Peter of England: He’s still F RE?

[GaryBale]

There's only one tiny problem with all this...

... Peter did not write that email.

I did.

I emailed every desperate sucker on the FB pages who had posted their email address in the hope that Peter would finally acknowledge them, and sent the above on Peter's behalf using a little bit of "from spoofing."

There's been a lot of speculation above this post about how amazingly gullible you have to be to send cash in a brown envelope to a massage parlour.

But let me ask you this: how easy is it to trick people into wire transferring money directly into the bank account of a reputable cancer charity?

Very, apparently. Judging by my fake inbox this morning (which I obersved with the worst hangover imaginable), they've had a good few donations already and it may breach the four-figure mark if "Peter" keeps on his sudden turn to philanthropy.

I'm sure a debate will follow as to the legalities and ethics of my actions here, but to be honest, I don't care: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbWbWIgNpE8

Seriously doubt thats legal, and it's certainly not ethical. I'd imagine the payments would use "WeRe Bank" as the payee though and would either fail or could easily be recalled.

[notorial dissent]

I think you're seriously missing the whole point. I would assume/hope that Zeek gave them a made up set of account information as a precaution, and since he isn't asking for any personal information the suckers clients aren't really in any danger, at least from him. On the other hand, it could well illustrate just how gullible they are.

[guilty]

https://www.fma.gv.at/en/consumers/inve ... -bank.html
Austria just doesn't understand Peter, obviously

[vampireLOREN]

There's only one tiny problem with all this...

... Peter did not write that email.

I did.







Seriously doubt thats legal, and it's certainly not ethical. I'd imagine the payments would use "WeRe Bank" as the payee though and would either fail or could easily be recalled.

But so droll

[Zeke_the_Meek]

Seriously doubt thats legal, and it's certainly not ethical. I'd imagine the payments would use "WeRe Bank" as the payee though and would either fail or could easily be recalled.

I slept pretty soundly last night.

Hadn't considered the 'Payee' thing, though. You might well be right there.

[Zeke_the_Meek]

I think you're seriously missing the whole point. I would assume/hope that Zeek gave them a made up set of account information as a precaution, and since he isn't asking for any personal information the suckers clients aren't really in any danger, at least from him. On the other hand, it could well illustrate just how gullible they are.

The bank details are for a legitimate cancer charity who accepts donations via wire transfer. I'd rather not say which charity as I don't want to start a debate on how worthy they are over another, and not making it public will make it trickier to get a refund when these generous and caring suckers inevitably figure out the money did not end up in Peter's back pocket.

Essentially, a few fools and their money have been parted. That was always going to happen, with my intervention or not; only difference is, that cash has now gone to charity instead of a conman. The world keeps turning.

[notorial dissent]

While your motives may have been pure that was a VERY bad choice as you have now involved an innocent third party who has no idea as to what is going on, and this could cause them some problems, legal and otherwise.

[Forsyth]

While your motives may have been pure that was a VERY bad choice as you have now involved an innocent third party who has no idea as to what is going on, and this could cause them some problems, legal and otherwise.

Indeed. This is simply wrong regardless of the circumstances. Many of the WereBank customers are victims themselves, perhaps greedy, perhaps foolish, but this no more gives you a license to exploit them than it does Peter. The fact that the money is going to a noble cause makes no difference - it is not your money to spend, it is theirs, and in many cases they have turned to Peter as they are in desperate need already and this is only going to make things worse for them.

The probability that the (legitimate) banks and the charity involved will now waste time sorting this out is high, probably costing more money in staff time than the value of the transactions.

It is also quite possible that the police could well become involved. Admittedly, Peter's customers seem reluctant to pursue things with the police so far, but the fact that you may get away with it does not mean that what you have done is right. Again, even if one person reports it to the police, more time (and therefore money) will be wasted even if no significant action is taken.

Personally I feel very uncomfortable that Quatloos could be associated with this, even in the loosest possible way.

[daveBeeston]

Wouldn't what Zeke has done be considered fraud or obtaining money by deception? i mean he has impersonated someone else in order to gain money from others(albeit to no financial gain for himself).
Couldn't the charity also be implicated in this aswell?
I think that although you may find it somewhat funny and deserved to those you have potentially made part with their cash it is in my eyes a quite serious offence, and it is certainly something that i would not be gloating about especially on a site that is all about exposing scams and one that is apparently frequently visited by the very person you've impersonated and those who the members here are trying to stop.

Not very smart at all.

[Forsyth]

Wouldn't what Zeke has done be considered fraud or obtaining money by deception? i mean he has impersonated someone else in order to gain money from others(albeit to no financial gain for himself).

