Excerpt from My First Scambaiting Correspondence (from 2021)
Oct 19, 2022 3:25:03 GMT
stellabella and bluelady like this
Post by robmaclenn on Oct 19, 2022 3:25:03 GMT
This encounter with a typical advance fee scammer ("Fred") begins with your usual Urgent Message that is BCC'd to "undisclosed recipients." It contains the typical elements: The United Nations....Some sort of inheritance fund AND a lottery fund.
This part catches my attention:
Fred:
All you are required to do is pay a TOKEN SUM to Court of Appeal in other to swear an affidavit at the Court of Appeal."
— Fred DelVechio, Chief Auditor of IMF/Fed.Govt., USA.
Me:
What's this all about?
In response I receive a verbose, pre-written template for which the scammer uses a cartoon-like font, which of course we all have learned to associate with the United Nations.
It mentions 5.5 billion dollars, $250,000 dollars and $10.5 million dollars...and it explains that the Chief Auditor finds it necessary "to elucide" me about how this all works. Upon seeing this, "elucide" immediately enters my permanent scammer correspondence vocabulary.
Me:
How much do I have to send you?
Another question I have is about swearing an affidavit. If the swearing words include "So help me G__" I wouldn't be able to do that because of my religion. Can you send me a copy of the affidavit words that have to be used to swear? Also, if the affidavit words that have to be used to swear include "So help me G__" do you have a substitute version I could use instead?
Thank you!
Fred:
The nature of the affidavit is different from what you think.......it has to be drawn up by an attorney who will proceed to the court and swear the affidavit on your behalf. The cost is usually low that you can easily afford. Therefore, do not panic.
Just send all the information needed from you, and our attorney will liaise with the court and give feedback.
Me:
Thank you for eluciding me about the attorney who will proceed to the court and swear the affidavit on my behalf." How much do I have to send you?"
Fred:
The lawyer had to go to court to update the cost of swearing Affidavit. The Commissioner for Oaths said the service charge payable by the deponent (that is you) is $1,700.00 and nothing more. He explained that this is an over-the-counter payment which has to be made, and Receipt issued after which the Affidavit is sworn by the Lawyer on your behalf.
As soon as I receive your response I will give information for the remittance of $1,700, so that Lawyer can proceed to the court.
Me:
Thank you for eluciding me about how much the lawyer needs to have remitted to him.
Earlier you said an attorney would be proceeding to court to swear the affidavit. This time, however, you said it will be taken to court by a Lawyer. Maybe it is a difference in legal cultures, but here we use an attorney for one type of thing but use a Lawyer for a different type of thing (both of them are related to each other, of course, because they are part of the larger court system).
Do you know which one it will be?
Fred:
Please do not get confused that I used both professional names attorney and Lawyer. It's just a matter of nomenclature. They are one
It is the Lawyer that will swear the affidavit. So, you have to go ahead and send the $1,700 so that the affidavit can be sworn and obtained for the transfer of your fund to take immediate effect.
I respond to that message with both gratitude and more confusion:
Me:
Thank you again for eluciding me on attorney and Lawyer. I've always found it interesting how two different words sometimes can mean the same thing.
I think the oddest example of this phenomenon is "flammable" and "inflammable." Believe it or not, they both mean the same thing, even though you would think they would be opposites.
I thought we were hiring an attorney and Lawyer to do the affidavit thing.
But in your most recent message you mentioned that you use both professional names attorney and Lawyer. Does that mean you are the attorney and Lawyer who will be doing the affidavit?
That would be very surprising, because as Chief Auditor I would think you would have to be an Accountant of some kind (e.g., CPA or something else that's official).
To be clear: Are you the attorney and Lawyer for IMF / Fed.Govt., or are you the Chief Auditor?
Although obviously both positions are very important, I don't want to be sending the $1,700 to the wrong person. As I'm sure you agree, it always is better to be safe than to be sorry.
If you could elucide me about whether I'll be sending my $1,700 to you or to the other person, that will put my mind to rest and I will know what to do without worrying that I'm doing it wrong.
