Warning - aware of scammers!

[misterfish]

I know most of us are aware of scams and scammers and need to be alert at all times.

I've just had an interesting afternoon! it started with a DPD delivery that I wasn't expecting - I always get notification of when to expect a delivery but this came out of the blue. The package was addressed to me though mentiioned 'Flat 7' rather than just the number 7. It was definately a real DPD delivery that I initially thought was for my son, but it was for me and it had the 'battery inside' warning label on the outside of the package. I opened it and inside were two new iPad 11 phones and sim cards with a Vodaphone delivery note. Nothing to do with me I thought, but it rang alarm bells as I try to keep aware of scams.

I'd only just opened the package when the doorbell rang and I opened the door to a different DPD driver who tried to tell me that a mistake had been made and the parcel was not for me and he wanted to collect it. My internal alarm bells were ringing as he had walked up our drive with no sign of a van so I asked for his ID. After a search he found he had forgfotten it and rang his mate saying he was going to get his ID from his van (which couldn't be seen anywhere). Off he went and my wife could see him standing in the middle of the road obviously looking for his 'van' but probably really waiting for his accomplice. A couple of minutes later he was back (still on foot) with his 'ID' - a brand new card with a name, his picture and a DPD logo; the back of the card was blank! At this point I made it clear that I waas not handing anything over and contacting Vodaphone. I insisted on a photograph of him.

I phoned Vodaphone and after they checked the details on the delivery note in the box gave me the contact details so that I can arrange for the real DPD to collect and return the package to Vodaphone. Meanwhile my son (who is working from home) called the police and they will be visiting to take a statement about what has happened and are interested in the photograph I have taken!

 

[Rorschach]

That's a weird one. Personally I think I might have waited it out a bit longer.

 

[Cabinetman]

So they used somebody else’s card to order them to your address and watched for it being delivered and then tried to collect? I think a lot of people would’ve said what iPhones, I know nothing about an iPhone delivery

 

[Rorschach]

Oh I should add, I would be extra vigilant tonight about the home security.

 

[D_W]

Oh I should add, I would be extra vigilant tonight about the home security.

unlikely to be an issue.

The real follow-up question at this point is whether or not they used the OP's ID to order the phone, or if they made his address a gift address on a third party's credit card or ID information. The latter isn't great, but it's better than the former.

This isn't uncommon, and variations do exist where the purchaser is scammed - as in, you buy an item from a retailer and you get a tracking number that somehow subverts the tracking system, and when you're notified of delivery, the item in question isn't on your doorstep, but you've paid for it, the retailer is either in on it or can confirm that you ordered it and you never get it and an audit of the tracking item will yield not too much as what's exploited seems to be a snafu in being able to change the delivery address from what's entered on the website to something else (credit card companies don't hold you responsible here, but it's annoying).

Whatever the case above, the individuals wanting the phone will be angry that they didn't get the phones that someone else paid for, but they're looking to keep doing this, not to get caught in an assault charge. They'll move on.

 

[D_W]

(separately, this must be a pretty good scheme if someone is showing up in an official uniform or one made well enough to pass as one.

Around here, when the version described above happens, it's usually porch pirates with something over their face and a blank shirt. The amazon ring share of the market must make it so that it's getting harder and harder to run up a sidewalk undetected.

 

[misterfish]

Hving been involved in IT (including aspects of security) I tend to be somewhat sceptical if things don't feel right! Many years ago I worked for the MOD and the one aspect of my initial induction training that I can still vividly see in my mind was the security course. All went as I would expect until the break and after we all asembled after coffee the first thing that happened was that we were asked if anybody had seen anything unusal. We all nodded 'no' at which juncture he grabbed a bag by the door that we had all missed and opened it to show a dummy bomb inside! We'd all walked by it without noticing! A few minutes later he shouted loudly, pulled a gun out of his pocket and fired a few blanks in the air! We were shocked and I can still hear the sound and smell the cordite now and that happened 40 years ago! It shows you really take things in after shock tactics! So my adage is if it doesn't feel right then be very aware.

