While a legitimate warning about a virus, hoax or scam may be appreciated ( if
it's from a trusted source, such as a virus protection company ), most are just
hoaxes in their own right, and do nothing but waste internet bandwidth and
cause unwanted emails for recipients further down the line. They are in
themselves a simple form of virus, and at best spam.
Most of these hoax warnings rely on the original recipient's naivety, and use
simple social engineering techniques to cause them to send the hoax on. They
aren't as damaging as actual viruses, but are none the less annoying.
It is therefore extremely worrying when UK Police Forces start sending out
warnings to businesses, about a scam which doesn't exist, and tell the
recipient to warn everyone else they know about the alleged scam.
This is exactly what PC Paul Toseland, Corby Business Anti-Crime Network
Administrator, did.
Toseland claims, in his email sent to Corby businesses, that there is a scam
running, whereby someone will knock on your door, claim their car has
broken down, and ask if they can call their partner to arrange a timely rescue.
Having agreed, and fulfilled your role as Good Samaritan, you will
later be shocked to find that the number called was a 50 GBP per minute
premium rate number, and your phone bill will cause a nasty dent in your bank
balance.
Toseland went on to claim that there had been five reported cases of this
scam occurring in Luton, Bedfordshire, over a period of a couple of weeks, and
that everyone needed to be warned.
Toseland's warning was taken seriously by many, and copies of his email
started to flood the internet - After all, this was a warning from the
Police.
Some people did question the origin of the email, having doubts about certain
"facts" stated in the original email, and wondering if someone was pretending
to be acting as an officer from Northamptonshire Police Force, and contacted
the Force.
The number of enquiries prompted Northamptonshire Police to issue a statement
on the matter, confirming they had sent the email, and although admitting that
there had been no reported cases of the scam occurring in Northamptonshire, they
believed that there had been a number of cases reported elsewhere.
They also re-affirmed the serious nature of the scam, stating that, to the best
of their knowledge, this was not an urban legend as some people have been
suggesting.
The Police's only evidence that this scam was operating was that they believed
there had been some reported cases of the scam being used, and that they didn't
think it was an urban legend.
It finally took a statement from ICSTIS,
the Premium Rate Services Regulator,
who had been inundated with queries about the Police email, to point out that
it was impossible to create a 50 GBP per minute Premium Rate number, that
they had received not one complaint about such a scam operating, and they
completely rejected the fanciful warning as being the stuff that urban
legends are indeed made of.
Rather belatedly, Northamptonshire Police admitted, "We can confirm information
circulated ... by the Force regarding a telephone fraud, is now believed to be
an urban legend."
Presumably Toseland received notification of the alleged scam and thought it
best to let local businesses and their staff know, but it is surprising that he
never did what hundreds of recipients of his email did, and checked with the
ICSTIS to see if the scam was possible, nor contacted Bedfordshire Police to
see if there were any actual reports of the scam being operated.
Most worrying is the claim by Toseland that there was nothing the victim of the
scam would be able to do, as they would have given the perpetrator
permission to use the phone.
This seems to be highly suspect advice from the Police, and
plays into the hands of those who hold the view that the Police are only
interested in pursuing crimes which generate revenue for themselves, citing
the ever increasing, and seemingly never ending, roll-out of speed enforcement
camera systems as an example.
It seems highly likely that the Police do have powers to charge someone who
tried to carry out such a scam as it is obviously a fraud based upon
deception.
If the person making the call hadn't actually broken down, or the person they
said they were calling wasn't the relative they claimed, nor at the receiving
end of the call, they would obviously have been lying about the circumstances
and their intended actions. Consent for the use of the phone may have been
given, but only because the householder was deceived into allowing its use.
Even if a criminal conviction could not be secured because evidence of the
fraud could not be established beyond all reasonable doubt, a civil case, on
balance of probability, would stand a far greater chance of success. It
wouldn't be that hard to identify the criminals involved, as they would have
provided details when setting up the premium rate line.
The advice from Northamptonshire Police, that there would be no means of
come-back, is wrong, inaccurate and at least incomplete. It is tantamount to
saying, try this scam; there's nothing we can do about it. The warning of the
alleged scam in the first place is, in itself, little more than scaremongering.
This is not the first time that a UK Police Force has alleged that some crime is
likely to be committed without even one shred of evidence to support their
claims.
Those involved in anti-globalisation and anti-capitalist campaigns have, in
particular, been targeted frequently. These protesters now wait with baited
breath, as every May Day approaches, to read the latest Police and Home Office
announcements that it expects "anarchists" to descend upon London, intent on
causing mayhem and destruction, and almost certainly armed up to the teeth with
firearms, Samurai swords and anything else which could be used as a weapon.
Toseland's email may not have had the political motivation behind it as other
Police concocted disinformation has had, but some see it, not just as another
"clueless user" re-posting a ridiculous hoax warning, but as something
symptomatic of deeper problems within the Police Services of the UK.
Businesses and residents of Corby are no doubt fuming that this warning of a
non-existent scam has taken up so much of the Force's time, which they pay for,
while parts of the local area are becoming known as "no go areas" for innocent
residents and workers.
