Ban Ki Moon wrote to me recently.
(Let me just say that even if you know only ONE Ban Ki Moon, you know exactly who I am talking about...)
Anyway, as I was saying... Ban Ki Moon wrote to me in an email informing me that the assembly has had meetings for the past 3 months and it has been decided that United Nations has agreed to compensate “all the people that have been scammed (through dubious emails, no less) in any part of the world.”
According to Ban's (yes, I can very well assume a first name affinity since he personally sent me a message over email from what I am assuming is his personal “att.net” address) “the UNITED NATIONS has agreed to compensate them with the sum of U.S $750,000.00 each and you have to indicate how much you lost in the hands of scammers.”
Ban was good to point out that scams in which I may have lost money include monies that I had not received as “Inheritance,Dating and Lottery payments... and unfinished transaction or international Lottery payment that failed due
to Government problems etc.”
He said that my name was on a list somewhere and that was why he was contacting me. This is actually what set alarm bells off in my head because it clearly means that someone in Ban's team has not done his or her homework – I have not fallen prey to any email scams. (Maybe I should inform him that my name was inadvertently included... we are friends after all since he wrote to me personally from his personal “att.net” address).
Or perhaps I should just contact Mr Billy Foster, who, Ban said in his email, “is in charge of your payment through our office in London UK as he is our representative in Europe,” since Ban might have other more pressing issues on his plate at the moment. (I mean, what are friends if not considerate, Right?)
As I read the message over and over again, it finally dawned on me (slow that I am at times) that I just lost U.S $750,000.00 as a result of my skepticism to respond to incredible email offers.
Maybe I SHOULD write Ban and explain myself, perhaps the UN could sit for the setting up of a consolation prize for people who have NEVER been scammed through dubious emails!
Of course not all scams are perpetrated online or come through emails – some are completed very personal and up close.
For example, an news item I read reported that authorities had arrested a 69-year-old Tampa man for “embezzling $600,000 from a 97-year-old woman and using part of the money to buy himself a 2007 Lamborghini worth nearly $200,000.”
The elderly gentleman supposedly removed nearly $600,000 from the woman's financial accounts to his personal accounts. Authorities uncovered that the Lamborghini was purchased in July against two cheques, totalling $181,229, that were drawn on accounts to which the victim's money was transferred.
In his defence, the 69-year old Lamborghini aficionado had previously been granted authority to oversee the woman's affairs and he WAS designated as the trustee of her living trust. (The report, however, did not mention what their relationship was that would make him so trustworthy in her eyes).
Considering that she was 97, he probably assumed that there was very little required to cover the rest of her living years anyway. And as a trustee to her finances he also assumed she would trust him to hold on to the Lamborghini and not just profit from it (cause that would be bad).
(Let me just say that even if you know only ONE Ban Ki Moon, you know exactly who I am talking about...)
Anyway, as I was saying... Ban Ki Moon wrote to me in an email informing me that the assembly has had meetings for the past 3 months and it has been decided that United Nations has agreed to compensate “all the people that have been scammed (through dubious emails, no less) in any part of the world.”
 |
| A face you can trust |
According to Ban's (yes, I can very well assume a first name affinity since he personally sent me a message over email from what I am assuming is his personal “att.net” address) “the UNITED NATIONS has agreed to compensate them with the sum of U.S $750,000.00 each and you have to indicate how much you lost in the hands of scammers.”
Ban was good to point out that scams in which I may have lost money include monies that I had not received as “Inheritance,Dating and Lottery payments... and unfinished transaction or international Lottery payment that failed due
to Government problems etc.”
He said that my name was on a list somewhere and that was why he was contacting me. This is actually what set alarm bells off in my head because it clearly means that someone in Ban's team has not done his or her homework – I have not fallen prey to any email scams. (Maybe I should inform him that my name was inadvertently included... we are friends after all since he wrote to me personally from his personal “att.net” address).
Or perhaps I should just contact Mr Billy Foster, who, Ban said in his email, “is in charge of your payment through our office in London UK as he is our representative in Europe,” since Ban might have other more pressing issues on his plate at the moment. (I mean, what are friends if not considerate, Right?)
As I read the message over and over again, it finally dawned on me (slow that I am at times) that I just lost U.S $750,000.00 as a result of my skepticism to respond to incredible email offers.
Maybe I SHOULD write Ban and explain myself, perhaps the UN could sit for the setting up of a consolation prize for people who have NEVER been scammed through dubious emails!
*
Of course not all scams are perpetrated online or come through emails – some are completed very personal and up close.
 |
| A face you can trust |
The elderly gentleman supposedly removed nearly $600,000 from the woman's financial accounts to his personal accounts. Authorities uncovered that the Lamborghini was purchased in July against two cheques, totalling $181,229, that were drawn on accounts to which the victim's money was transferred.
In his defence, the 69-year old Lamborghini aficionado had previously been granted authority to oversee the woman's affairs and he WAS designated as the trustee of her living trust. (The report, however, did not mention what their relationship was that would make him so trustworthy in her eyes).
Considering that she was 97, he probably assumed that there was very little required to cover the rest of her living years anyway. And as a trustee to her finances he also assumed she would trust him to hold on to the Lamborghini and not just profit from it (cause that would be bad).
No comments:
Post a Comment