I immediately checked my bank and credit card yesterday after it happened but nothing out of the ordinary. From what I have been able to find out the scammers use a stolen credit card and pick a random address. They use a 'burner' email address so they know when and where the delivery will take place and then wait until they see the DPD van as they have the notification of the approximate delivery date and time. They then send in their stooge (often doing a quick job on the side for easy cash!)

My neice on our family whatsapp group came up with the following

Fake DPD workers jailed for laptop and iPhone delivery scam

Jeff

 

[Just4Fun]

Two things really puzzle me about this.

First, who or what is DPD?

Second, the article Jeff linked to reports that:
"[Judge Rupert Overbury] said the fact that Adefowora and Oyeniyi had access to delivery information inferred it was they who ordered the items.
How come a judge does not know the difference between "infer" and "imply"? A judge!

 

[misterfish]

DPD is a well known and used delivery company that offer quick delivery with a time slot of one hour on a particular day and also a real-time map of the delivery allowing you to follow the van as it goes about its deliveries.

The link to the newspaper article was merely a link sent to me. As for the semantics used by the judge I really can't comment but I would say that journalists are no renowned for accurate reporting.

Anyway, things move ahead. I have sent an email to Vodafone customer service expressing my concern/annoyance at the apparent disinterested customer service rep I spoke to yesterday. Also we have now had a visit from the local police giving them my stastement and copies of everything of relevance I have. They also have the photo of the supposed DPD person and they will check with DPD to see if he is known. If not, they will take the delivery as evidence to use in a prosecution as and when they catch up with him. I've also shown the picture to my wife's family firm who have a contract with DPD and know most of the drivers as all their orders for delivery are sent by DPD.

So now we wait for the next stage!

Jeff

 

[RobinBHM]

I know most of us are aware of scams and scammers and need to be alert at all times.

I've just had an interesting afternoon! it started with a DPD delivery that I wasn't expecting - I always get notification of when to expect a delivery but this came out of the blue. The package was addressed to me though mentiioned 'Flat 7' rather than just the number 7. It was definately a real DPD delivery that I initially thought was for my son, but it was for me and it had the 'battery inside' warning label on the outside of the package. I opened it and inside were two new iPad 11 phones and sim cards with a Vodaphone delivery note. Nothing to do with me I thought, but it rang alarm bells as I try to keep aware of scams.

I'd only just opened the package when the doorbell rang and I opened the door to a different DPD driver who tried to tell me that a mistake had been made and the parcel was not for me and he wanted to collect it. My internal alarm bells were ringing as he had walked up our drive with no sign of a van so I asked for his ID. After a search he found he had forgfotten it and rang his mate saying he was going to get his ID from his van (which couldn't be seen anywhere). Off he went and my wife could see him standing in the middle of the road obviously looking for his 'van' but probably really waiting for his accomplice. A couple of minutes later he was back (still on foot) with his 'ID' - a brand new card with a name, his picture and a DPD logo; the back of the card was blank! At this point I made it clear that I waas not handing anything over and contacting Vodaphone. I insisted on a photograph of him.

I phoned Vodaphone and after they checked the details on the delivery note in the box gave me the contact details so that I can arrange for the real DPD to collect and return the package to Vodaphone. Meanwhile my son (who is working from home) called the police and they will be visiting to take a statement about what has happened and are interested in the photograph I have taken!

You need to be very careful.

Don't just return them

This happened to my sister with the latest iPhones.

What has happened is the scammers have taken created 2 phone contracts in your name, they probably don't the correct bank details, but they do have your home address, your name and other personal info.

The problem is the phone company will have a contract against your name and address - so if they find the bank account details are wrong for the direct debit, they will chase you for new details.

In my sisters case, I think it was phones4you - and they had no interest in sorting it out. She had to really kick up a stink before they cancelled the contracts in writing.

 

[Blackswanwood]

Second, the article Jeff linked to reports that:
"[Judge Rupert Overbury] said the fact that Adefowora and Oyeniyi had access to delivery information inferred it was they who ordered the items.
How come a judge does not know the difference between "infer" and "imply"? A judge!

Is the use of the word inferred not correct? I thought inferred is used when the conclusion is derived from a fact (and he has pointed out the fact earlier in the sentence) whereas implied is used where the facts are less obvious.