Toseland's email has probably caused Northamptonshire Police considerable
embarrassment, by making the Force front page news. I'm sure they would have
preferred to have seen their names in lights as they successfully reduced crime
in their area, rather than being lambasted for their incompetence, and inability
to foresee the damage a misleading email can do as it wings its way across
cyberspace.
Northamptonshire residents have enough real crime to worry about, including
the theft of a 25,000 GBP "Safety Camera" from an accident black-spot,
a generally increasing crime rate across the region, with teenage crime getting
so out of control that
curfews are being
considered, that they don't need the worry of imaginary crime on top of all
that.
Reading about a gang of youths plucking frogs from a local pond and proceeding
to
stamp them to death,
the
callous abduction
of a disabled person while their personal property is stripped from them, and
the story that a young child was attacked with a
petrol bomb hardly puts
Northamptonshire at the top of the list of places to visit.
The Police are prone to telling us that they are doing an excellent job, and
that it is the fear of crime, rather than crime itself, which is to blame for
the impression that they are not doing enough to combat it.
It is ironic that they should therefore create the fear of crime themselves.
PC Toseland's Scaremongering Email
Police Report !The reason this is working so well is it plays on your good will! Picture the
scene:-
You are sitting at home and there is a knock at the door. On answering it you
are confronted by a respectable looking woman in a suit, who is slightly
distressed. She explains that her car has broken down further down the road and
she needs to contact her husband to come to her aid. Is it at all possible to
use your phone to call him?
You allow her to use the phone, but being the suspicious type you stand with
her as she makes the call. She dials the number, and asks to be put through to
Mr Smith / Brown / Stevens (Whatever). She holds the line for about thirty
seconds. She continues, "In that case can you ask him to leave the meeting for
a minute I need to speak to him quite urgently." She apologies again and
explains they are getting him out of a meeting.
A couple of minutes goes by and she starts to speak to her husband. She
explains the situation to him, tells him what has happened to the car, is
annoyed because she now can't get to her meeting, and asks what she should do
now. She listens for a few seconds and then says, "Well as soon as the meeting
finishes can you come to Cardiff Road / Leicester Road / Surrey Street
(Whatever), where the car has broken down. Another few seconds go by, "OK, I'll
see you in about twenty minutes then."
She put the phone down, and thanks you ever so much for your kind assistance,
even offering you a pound for your trouble, but of course you decline, it's no
trouble.
She leaves and everything is fine.
Or is it? The day or week before knocking on your door she set up her own
premium rate line with a telephone company at the cost of about £150, and she
has dictated that calls to that number should be charged at £50 per minute. She
has dialled that number. The conversation she has had with her "husband" is
entirely fictitious, there is a pre-recorded voice message on the other end to
give you the impression she is talking to someone. She has been on the phone
for about five minutes, that call just cost you £250, the majority of which
goes into her pocket, and the first you know about it is when you get your bill
a month later.
To rub a bit of salt into the wound,she hasn't even committed a criminal
offence. You've given her permission to use your phone.
5 occasions in Luton where this has been reported in the last couple of weeks.
Would anyone reading this please pass it on to friends and colleagues etc.
otherwise it could cost someone a lot of money.
PC Paul Toseland
Corby Business Anti-Crime Network Administrator
The ICSTIS Slams The Lid Shut On The Hoax
The following story has been circulated by e-mail in recent weeks.
If you receive any enquiries about this story, please note that it is not true.
It is an urban myth:
* A £50 per minute premium rate tariff does not exist - the highest tariff
available is £1.50 per minute.
* Service providers must choose a charging rate from the range offered by their
network operator - they simply can't 'dictate' their own charging
rates.
* ICSTIS has received hundreds of enquiries about this so-called deception but
not one person has been able to produce a phone bill to support the story.
Please pass this information on to all enquirers.
Rob Dwight
Media & PR Officer
ICSTIS - The Premium Rate Services Regulator
Wiltshire Police Take A Bow
Not to be outdone by their colleagues in Northamptonshire, Wiltshire Police
fell victim to its own inability to spot a scam and, in December 2003, warned
the public about the serious consequences of responding to an incoming call
which could cost them hundreds of pounds.
The alleged scam is meant to involve being called, with a recorded message
telling the recipient to "Dial 9" on their telephone for more details, and if
they do, they will be automatically connected to a reverse-charging premium
rate number which will rapidly add to their telephone bills.
Once again, ICSTIS had to step in and say that this was not possible, and
Wiltshire police eventually retracted their warnings about the non-existant
scam.
This is a Seriously Worrying Scam
Beware !!.Don't get caught out: SEND THIS WARNING TO EVERYONE ON YOUR EMAIL LIST.
IF A MAN COMES TO YOUR FRONT DOOR AND SAYS HE IS CONDUCTING A SURVEY AND
ASKS YOU TO SHOW HIM YOUR TITS, DO NOT SHOW HIM YOUR TITS.
THIS IS A SCAM, HE ONLY WANTS TO SEE YOUR TITS.
I wish I'd seen this email yesterday. I feel so stupid.