Fred:
I am the Auditor.
I am not the lawyer.
Rather, there is accredited lawyer who handles legal issues in our Department.
Sorry, do not be confused. Once again, you have to send $1,700.00 (One Thousand, Seven Hundred U. S. Dollars only).
Me:
First, please accept my apologies for taking so long to reply to your email.
Yesterday in the morning I had my periodic annual physical checkup.
I figured I would be back by lunch, but my doctor who does my checkups told me I had to go see a dermatologist, who checked me up and told me I had to go see a Surgical Oncologist, and he said I have something called spindle cell melanoma. Apparently it's very rare, so I guess that's good.
Please tell me where to send the $1,700 (One Thousand, Seven Hundred U. S. Dollars only). And also the name I should put on the check. I assume I should make it out to "IMF/Fed.Govt. USA," but of course as the old saying goes it's not good to assume.
Fred:
Which area is comfortable with you to make the payment is it by Western Union or MoneyGram or bank transfer or by money order AND walmart
Me:
The most comfortable way for me to make the payment would be by bank check. I have a bank checking account (in my name, so you'll know it's from me) that I can use.
Fred:
As a matter of policy, we do not accept Cheque Payment.
You can now send money by Money Order, or via account.
These are the information:
He tells me to send a money order to someone in Cleveland, Ohio.
Me:
I know what you mean by having to follow the policy of your employer, especially if it's a big bureaucracy, and I'd guess IMF/Fed.Govt. USA is about as big a bureaucracy as there is.
For three years I worked in the Purchasing Department for the city of Lake Wales, Florida. (This was many years ago, before Lake Wales became such a big tourist attraction.) It took forever(!) to get a requisition request approved. The most ridiculous, (almost) unbelievable if I hadn't been there to see it for myself, example of this was when my department, the Purchasing Department, ran out of Requisition Request forms.
So we asked them to send us more forms and they told us we had to make the request on an official Requisition Request form. We replied that we didn't have any more Requisition Request forms and asked them to send us some, but they said they couldn't without first receiving from our department an official Requisition Request for more Requisition Request forms.
This went on and on and on until finally our City Manager was indicted for some sort of financial hanky panky (with which I had absolutely no involvement). Even though, as I mentioned, I didn't have any involvement in that alleged scheme, I lost my job and was unemployed for nearly 1.5 years before I used my connections to land a pretty good job in Bartow.
Who is (name of person in Cleveland)? Shouldn't I be making the money order payable to IMF/Fed.Govt. USA rather than to one person?
Also, did you mean to put the city as "Cleveland, Ohio"? I'm sure the United Nations is in New York City, and your phone number that you gave me earlier has the same area code (347) as my cousin. He moved to New York several years ago to study acting, which I'm confident he'd be very good at. He lives in Queens, New York, New York with 347 as his telephone area code.
It would make a lot more sense to be sending the United Nations money order to the UN in Queens, which is why I'm wondering if maybe that was a typological error?
Please confirm at your earliest convenience so that we may happily conclude this arrangement.
Fred:
Go ahead and make the payment. Mr. (REDACTED) is the accountant/Cashier whose job description covers receiving funds. All money received via him is properly account for.
No worries at all.
So, you are not paying to a person. Not at all.
Me:
I am sorry to appear so flundered, but if Mr. (REDACTED) is an accountant/Cashier then wouldn't that mean he actually IS a person?
Do you know him personally? If you are in Queens, New York, New York with IMF/Fed.Govt. USA and he is in Cleveland, OH, I can't help but suspect the possibility that he is conducting a scheme to get IMF/Fed.Govt. USA's money.
I think to play it safe I should make the payment payable to your name in care of IMF/Fed.Govt. USA. What is the rest of your address in Queens, New York, New York?
Vis-a-vis the amount due to me, in your electronic communication to me date stamped May 12, you said I am due either $250,000.000 or $10.5m. Would you please clarify which amount is correct?
