Hyderabad: Crooks have benefited from the uncertainty caused by demonetisation and the push for cashless transactions. Police said that after demonetisation, account-holders were nervous after hearing rumours that bank accounts not complying with Know Your Customer norms would be deactivated.
Many of them revealed their account details, including the CVV number at the rear of the card, and even OTP numbers, to crooks who posed as bank officials.
The number of complaints has seen a rise since demonetisation was announced on November 8 last. In most of the case reported to the police, the victims were highly qualified or even software professionals in some cases.
“In almost all the cases, the caller makes the victim panic by threatening that the account will be suspended. Some people called back to verify, but the caller could convince them by creating a fear of the account being blocked,” said Racha-konda cybercrime inspector Md Riyazuddin.
Most of the victims who lodged complaints were not aware of the cashless transactions, while others who fell prey to ‘vish callers’ — those who fraudulently collect account details by pretending to be bank officials.
The vish callers collect card and bank account details and make transactions. They then call the victims back and ask for the OTP as well. The victims, believing it to be part of the banking process, gave them the details.
Binod Mandal, who was arrested from West Bengal for cheating people, assured his victims when they questioned the deductions from their account that the amount would be refunded within 24 hours. Police suspects that the gangs could have collected the data of account holders from various agencies or could be making calls at random.
Go to the police immediately
Police officers working in the cyber crimes department say that registering a complaint quickly can help retrieve the money. But e-wallet agencies are responding too late and this is hampering the process. In more than 90 per cent of complaints lodged with cyber crime police, the money transferred into the accounts used by the fraudsters was retrieved if the victim lodged a complaint immediately after coming to know that the money was transferred.
In all these cases, the money is first transferred to e-wallets of banks or mobile operators and then diverted to other accounts or spent on purchases. Investigating officers said that e-wallets operated by various banks were responding immediately, but the e-wallets operated by private agencies were delaying the process, which increased the risk of losing the money. While banks have fraud investigating teams to handle such issues, private agencies do not.
“With some agencies, we have to communicate with at least four different levels for processing the complaint or freezing the account. Some agencies respond only to communication from a senior level officer. Such cases become complicated for amount retrieval,” an officer said.
If the money is transferred to an account and is used to make purchases through e-portals, the police can request the e-tailer to block the delivery and refund the amount to the customer through the bank. If the fraudster makes purchases at a point-of-sale in a shopping mall or restaurant, it is difficult to retrieve the money.
“In such cases, we can analyse the CCTV footage and nab the culprit and that will prevent him from cheating other victims,” the officer said.
In one case, a fraudster made more than 10 purchases through an e-portal, but the police tracked the transactions and blocked the delivery and the amount was retrieved. In another case a fraudster had purchased an Apple iPhone through an e-portal, but due to the delay by the victim in lodging a complaint, the police could not block the delivery.
