TWO stories on page 2 of today’s Bay Post/Moruya Examiner are disturbingly similar.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
In the first case, businessman Adam Pike has become another on a long list of Eurobodalla people on the scammer hit list.
Mr Pike was not easily intimidated and is unlikely to ever make a would-be scammer’s day.
Yet he is correct to be concerned for others.
The Bay Post/Moruya Examiner has been contacted several times by the families of elderly or impressionable people who have either been scammed or come perilously close to revealing vital personal and financial information.
The aggression and threats shown by the scammer who spoke to Mr Pike were disturbing.
Many of us would not fall for such tactics, but a vulnerable person, behind on a tax return, or who had failed to lodge information with a government department on time, just might.
If scams such as this were not sometimes successful, the perpetrators would turn to other pursuits.
It was with a sense of concern that we have published reporter Carmen McIntosh’s account of being threatened – not by an illegal phone scammer – but by a NSW Government authority.
“Pay up now or go to jail,” was the line used by the illegal scammer; “Pay up or lose your right to drive,” was the government line.
Never mind that Ms McIntosh had done nothing to deserve such an inconvenience.
She was the victim of a train-tunnel-sized hole in the NSW transport system’s compliance procedures.
Someone fails to purchase a ticket on a train, gives any old name and address, fails to provide identification – and someone unlucky enough to have a similar or the same name must prove they were not involved.
Years after an event she had no knowledge of, Ms McIntosh was asked to prove her whereabouts on a given day, at a given time.
Could you?
Many people in this situation probably roll over and pay – just to keep their licence or vehicle registration.
One party in these two scenarios might have the authority of the law, but both are employing questionable ethical tactics.
Surely a stronger burden of proof should be required before such pressure is brought to bear.