I am planning to use a goodly portion of the proceeds to construct a tennis (or "Rounders" on the European continent) court behind my house, because tennis is a passion of mine. I'm sure you, too, have a hobby about which you, too, are passionate about. Mine is tennis ("Rounders" in Europe).
If the amount I am to receive is only $250,000, I shall be able to construct only a 1/4 scale court. If, however, the correct amount due me is $10.5m, I will go "whole pig" and install a professional built tennis court right behind my back porch.
On another matter, I do not know if you saw my concerns about Mr. (REDACTED). I know that you advocated that I have no worries, but because Mr. (REDACTED) is in Cleveland, OH and you are at the IMF/FedGovt. USA's head office in Queens, NY NY, I fear that this person might be a clever criminal who has gained your trust solely because he has presented himself to you as your colleague in a distant city.
That is why in the previous email I sent you before this one, I asked if you actually know him personally. For example, if you have ever dined with him or maybe if he sometimes comes to your head office in Queens, NY NY you have entertained him as your guest at a Broadway (or off-Broadway) show or something that would make you know he is a real person and colleague and not just some clever imposter.
Have you?
I just can't help but feeling that it might be safer for me to send the $17,000 to you, rather than risk sending it to Mr. (REDACTED).
Three days later I receive a duplicate copy of his most recent email.
Me:
I do not understand.
You have sent me the exact same identical email as the one your sent me 3 days ago and which I replied to, in detail, 2 days ago.
In that email reply to which I sent to you 2 days ago, I asked you a question about the amount of money that is due me and I quoted the two different amounts you listed in your original communication to me.
I also expressed some additional thoughts about Mr. (REDACTED) and asked if you actually have met him personally, in a personal capacity.
I also told you about my personal desire to build a tennis court right behind my back porch.
Instead of addressing my question and concerns, you have sent me the exact same identical email as the one your sent me 3 days ago.
If you are playing some sort of game with me, please do not continue sending me communications. I have made it clear that I am quite ready and willing to send you the $17,000, but if instead of answering my sincere questions and considering my very valid concerns and desire to protect you (and me) from being cheated by a third-party trickster you prefer to play games with me by sending me the same email again and again, please stop this nonsense.
You'd think after having been given such a stern talking to, Fred would be chagrined and apologetic. Well, you would be wrong....
Fred:
As a professional with experience spanning well over 21 years, I feel insulted each time a customer attempts to raise issues that safety mechanisms have been built into the system of administration to maintain our integrity, and also assuage the curiosity of our client.
This is what you have willy-nilly delved into by your insistence, and repeated questions.
The amount payable as approved into your account is $10,500,000 (Ten Million Five Hundred Thousand U.S. Dollars only).
The fear you have continued to express over receipt of $1,700 by Mr. (REDACTED) is unfounded, and a very big indictment about the sincerity of this organisation, and the character of the gentleman Mr. (REDACTED) who had received huge amounts over the $1,700 you want to pay.
In your own interest, do not drag feet anymore. Go ahead and make the payment. We may not entertain further correspondence with your payment, and your particulars.
Well, if you're like me then I don't need to tell you that I'm not likely to respond well to such a scolding, as I believe my response makes clear:
Me:
You appear to have mistaken me for someone who can be treated rudely and without courtesy, as well as someone whom you can insult for no good reason at all.
As of course you know, I asked you about Mr. (REDACTED) only with courtesy and concern for your own reputation and position within IMF/FedGovt.
I simply asked if you ever have met that person — especially in light of the fact that Mr. (REDACTED) apparently works out of an IMF/FedGovt. satellite branch in Cleveland, OH, which is literally a thousand miles away from your own office in Queens, NY NY.
I asked that innocent question, sir, out of a sincere concern for your best interests. After all, it would not be I whose job might be in jeopardy if the person you were instructing me to send money to turned out actually to be not genuine but instead a clever fraud engager.
Also after all, I do not work for IMF/FedGovt. If an unauthorized (third) party in Ohio were to intercept the $17,000 from me, causing IMF/FedGovt. not to receive it as they properly should, my job would not be in danger.
