officers in North Wales, well probably around 500 of them.

The bottom line is that since the "de-industrialisation" of Britain during the Thatcher Years (don't quote just me, quote the Chinese Ambasador during the Olympics who described Britain as: a "post industrial nation".) Not enough people pay enough Tax now for the upkeep of our society anymore. The reduction of the tax burden upon the rich since 1997 is pure Orwellian. Crime prevention, Policing, Roads, etc...Yes, you can have all these if you can pay....

It's either: "Can't pay" or "Won't pay".

For 90% of us in the near future...there is only one way to go ................ down.
Just wait until all the banks collapse, and this time blaming the "Unions" or the greedy "workers" won't wash......

Who then is to blame?........
At least 6 Major Banks have now collapsed in the U.S. and the word "nationalise" is sticking in their throats. Yet GW Bush has seemingly now found solice in the word: "Socialism".....and nationalised them to save the Nation.

Hallejulla Brother! Praise the Lord! there is hope after all....admission at last that the Global "system" which has caused all the problems has failed...