My business is involved in a transaction where Person X gives me money which I in turn transfer to Person Y, keeping a percentage for the business.
Naturally I am a bit suspicious since a lot of confidence schemes work in this manner. Basically the first transfer of monies is done by means of a phony check which is later dishonored.
So I asked for the transfer to be made by wire. Lo and behold, the wire transfer showed up in my account.
The question is – is there any way that a wire transfer could be phony and subject to later dishonor?
Was the bank of issue US or foreign? International wires may have different rules. While I don’t know of any way to reverse an incoming wire (domestic transfers), there are other ways that this could be a scam. You gave the other person your account and routing numbers so they could send the wire, so they could in theory use that information to create phony ACH debits from your account.
Best bet is to call your bank and 1) check the validity of the wire transfer, and 2) set up an alert for any ACH debits.
Yeah, I don’t know of any way it could be dishonored or reversed if the money is already in your account.
I suppose it could be found to be fraudulent on the senders side in that whoever sent the wire should not have been permitted too (account takeover) but that would be an issue for the sending bank they still couldn’t reverse the wire without your cooperation.
So if fraud is involved I think it would be more the traditional kind of using stolen money to pay for your services, whatever they ware.
But as Doctor Jackson said, you have given this person your account number and there are other nefarious things that could be done with that information. Account alerts are good. I also generally maintain a separate account for things like this so that the money can come in and then I move it to a different account # I haven’t shared with the world.
Yes. And I also don’t keep money in my checking account except to cover checks written.
However, when I am giving someone a check, I have to expect that I’ll give up something for them to get the money in a way more convenient then me tracking down a bag of quarters and it is generally in what I would consider a low risk environment. I would not give the homeless down on the corner a check for $5 instead of the five in my pocket.
And conversely, if someone were trying to pay me (especially when, as is apparently the case in the OP, there is a trust issue), I would be resist a method of transaction that required me to give them my personal information.
Oh no ! Do not promise to act as the middle man for a transaction like this !
Says that it is always a bad thing to do.
Even if it is just sending cash for someones living costs, it looks bad.
If it makes you look criminal you can be extorted from !
Someone was charged with stealing when they received the payment from a scam system. The idea is that the scammers use the middlemen to avoid having their own bank account is locked and shut down too soon… Because the patsies (the middle men agents) prevent the transactions being detected and followed.
Why would this random stranger trust you with the cash ?And you can’t identify this random stranger, you have no way to say what you did to prevent yourself being used in a scam or other crime… you didn’t do anything.
Do not send the money on. Hopefully the other people do not know who you are…
Do you mean used to share your account information with the world when you used to give people checks?
Seriously, in addition to what obfusciatrist said, the norm in this case would be for the buyer to send the check (and accompanying bank information). In this case, among other red flags, the buyer turned the norm around and received the seller’s bank info. Not criminal, but another red flag.
In this case, a person with no connection to the transaction, and hence no evidence of the bonafides of the transaction, (who is this other person ? Easy to say "I just got his email address ! "…prove a negative… that you do not know … ) The middle man is getting his ID put on the transaction, and even when he shows the money is sent a long, there is the question of the profit.
Why should the middle man get 10% just for transferring the cash through ?
Sounds like his knowingly taking a cut on the profits of crime.
It is unwise to get involved in a transaction when you cannot verify the details of the transaction, not even any idea as to nature.
Collect more information on who the participants are and why ?
why wouldn’t they just use western union ?
I did read of someone being charged, as she was receiving the proceeds of crime.
eg the payment was part of a gumtree scam. The scammer may get payment, it doesn’t matter much to them if the payments are reversed.
Can win, can’t lose… so they use middle men…