You might not have heard about them, but in recent years there has appeared a group of online Internet tricksters and flim-flam specialists who scheme to rob strangers through trickery.
All I did was ask if you personally have met Mr. (REDACTED), for reassurance. Instead of responding that indeed you have met him, you repeatedly refused to answer that simple question. I have to ask myself, "Why would the Chief Auditor not answer that easy question?" Is it that you have not verified the reality of Mr. (REDACTED) and are embarrassed to admit such an oversight?
While, you have experience spanning well over 21 years, I have almost 43 years' experience as a successful investor in many, many business ventures. As you might be aware, I have been featured on the cover of Entrepreneur Magazine three different times including once on their annual double holiday issue.
In all those years, I have never had anyone address me with such superiority and arrogance. If you get so offended at a professional counterpart asking such a simple and reasonable question and, resultingly, speak to me so rudely, then perhaps I have been wasting my time corresponding with you.
I do recognize that with COVID-19, many individuals have been put under extraordinarily intense unfair pressure in a workplace where suddenly all of your colleagues from your office might be working from home, leaving you in an office severely depleted of the usual number of people walking and sitting about.
Even that, however, does not necessitate addressing me so disrespectfully and with such disdain.
I was waiting only for you to confirm that you have met and authenticated Mr (REDACTED) before I mailed him the $17,000 money order. If this is how you choose to behave toward a fellow professional, I have little interest in proceeding further with you and your office.
Fred apologizes profusely and assures me he does know Mr. (REDACTED).
Me:
I am happy and reassured to learn that indeed you do personally know Mr. (REDACTED). If you vouch for him, then obviously I have no worries there.
Having given it some thought, and with so much extra time having passed since we began discussing this transaction, I would like to change my mind and instead of mailing a money order to Mr. (REDACTED), I would like to use Western Union instead of the money order.
For the next week or so, I am preoccupied with other responsibilities in my life and don't respond to his messages...which prompts him to write:
Fred:
After the meeting with the board of directors and bank managers they want to know if they will continue the arrangement or not. I have sent you a mail and you did not reply to me.I hope you are safe. Please update me so we will know the next step to take.
I find it quite touching to learn that even though it is taking him more time than he expected to scam me, he hopes I am safe. Chagrined by my inconsiderateness, I reply:
Me:
I apologize for my delay in responding to your emails of June 14, June 19 and June 20.
A sudden, unexpected death in my family required me to drive 1,250 miles to the funeral and then 1,250 miles back (round-trip), and I did not have email access for about a week.
We weren't very close at all, at least over the past several years. In fact, she and I hadn't spoken since during the last season of Breaking Bad, in 2013.
We both enjoyed that show a lot, and we used to talk to each other about it on the phone for hours after each episode.
We would playfully argue about certain parts of the story. For example, she kept saying the character of the sister-in-law was a slut, but I didn't think so at all. She only dressed that way for the part.
Sadly — although it's her fault; I tried to put up with her nonsense as best I could — when Walt dropped dead on the floor of that warehouse (or whatever it was), that was the last time we had any contact.
You're probably wondering why I bothered to put up with her at all, given how cranky she was and everything. But after all, she did raise me, so....
Anyway, that is why suddenly you didn't hear from me for more than a week. You must have thought I slipped and fell off the face of the Earth!
Please tell the board of directors and bank managers that I definitely will send the Western Union payment as soon as possible.
Fred:
DO NOT SEND IT BY WESTERN UNION. We have the responsibility to safeguard your payment. You can now send money through Walmart or moneygram transfer. So, you have to do well to abide by our advice and directives for the conclusion of your final payment.
Take care, and accept my condolence for your late relation.
Me:
I am glad you no longer want me to send the payment via the Post Office. It's such a hassle driving there and back, you wouldn't believe it.
When you get there, you stand in line forever. And then the postal clerk is usually rude to you, for no good reason. Don't they know I pay their salary?