Yes:

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/35/section/2
Fraud by false representation

1. A person is in breach of this section if he—
   1. dishonestly makes a false representation, and
   2. intends, by making the representation—
      1. to make a gain for himself or another, or
      2. to cause loss to another or to expose another to a risk of loss.
2. A representation is false if—
   1. it is untrue or misleading, and
   2. the person making it knows that it is, or might be, untrue or misleading.
3. “Representation” means any representation as to fact or law, including a representation as to the state of mind of—
   1. the person making the representation, or
   2. any other person.
4. A representation may be express or implied.
5. For the purposes of this section a representation may be regarded as made if it (or anything implying it) is submitted in any form to any system or device designed to receive, convey or respond to communications (with or without human intervention).

Couldn't the charity also be implicated in this aswell?

Not in the sense that they could have committed an offence themselves, but certainly in the sense that they might have to help untangle it.

[Zeke_the_Meek]

I have duly taken response on board and emailed the original seven WeRe customers to inform them of the dupe (along with a note on the idiocy of blindly sending money to people.)

This attempt at reversal in no way diminishes my genius, and if it was only myself that I'd put in the firing line, I honestly couldn't care less. But as they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and I had not considered that the charity in question could potentially suffer from my drunken mischief (apparently common sense can't be found at the bottom of a second bottle of rather nice claret.)

Thanks to everyone who pointed out that there were legal ramifications that extended beyond myself. I will leave it to moderator discretion as to whether or not to delete my earlier posts (and those quoting it.)

[Pox]

Apparently common sense can't be found at the bottom of a second bottle of rather nice claret

Given that your email had all the hallmarks of a POE missive, it makes me wonder if that is what fuels his rants?

I imagine that in your case though, that you bought your own claret as opposed to some sucker being duped into buying it for you.

IMO, and my experience, a lot of common sense can be found at the bottom of the odd bottle or two - at least that's how it felt at the time! (and on the odd occasion, even the morning after! )

[exiledscouser]

I'm glad you've retracted this Zeke - a bit unwise.

I will say that despite misgivings you really did capture the style and metre of PoE - I thought it was one of his pronouncements - which is all the more reason to undo this as the target audience have already demonstrated their gullibility - in spades.

Back on topic and Peter is telling the flock that a WeRe ATM is just about to be launched on the High Street and that direct Re to Re transfers will be possible. Short as ever on detail, he's nevertheless buoyant about prospects.

No doubt to go with Re gold impregnated folding money and car insurance emptily promised last year. He's gleeful too about the imminent cataclysmic crash in stock values due this month. Posters who survive culling on his Facebook site all seem to belong to the loon conspiracy community predicated on "Zionist Nazis".

Why anyone can't see through the bullshit and repeated failure is beyond me.

[Pox]

Back on topic and Peter is telling the flock that a WeRe ATM is just about to be launched on the High Street and that direct Re to Re transfers will be possible. Short as ever on detail, he's nevertheless buoyant about prospects.

Would that be on Dulcie Street or will he bring his camper van to a High Street near you with a mobile ATM?

[rumpelstilzchen]

will he bring his camper van to a High Street near you with a mobile ATM?

I can see it now. A keyboard on the side of the van with a slot below. You feed GBP into the slot in exchange for some Re.

[Pox]

will he bring his camper van to a High Street near you with a mobile ATM?

I can see it now. A keyboard on the side of the van with a slot below. You feed GBP into the slot in exchange for some Re.

Exactly - although I was sort of imagining one of those letter box thingies that REal banks have for customers who want to make a deposit 'out of hours'.

With a REal bank however, one would expect that the deposit would reach ones account, but in POE's bank, it would simply go into a bag marked 'swag'.

[Forsyth]

I have duly taken response on board and emailed the original seven WeRe customers to inform them of the dupe (along with a note on the idiocy of blindly sending money to people.)

Thank you Zeke, you've made me a lot happier.

[Hercule Parrot]

I'm glad you've retracted this Zeke - a bit unwise.

I will say that despite misgivings you really did capture the style and metre of PoE - I thought it was one of his pronouncements - which is all the more reason to undo this as the target audience have already demonstrated their gullibility - in spades.

I agree, it was an inspired and hilarious prank. The mimicry was excellent. If only you had specified a void account number, we could have had hours of fun as the confusion developed. Top marks for audacity though ...

[Wake Up! Productions]

I have duly taken response on board and emailed the original seven WeRe customers to inform them of the dupe (along with a note on the idiocy of blindly sending money to people.)

I often come up with hair-brained ideas like this (especially when drinking), but I always try to attempt to seek the advise of the Quatloos "elders" (via PM) before I act upon my ideas. Please keep this in mind for the next time.

Legal and moral issues aside, I thought it was a damn brilliant idea. I personally would have just made it a completely fictional account number, and let PoE deal with all the complaints.

[FatGambit]

Should have used the infamous 88888888 account number they have on the cheques.