Microsoft 365 scam

Received this email today:

Your Mircosoft billing statement is ready URGENT ACTION REQUIRED

Dear gordon
Your billing statement is ready for review and is attached to this email.

Our records indicate that the payment method you used to purchase Exchange Online was declined.

Sincerely, The Mircosoft Online Services Team You’re receiving this email because you’re assigned the Global Administrator [gordon@…]

I never realised I was The Global Administrator!

The obvious pointer to a scam-
from: (not
with an attachment schteam . html, which I will not be opening

plus the fact that I have not purchased Exchange Online make it obviously a scammer.


I had to look back and forth across the two addresses a couple of times before I finally saw the misspelling.

Well spotted!


We had a 3 scam Microsoft charges on a credit card - all for $14.95 - between Christmas and New Year. Beware if you find a charge “MICROSOFT*STORE MSBILL.INFO AUS” on your card.

We do have a Microsoft account but not connected to that particular card.


Microsoft actually do use a .info domain, so it looks like it could be a legitimate subscription charge.
What can you see in your MS account about charges and card details?

1 Like

True, but I was referring to @Windyhill credit card entry. Not any email.

1 Like

I’ve had that one a couple of times with correct spelling. Problem is, I dont have, nor did I ever have, a Microsoft 365 account. Junked.


Hi Gordon,
I have had 5 of this type of email in the last few weeks. 2 for Norton security, 1 for McAfee, 1 for PayPal and a couple of days ago, 1 for Ebay. All using the same sort of billing scam wording. Naturally I checked my bank account over a few days each time, just to be sure there wasn’t a debit. So far all ok. I have reported each one to ScamWatch online, having ‘saved’ the emails so that I could ‘attach’ as requested. I always receive an email back from ScamWatch acknowledging, and showing all that I have reported to them. Hope you will do the same. (ScamWatch is run by the ACCC.)


Just a small addition to what I have said…The last scammer was also not good at maths. The ‘bill’ was for $500 with a 10% tax added. $15 was the 10% tax and of course it should be $50. Obviously not a very bright spark!! Even the ‘wording’ in the others left a little to be desired!!


Online scamming is getting out of hand. I don’t see much action by the authorities other than pushing the responsibility back to us. That’s fine for those of us that are tech savvy and wily enough to spot a scam, but what about those that aren’t? They are the ones the scammers target. They are the ones the authorities should be protecting but they aren’t, evidenced by the billions reported to have been scammed. We hear of drug busts etc. but very little of scammers being caught. Yes, it’s hard but so is arresting a bikie boss.
What can we do? Should we lobby our local representatives? Is there a better way?


At the same time, the sort of scam being discussed in this topic is small fry, and may be a waste of time in terms of prioritising the focus of our elected representatives: Identity Theft - Latest Warning From Scamwatch Regarding - #17 by person

1 Like

Well the scammers just target everyone. Most are aware and do not take the bait. But some do, and get scammed.

Caveat emptor. Why should Governments step in to protect the few scam victims that won’t protect themselves, let alone recompense them after it happens?

Being connected to the Internet and or the phone network is pretty much a requirement in today’s world unless you live as a hermit in a cave. And it is open to all, for good or bad.

So be aware. Trust nothing. Scammers are doing their business, and don’t expect anything will done to disrupt that business in any meaningful way.

What about the scam victims who have taken reasonable steps to protect themselves? What about the banks and others that hide behind their own weaknesses to justify handing over our funds etc to the wrong person? Should their failures go without penalty or compensation to their genuine customers?

Reality is ongoing competition between improving consumer digital literacy and more sophisticated and effective scams. The escalation of data leaks is exposing many more to risk. Our ability to control that risk is arguably being diminished.

Is leaving government out of the discussion and a call to take personal responsibility a call to return to the lawlessness of the Wild West for those who fall victim? Governments exist, hopefully with purpose and intent that we don’t need to take the law physically into our own hands. The consumer holster needs to be more than lightly packed hanging on a belt loaded with wet feathers. :wink:

1 Like

That was the very first thing I saw meltam!

Same here Norma. We get them all the time! All for companies we don’t use.

Gregr, it’s the typo that the first and most obvious clue that it’s scam.

Sure it is obvious. But there are two issues in this post. The first is about a scam with obvious typos and obviously not legitimate, and the second is a recurring direct charge for subscription that may or may not be legitimate. I maintain legitimate unless otherwise corrected.

Perhaps these two should not intermixed as it is causing confusion. Not helped by me posting a response to something that appeared, and subsequently disappeared just after I posted, by someone using the powers of a moderator.

Because we are a society and that’s what societies do. We look after those that can’t help themselves.

1 Like

@Norma That reminds me of the text message I received yesterday from “AustPost”…with a US format date… LOL

There was a link in the text to a… No tracking number. Block and delete.

I don’t even report them anymore unless they are novel and I have to think about whether it could be legit. They are too frequent, and mostly obvious. Like when 10% of 500 supposedly = 15…


With the rise of AI tools (ChatGPT, WordTune and Grammarly), the attacker is getting more sophisticated.

Plus, there is a new domain with .ZIP, it gets even more challenging to identify the threat.