I cannot send money through Walmart, because I refuse to do business with them because of their exploitation of child labor in China. Besides, Costco has good prices, too, and they don't exploit children.
So I'll go ahead and send the money by Western Union, as originally discussed.
Entire video is here: youtu.be/4VB8BVQUjgs
This part catches my attention:
Fred:
All you are required to do is pay a TOKEN SUM to Court of Appeal in other to swear an affidavit at the Court of Appeal."
— Fred DelVechio, Chief Auditor of IMF/Fed.Govt., USA.
Me:
What's this all about?
In response I receive a verbose, pre-written template for which the scammer uses a cartoon-like font, which of course we all have learned to associate with the United Nations.
It mentions 5.5 billion dollars, $250,000 dollars and $10.5 million dollars...and it explains that the Chief Auditor finds it necessary "to elucide" me about how this all works. Upon seeing this, "elucide" immediately enters my permanent scammer correspondence vocabulary.
Me:
How much do I have to send you?
Another question I have is about swearing an affidavit. If the swearing words include "So help me G__" I wouldn't be able to do that because of my religion. Can you send me a copy of the affidavit words that have to be used to swear? Also, if the affidavit words that have to be used to swear include "So help me G__" do you have a substitute version I could use instead?
Thank you!
Fred:
The nature of the affidavit is different from what you think.......it has to be drawn up by an attorney who will proceed to the court and swear the affidavit on your behalf. The cost is usually low that you can easily afford. Therefore, do not panic.
Just send all the information needed from you, and our attorney will liaise with the court and give feedback.
Me:
Thank you for eluciding me about the attorney who will proceed to the court and swear the affidavit on my behalf." How much do I have to send you?"
Fred:
The lawyer had to go to court to update the cost of swearing Affidavit. The Commissioner for Oaths said the service charge payable by the deponent (that is you) is $1,700.00 and nothing more. He explained that this is an over-the-counter payment which has to be made, and Receipt issued after which the Affidavit is sworn by the Lawyer on your behalf.
As soon as I receive your response I will give information for the remittance of $1,700, so that Lawyer can proceed to the court.
Me:
Thank you for eluciding me about how much the lawyer needs to have remitted to him.
Earlier you said an attorney would be proceeding to court to swear the affidavit. This time, however, you said it will be taken to court by a Lawyer. Maybe it is a difference in legal cultures, but here we use an attorney for one type of thing but use a Lawyer for a different type of thing (both of them are related to each other, of course, because they are part of the larger court system).
Do you know which one it will be?
Fred:
Please do not get confused that I used both professional names attorney and Lawyer. It's just a matter of nomenclature. They are one
It is the Lawyer that will swear the affidavit. So, you have to go ahead and send the $1,700 so that the affidavit can be sworn and obtained for the transfer of your fund to take immediate effect.
I respond to that message with both gratitude and more confusion:
Me:
Thank you again for eluciding me on attorney and Lawyer. I've always found it interesting how two different words sometimes can mean the same thing.
I think the oddest example of this phenomenon is "flammable" and "inflammable." Believe it or not, they both mean the same thing, even though you would think they would be opposites.
I thought we were hiring an attorney and Lawyer to do the affidavit thing.
But in your most recent message you mentioned that you use both professional names attorney and Lawyer. Does that mean you are the attorney and Lawyer who will be doing the affidavit?
That would be very surprising, because as Chief Auditor I would think you would have to be an Accountant of some kind (e.g., CPA or something else that's official).
To be clear: Are you the attorney and Lawyer for IMF / Fed.Govt., or are you the Chief Auditor?
Although obviously both positions are very important, I don't want to be sending the $1,700 to the wrong person. As I'm sure you agree, it always is better to be safe than to be sorry.
If you could elucide me about whether I'll be sending my $1,700 to you or to the other person, that will put my mind to rest and I will know what to do without worrying that I'm doing it wrong.
Fred:
I am the Auditor.
I am not the lawyer.
Rather, there is accredited lawyer who handles legal issues in our Department.