Sorry to be a pedant but the Judge isn’t here to stick up for himself

 

[Just4Fun]

No, infer means to conclude (from facts) whereas imply means to suggest. The fact that Adefowora and Oyeniyi had access to delivery information might suggest it was they who ordered the items but it does not and cannot conclude anything. A fact can never conclude anything - a fact doesn't have a mind so how can it conclude anything? A fact might suggest (imply) somethng and a person might conclude (infer) something from that fact. The judge's use of infer is simply wrong.

 

[Phil Pascoe]

Well. That's him told off.

 

[planesleuth]

Woot; you are crazy! These scum bags have your address and you just crossed them. I would be very concerned about that. You should have given them the package. Who the hell cares? Vodafone will claim on insurance and even if they don't, the cost of two phones is small change compared to their turnover. The system is at fault here...ineffective laws, ineffective penalties and police that can't or don't do their job properly. It's not your bag. No one will give a damn when you or the missus are in hospital.This is a war and you could be under attack. You have to know when to cut and run. I wouldn't risk my family's lives supporting this system with my 'bravery' that's for sure!!!

 

[paulrbarnard]

No, infer means to conclude (from facts) whereas imply means to suggest. The fact that Adefowora and Oyeniyi had access to delivery information might suggest it was they who ordered the items but it does not and cannot conclude anything. A fact can never conclude anything - a fact doesn't have a mind so how can it conclude anything? A fact might suggest (imply) somethng and a person might conclude (infer) something from that fact. The judge's use of infer is simply wrong.

They were convicted. From that point there was no inference.

 

[Blackswanwood]

No, infer means to conclude (from facts) whereas imply means to suggest. The fact that Adefowora and Oyeniyi had access to delivery information might suggest it was they who ordered the items but it does not and cannot conclude anything. A fact can never conclude anything - a fact doesn't have a mind so how can it conclude anything? A fact might suggest (imply) somethng and a person might conclude (infer) something from that fact. The judge's use of infer is simply wrong.

I'd suggest the Oxford, Cambridge and Collins English dictionaries would view with the judge's use of the word to be correct.

 

[Just4Fun]

They were convicted. From that point there was no inference.

The judge was explaining what he concluded from the fact. If there were no inference he must not, by definition, have concluded anything since infer means to conclude from facts. I would find it worrying if the judge did not reach his conclusions based on the facts presented in evidence.

I'd suggest the Oxford, Cambridge and Collins English dictionaries would view with the judge's use of the word to be correct.

Really? Then you would be wrong.

I don't have access to the OED but my copy of The Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English" published by the Oxford University Press defines infer as:

reach an opinion (from facts or reasoning)

The Cambridge online dictionary defines infer as:

to form an opinion or guess that something is true because of the information that you have

Collins says:

If you infer that something is the case, you decide that it is true on the basis of information that you already have.

Indeed, Collins goes further in saying:

Some people use infer to mean 'imply', but many people consider this use to be incorrect.

In all of these it is clear that someone infers something from the facts. The facts do not infer something, they may imply something, and someone might infer (conclude) something based on the facts.

The judge said " the fact ... inferred it was they who ordered the items". Did the fact "reach an opinion" or "form an opinion" or "decide that it is true"? Clearly not: the judge did that.

There are loads of online sources to confirm this, such as
Imply vs. Infer
How to Use Imply vs. infer Correctly – Grammarist
Imply or infer ?

Let's try another example: The judge's incorrect use of "infer" implies that he lacks a good grasp of English. The responses to my comment about that causes me to infer that the judge is not the only one.

 

[selectortone]

Let's try another example: The judge's incorrect use of "infer" implies that he lacks a good grasp of English. The responses to my comment about that causes me to infer that the judge is not the only one.

Shouldn't that be: "The judge's incorrect use of "infer" infers that he lacks a good grasp of English?

 

[Phil Pascoe]

I'd suggest the Oxford, Cambridge and Collins English dictionaries would view with the judge's use of the word to be correct.

Dictionaries record common usage, not necessarily correct usage.

 

[Just4Fun]

Shouldn't that be: "The judge's incorrect use of "infer" infers that he lacks a good grasp of English?

Oh I do hope you are trolling.