Thank you,
I will be reporting it tomorrow, I would say the money is long gone
2 Likes
Um, for 12 grand I would be reporting it today.
1 Like
Don’t be too hard on yourself Jim555, you certainly aren’t the only one to get done. I got done for more than that. Read through this thread to see what to do. Best of luck mate
3 Likes
Also get onto ID Care 07 35555900. They will help point you in the right direction on what you need to do regarding id theft.
2 Likes
A question I have that maybe someone can answer, what happens to the money that is recovered by police. Speaking specifically on money that has been scammed ( eg. JGE machinery).
2 Likes
I believe that it is eventually returned to the person who paid the crimminal as it was thir legal property.
3 Likes
@Fred123 is correct. If stolen money (property) is recovered, it is returned to the rightful owner. The NSW Police website has more information (and no different to other states):
https://www.police.nsw.gov.au/crime/are_you_a_victim_of_crime/victims_of_crime/return_of_property
2 Likes
As ASIC provides less and less public information on business registrations and contacts, but offers to sell it, scammers are getting something akin to a free kick 
6 Likes
Yep. Almost a carbon copy of JGE. The same web page layout, using the name and ABN from an existing company, a new web site registered a few weeks ago overseas, the address some shed out in the countryside, the image of the team was stolen from here.
So TJH Equipment are the JGE scammers revisited
7 Likes
Scam used tractor supply
In February this year I arranged for the purchase of a used Kubota tractor and backhoe from DMS Auction Services. Cost was $8300 plus $1000 shipping from Wagga to Brisbane. I paid by wire tx to their bank, when it came time to ship it didn’t turn up, when I checked they said the truck had a serious accident and the tractor was written off. They offer a refund or replacement, as I needed a tractor I chose replacement. The Semone never showed up either and the company had gone. What’s worse is that Consumer Affairs knew they way scam. I still don’t have my money back.
4 Likes
Welcome to the Community @Viking
I have moved your post into this already existing topic on scam machinery sales. These scams spawn new identities and they continue to hurt those who try to purchase through them. Sorry to hear of your experience and Thank you for posting about it, hopefully it will help forewarn others.
4 Likes
What is the name of the company?
How do you know that Consumer Affairs are aware of the scam?
1 Like
I’ve updated my post with name of the company (DMS Auction Services)
I contacted Consumer Affairs and all the did was acknowledge the company was a scam, they never told me how to get my money back
3 Likes
We came to the conclusion DMS were crook back in March. One can only hope that other players since mentioned show up in search engines and warn others off.
3 Likes
We are all left to ask just how many Aussies were taken advantage of by this SCAM? And how much money has been lost.
The restrictions of movement due to Covid may have contributed. The Scams rely on outwitting trusting Aussies.
If not Government, should Google and others also be held to account for providing consumers with the link to the business that is not genuine?
4 Likes
They did in a way. Unless you are luckier than everyone else you cannot and will not because it has been transferred off shore, probably through myriad accounts as well as laundered.
It will have been an expensive lesson.
4 Likes
It seems unreasonable to me that the search engine company would be held accountable for the crimes of the scam business. It is easy to cast about looking for someone else to blame but at the end of the day only one entity should be accountable for the crimes of the scam business i.e. the scam business itself.
It is unclear how a search engine operator would verify that the business is genuine. Mr Google has to buy a tractor successfully first before allowing the business listing? (and then try to sell the tractor?) Then the scammers can make that one transaction a legitimate transaction. (The scammers can somewhat easily detect that the buyer is Mr Google even if Mr Google uses a front company to buy the tractor because the purchase is occurring before the business is listed in search results.)
As commented above about 6 weeks ago, I think the best option here is for government to take action to make it harder and slower to transfer (large amounts of) money overseas as part of a scam. As long as the money is still in Australia, you will get your money back if it’s a scam - even if the process could be a bit painful.
A customer can get a measure of protection by
- dealing only with domains that are in
.com.au - dealing only with a company that will accept payment by credit card (although that is really just pushing the cost of the scam onto all other card users)
1 Like
Doesn’t Google also benefit from being able to serve up the business details? Why does the business which has a different web ID get to the top of Google’s hit parade (search results) so readily?
At the very least with Google and others it would be useful to put a banner across the top of every commercial search result. ‘This business has not been verified by Google as real or legitimate.’ Why shouldn’t Google and others accept responsibility for verifying the results they promote.
Dealing with Amazon or through PayPal both make representations and some attempt to assist or protect customers. Google is more than a search engine. It is both a data aggregator and marketer. Cigarettes come with health warnings. Why not Google?
We do have a seperate topic,
It’s not as is Google is without blame for many things.
P.S.
I do agree we should look for ways that might reduce the risks of any fraudulent sales. There are ways around the FX system and our banking systems (previously raised in this topic) for those intent on doing so.
The most effective protection is at the point of sale. Physically meeting the seller, inspecting the plant, seeking verification the seller has full legal ownership or right to sell, and the plant meets the performance/description as offered. There are options for engaging third parties where one cannot act in person. For payment of larger amounts the option of engaging a solicitor local to the vendor and discussing payment on delivery to either the purchaser’s transport or site is an option.
I’m not sure paying by Credit Card would be wise if the sale is a potential SCAM. Where else in the world would your CC number and CCV etc be 30 seconds later?
1 Like
Yes, Google does benefit. So does every other service provider who is unwittingly involved in this scam.
Yes, Google could do that. Could even make it a money spinner (by using government-backed extortion) to get businesses to pay for verification.
However I think the reality is that then virtually all businesses would be marked as unverified - so such a marking would not benefit the consumer.
Think about it in the context of social media. A very small percentage of participants have verified identity. Almost all are unverified (which doesn’t make them dodgy). Would you bother to pay for verification? (if you don’t participate in social media then take it as a hypothetical question or take it as a question regarding your kids or your grandkids …)
Well you didn’t specify how Google would perform such verification? How practical would it be? What would it cost Google? What would it cost the business? What would it cost the consumer? What steps to verify would be deemed adequate by the government? What exactly would Google be attempting to verify?
If Google carries out all the steps deemed adequate by the government and a consumer still gets scammed, who is legally liable?
What happens when Google erroneously declines to provide verification i.e. erroneously decides that a business is a scam and hence implicitly falsely labels it a scam?
What could Google do that a consumer can’t do? Wouldn’t any sensible consumer want to verify the business him- or herself before handing over a large amount of money?
What if it’s not being promoted by Google? i.e. just came up in unpromoted search results?
Google is only one way that a consumer finds businesses. I almost never use Google (because I don’t wish to share my life with Google).
To answer your question though:
- because you are attempting to make someone else responsible for the crimes of another. I understand that government these days does that a lot.
- because there are far too many unanswered questions about how this would work or whether it even would
- because I am not satisfied that you have exhausted better(?) alternatives if you are looking for more legislation
Less than the very least would be limiting this to sellers who are selling expensive items. While in theory you could apply the same logic to sellers who are mostly selling items for $20, the impost becomes more significant for cheaper items.