Sorry, do not be confused. Once again, you have to send $1,700.00 (One Thousand, Seven Hundred U. S. Dollars only).
Me:
First, please accept my apologies for taking so long to reply to your email.
Yesterday in the morning I had my periodic annual physical checkup.
I figured I would be back by lunch, but my doctor who does my checkups told me I had to go see a dermatologist, who checked me up and told me I had to go see a Surgical Oncologist, and he said I have something called spindle cell melanoma. Apparently it's very rare, so I guess that's good.
Please tell me where to send the $1,700 (One Thousand, Seven Hundred U. S. Dollars only). And also the name I should put on the check. I assume I should make it out to "IMF/Fed.Govt. USA," but of course as the old saying goes it's not good to assume.
Fred:
Which area is comfortable with you to make the payment is it by Western Union or MoneyGram or bank transfer or by money order AND walmart
Me:
The most comfortable way for me to make the payment would be by bank check. I have a bank checking account (in my name, so you'll know it's from me) that I can use.
Fred:
As a matter of policy, we do not accept Cheque Payment.
You can now send money by Money Order, or via account.
These are the information:
He tells me to send a money order to someone in Cleveland, Ohio.
Me:
I know what you mean by having to follow the policy of your employer, especially if it's a big bureaucracy, and I'd guess IMF/Fed.Govt. USA is about as big a bureaucracy as there is.
For three years I worked in the Purchasing Department for the city of Lake Wales, Florida. (This was many years ago, before Lake Wales became such a big tourist attraction.) It took forever(!) to get a requisition request approved. The most ridiculous, (almost) unbelievable if I hadn't been there to see it for myself, example of this was when my department, the Purchasing Department, ran out of Requisition Request forms.
So we asked them to send us more forms and they told us we had to make the request on an official Requisition Request form. We replied that we didn't have any more Requisition Request forms and asked them to send us some, but they said they couldn't without first receiving from our department an official Requisition Request for more Requisition Request forms.
This went on and on and on until finally our City Manager was indicted for some sort of financial hanky panky (with which I had absolutely no involvement). Even though, as I mentioned, I didn't have any involvement in that alleged scheme, I lost my job and was unemployed for nearly 1.5 years before I used my connections to land a pretty good job in Bartow.
Who is (name of person in Cleveland)? Shouldn't I be making the money order payable to IMF/Fed.Govt. USA rather than to one person?
Also, did you mean to put the city as "Cleveland, Ohio"? I'm sure the United Nations is in New York City, and your phone number that you gave me earlier has the same area code (347) as my cousin. He moved to New York several years ago to study acting, which I'm confident he'd be very good at. He lives in Queens, New York, New York with 347 as his telephone area code.
It would make a lot more sense to be sending the United Nations money order to the UN in Queens, which is why I'm wondering if maybe that was a typological error?
Please confirm at your earliest convenience so that we may happily conclude this arrangement.
Fred:
Go ahead and make the payment. Mr. (REDACTED) is the accountant/Cashier whose job description covers receiving funds. All money received via him is properly account for.
No worries at all.
So, you are not paying to a person. Not at all.
Me:
I am sorry to appear so flundered, but if Mr. (REDACTED) is an accountant/Cashier then wouldn't that mean he actually IS a person?
Do you know him personally? If you are in Queens, New York, New York with IMF/Fed.Govt. USA and he is in Cleveland, OH, I can't help but suspect the possibility that he is conducting a scheme to get IMF/Fed.Govt. USA's money.
I think to play it safe I should make the payment payable to your name in care of IMF/Fed.Govt. USA. What is the rest of your address in Queens, New York, New York?
Vis-a-vis the amount due to me, in your electronic communication to me date stamped May 12, you said I am due either $250,000.000 or $10.5m. Would you please clarify which amount is correct?
I am planning to use a goodly portion of the proceeds to construct a tennis (or "Rounders" on the European continent) court behind my house, because tennis is a passion of mine. I'm sure you, too, have a hobby about which you, too, are passionate about. Mine is tennis ("Rounders" in Europe).
