So, they wanted to enjoy a free broadband.
This was the second time there was an attempted fraud/scam over telephone.
What brought it was that I cancelled the newly entered broadband agreement. In response, they phoned me claiming it was not cancelled alleging that an agent whose id was not recorded cancelled it. I telephoned the broadband provider and they had no information about cancellation.
The scammer attempted to telephone me a few more times until the day before the service was to be disconnected. The service was disconnected on the agreed date and I received £5 good will gesture at their own initiative.
Back to the scammers, they desperately tried to stop the disconnection in particular as they got hold of the Wi-Fi router. The reason was because the courier left it outside my front door whilst putting on the system I signed it whilst in fact I was out of the UK miles away.
I did not report it to the action fraud line as no crime was committed although they clearly attempted to. They have appropriated a router they reasonably knew did not belong to them but this is dispute that is between them and the broadband provider.
Their anger must have been even greater in the knowledge they committed theft but could no longer enjoy proceeds of their crime.
One of the reasons I cancelled was hacking. There was me using the old broadband network trying to access my emails. Instead of emails I kept getting messages scrip running in the background. I do not support socialism and no doubt using your neighbour’s broadband is most likely accepted under their socialist utopia of free world where others/victims pay.
There was another occasion when I was contacted by a fraudster claiming they were from a credit reference agency. I knew very well that the credit reference agency does not call people and that it is a duty of the person to request any correction of the agencies’ records, if proven that the records are incorrect. There was two of the scammers on the line as I put them on mute hoping they would go. They did not. They kept being aggressive until I said I was calling police to which point they cut the line as if shot by a lighting.
That call took place whilst I was away. So now I do not answer calls unless from friends or family whilst I am on holiday.
Although there is very little they can do apart from upset you.
There is recommendation to share experience of scams among your friends, family and neighbours in order to make them aware and keep them safe in particular vulnerable such as elderly who seems to be an easy target for fraudsters. It is also recommended to check unexpected calls, letters and online contacts with someone you trust.
I was glad to read on the local community Facebook group people sharing the experience and recent scam attempts, as well as asking for advice on suspicious calls. Lots of scam attempts tent to allege the victim owes money or fraud was committed attempting to black male the victim into quick decisions to part with the money. Many of the scammers recently alleged they were calling from HMRC.
Helpful guidance that it could be scam is if the call, letter, email or text has arrived unexpectedly. You’ve never heard of the lottery or competition they are talking about and did not buy a ticket. They are asking you to send money in advance. You’ve been urged to respond quickly so you don’t get time to think about it.
When the broadband scammer called, me it was obvious that the person was not working in any form of customer services and certainly not for one of the leading broadband providers. He was arrogant, brash and cut me abruptly in the middle of the sentence. It is important to also look for small clues as well, such as their attitude and behaviour. I also called the number back and there was just messages you called [broadband] sorry you missed us. This clearly did not sound like the message when you telephone the real broadband provider. It was a very casual non-professional message.
It is important to stay safe so, sometimes is necessary to report the fraud to Action Fraud action line [0300 123 2040] or visit http://www.actionfraud.police.uk, or call Citizens Advice Consumer Service who can pass on details to the trading standards [03454 04 05 06].
What fraudsters often ignore is the emotional impact they have on their victims. I still remember vividly how this lady was defrauded by a man, her former landlord in a similar to Fiona Onasanya incident. She has just lost her husband. She speaks very limited English. In all this grief, she had to deal with this man who did not want to pay his ticket and who most likely was fully aware and no doubt took advantage of her circumstances.
At the time of alleged contravention, she did not even have a full driving licence.
She felt angry and was anxious as how slow police work was going. Taking private prosecution would however be more difficult for her not to mention the cost implication.
In hindsight, she at the end benefited from the overall money advice as she was financially struggling and it was important for her to manage her finances as this could potentially implicate her immigration application.
As the current law stands applicants who for instance were declared bankrupt applying for British nationality, their application is likely to be turned down. This is because the applicants are required to prove good character. Whilst changes are announced to the immigration rules I hope that this will not be watered down as simply the society is entitled to accept only those who can guarantee they will positively contribute to the society.
In this instance, her vulnerability was very obvious and significant but it is unclear if police and indeed Crown Prosecution Service CPS are adequately trained to deal with vulnerable victims. Whilst lots of it may be improving my view is that the quality of the training needs to be improved. Whilst it is easier to for instance follow a logic you were not driving therefore it is fraud. It is not so obvious to many officers that there could be emotional issues and vulnerability also involved. Not to mention that they were taking their time to contact the victim.
In comparison Fiona Onasanya’s victim although I did not read the judgment I was not aware if any vulnerability was involved. This still makes it a cowardice crime implicating another innocent person into a web of lies, having them to attend criminal hearing and being interrogated by the judge and the CPS. Some also argue that “mud sticks”.
Whilst there has been significant improvement in treatment of vulnerable court users, it is very discouraging that judges for instance do not require to complete training in mental health and wellbeing. The only judges who are required are employment tribunal judges. Both sides of political spectrum agree that this needs to be changed.
I have read a report by the JUSTICE [https://justice.org.uk/our-work/criminal-justice-system/mental-health-fair-trial/] working party, where Lord Burnett of Maldon, The Lord Chief justice said: “Underpinning these proposals is a common thread – the concern that courts and the legal profession are not being provided with sufficient training and guidance to enable them to carry out their roles effectively, whether case management, trial management or sentencing.”
The Mental Health and Fair Trial report argues that from first contact with the police through to sentence, there remain fundamental problems with the English justice system’s response to mental health. Left unaddressed the fair trial rights of many defendants may be undermined.
The report makes 52 recommendations on the following aspects of the criminal justice process:
[1. The investigative stage – Mental health experts, not police officers, should be identifying people with vulnerability as a result of mental ill health or learning disability and those identified should have access to proper support.
2. Decision as to charge or prosecution – A specialist prosecutor should be appointed for each Crown Prosecution Service area who must make the charging decision in cases of vulnerability, assisted by up-to-date guidance and assessments.
3. Pre-trial and trial hearings – Trial processes can be bewildering and incomprehensible for those with mental ill health and learning disabilities. Magistrates’ courts, youth courts and the Crown Court should have a dedicated mental health judge with enhanced case management powers and responsibility for a case progression protocol.
4. Legal capacity tests – A capacity based test of fitness to plead and fitness to stand trial, placed on a statutory footing should be available in all courts and the “insanity” defence should be amended to a defence of ‘not criminally responsible by reason of a recognised medical condition’.
5. Disposal and sentencing – A Sentencing Guideline on mental health and vulnerability should be created and a broader range of disposals made available to sentencers to meet the needs of the case.
]
Criminals often do not consider the impact they have on the victims of crime. By increasing the number of officers, I cannot see how this will improve unless the police and courts’ training is significantly improved.
Written by Vesna Cvetek
20 August 2019
Green Queen 