If the amount I am to receive is only $250,000, I shall be able to construct only a 1/4 scale court. If, however, the correct amount due me is $10.5m, I will go "whole pig" and install a professional built tennis court right behind my back porch.
On another matter, I do not know if you saw my concerns about Mr. (REDACTED). I know that you advocated that I have no worries, but because Mr. (REDACTED) is in Cleveland, OH and you are at the IMF/FedGovt. USA's head office in Queens, NY NY, I fear that this person might be a clever criminal who has gained your trust solely because he has presented himself to you as your colleague in a distant city.
That is why in the previous email I sent you before this one, I asked if you actually know him personally. For example, if you have ever dined with him or maybe if he sometimes comes to your head office in Queens, NY NY you have entertained him as your guest at a Broadway (or off-Broadway) show or something that would make you know he is a real person and colleague and not just some clever imposter.
Have you?
I just can't help but feeling that it might be safer for me to send the $17,000 to you, rather than risk sending it to Mr. (REDACTED).
Three days later I receive a duplicate copy of his most recent email.
Me:
I do not understand.
You have sent me the exact same identical email as the one your sent me 3 days ago and which I replied to, in detail, 2 days ago.
In that email reply to which I sent to you 2 days ago, I asked you a question about the amount of money that is due me and I quoted the two different amounts you listed in your original communication to me.
I also expressed some additional thoughts about Mr. (REDACTED) and asked if you actually have met him personally, in a personal capacity.
I also told you about my personal desire to build a tennis court right behind my back porch.
Instead of addressing my question and concerns, you have sent me the exact same identical email as the one your sent me 3 days ago.
If you are playing some sort of game with me, please do not continue sending me communications. I have made it clear that I am quite ready and willing to send you the $17,000, but if instead of answering my sincere questions and considering my very valid concerns and desire to protect you (and me) from being cheated by a third-party trickster you prefer to play games with me by sending me the same email again and again, please stop this nonsense.
You'd think after having been given such a stern talking to, Fred would be chagrined and apologetic. Well, you would be wrong....
Fred:
As a professional with experience spanning well over 21 years, I feel insulted each time a customer attempts to raise issues that safety mechanisms have been built into the system of administration to maintain our integrity, and also assuage the curiosity of our client.
This is what you have willy-nilly delved into by your insistence, and repeated questions.
The amount payable as approved into your account is $10,500,000 (Ten Million Five Hundred Thousand U.S. Dollars only).
The fear you have continued to express over receipt of $1,700 by Mr. (REDACTED) is unfounded, and a very big indictment about the sincerity of this organisation, and the character of the gentleman Mr. (REDACTED) who had received huge amounts over the $1,700 you want to pay.
In your own interest, do not drag feet anymore. Go ahead and make the payment. We may not entertain further correspondence with your payment, and your particulars.
Well, if you're like me then I don't need to tell you that I'm not likely to respond well to such a scolding, as I believe my response makes clear:
Me:
You appear to have mistaken me for someone who can be treated rudely and without courtesy, as well as someone whom you can insult for no good reason at all.
As of course you know, I asked you about Mr. (REDACTED) only with courtesy and concern for your own reputation and position within IMF/FedGovt.
I simply asked if you ever have met that person — especially in light of the fact that Mr. (REDACTED) apparently works out of an IMF/FedGovt. satellite branch in Cleveland, OH, which is literally a thousand miles away from your own office in Queens, NY NY.
I asked that innocent question, sir, out of a sincere concern for your best interests. After all, it would not be I whose job might be in jeopardy if the person you were instructing me to send money to turned out actually to be not genuine but instead a clever fraud engager.
Also after all, I do not work for IMF/FedGovt. If an unauthorized (third) party in Ohio were to intercept the $17,000 from me, causing IMF/FedGovt. not to receive it as they properly should, my job would not be in danger.
You might not have heard about them, but in recent years there has appeared a group of online Internet tricksters and flim-flam specialists who scheme to rob strangers through trickery.
All I did was ask if you personally have met Mr. (REDACTED), for reassurance. Instead of responding that indeed you have met him, you repeatedly refused to answer that simple question. I have to ask myself, "Why would the Chief Auditor not answer that easy question?" Is it that you have not verified the reality of Mr. (REDACTED) and are embarrassed to admit such an oversight?
While, you have experience spanning well over 21 years, I have almost 43 years' experience as a successful investor in many, many business ventures. As you might be aware, I have been featured on the cover of Entrepreneur Magazine three different times including once on their annual double holiday issue.
In all those years, I have never had anyone address me with such superiority and arrogance. If you get so offended at a professional counterpart asking such a simple and reasonable question and, resultingly, speak to me so rudely, then perhaps I have been wasting my time corresponding with you.
I do recognize that with COVID-19, many individuals have been put under extraordinarily intense unfair pressure in a workplace where suddenly all of your colleagues from your office might be working from home, leaving you in an office severely depleted of the usual number of people walking and sitting about.
Even that, however, does not necessitate addressing me so disrespectfully and with such disdain.
I was waiting only for you to confirm that you have met and authenticated Mr (REDACTED) before I mailed him the $17,000 money order. If this is how you choose to behave toward a fellow professional, I have little interest in proceeding further with you and your office.
Fred apologizes profusely and assures me he does know Mr. (REDACTED).
Me:
I am happy and reassured to learn that indeed you do personally know Mr. (REDACTED). If you vouch for him, then obviously I have no worries there.
Having given it some thought, and with so much extra time having passed since we began discussing this transaction, I would like to change my mind and instead of mailing a money order to Mr. (REDACTED), I would like to use Western Union instead of the money order.
For the next week or so, I am preoccupied with other responsibilities in my life and don't respond to his messages...which prompts him to write:
Fred:
After the meeting with the board of directors and bank managers they want to know if they will continue the arrangement or not. I have sent you a mail and you did not reply to me.I hope you are safe. Please update me so we will know the next step to take.
I find it quite touching to learn that even though it is taking him more time than he expected to scam me, he hopes I am safe. Chagrined by my inconsiderateness, I reply:
Me:
I apologize for my delay in responding to your emails of June 14, June 19 and June 20.
A sudden, unexpected death in my family required me to drive 1,250 miles to the funeral and then 1,250 miles back (round-trip), and I did not have email access for about a week.
We weren't very close at all, at least over the past several years. In fact, she and I hadn't spoken since during the last season of Breaking Bad, in 2013.
We both enjoyed that show a lot, and we used to talk to each other about it on the phone for hours after each episode.
We would playfully argue about certain parts of the story. For example, she kept saying the character of the sister-in-law was a slut, but I didn't think so at all. She only dressed that way for the part.
Sadly — although it's her fault; I tried to put up with her nonsense as best I could — when Walt dropped dead on the floor of that warehouse (or whatever it was), that was the last time we had any contact.
You're probably wondering why I bothered to put up with her at all, given how cranky she was and everything. But after all, she did raise me, so....
Anyway, that is why suddenly you didn't hear from me for more than a week. You must have thought I slipped and fell off the face of the Earth!
Please tell the board of directors and bank managers that I definitely will send the Western Union payment as soon as possible.
Fred:
DO NOT SEND IT BY WESTERN UNION. We have the responsibility to safeguard your payment. You can now send money through Walmart or moneygram transfer. So, you have to do well to abide by our advice and directives for the conclusion of your final payment.
Take care, and accept my condolence for your late relation.
Me:
I am glad you no longer want me to send the payment via the Post Office. It's such a hassle driving there and back, you wouldn't believe it.
When you get there, you stand in line forever. And then the postal clerk is usually rude to you, for no good reason. Don't they know I pay their salary?
I cannot send money through Walmart, because I refuse to do business with them because of their exploitation of child labor in China. Besides, Costco has good prices, too, and they don't exploit children.
So I'll go ahead and send the money by Western Union, as originally discussed.
Entire video is here: youtu.be/4VB8BVQUjgs
