Possible algorithm for returning money given to scammers

Imagine that fraudsters call a bank client, introduce themselves as bank employees, call the bank client by name and patronymic, and, for greater persuasiveness, name the last four digits of the client's bank card.



Further, as a result of talking on the phone for several hours, the client withdraws all his money from the bank account and immediately deposits cash into the personal account of the attackers with the mobile operator.



Do you think this is "sur"? No, this is a real case.





After the bank client realizes that he was deceived, he goes to the police.



When accepting a statement and receiving an explanation from the victim, the police immediately warn that the money cannot be returned.



What can be done in this case?



It begs to contact the bank security service, in which the client has an account.



It is logical that information about the client and his bank account can get to attackers from the bank.



However, the key to the client's trust, which is used by the attackers - his name and patronymic and the four digits of the card - can be found in the application on the smartphone, making a fictitious money transfer in the online bank using the phone number.



That is, to get a "key" to a client, you just need to enter phone numbers at random in the bank's application.



Contacting the bank can help to find the one who initiated the fictitious transfers, if the bank keeps logs of interrupted transactions in the online bank.



However, this does not mean yet - to return the money.



The next direction of the client's actions is the telecom operator, to whose personal account the money is transferred.



In this case, the telecom operator even refuses to accept the application, because the client of the bank (the victim) does not have original checks. The victim left the checks with the police.



Nevertheless, a telecom operator is an important source of information from which you can get information about who owns a personal account and where the money went.



This information must be requested by the police.



But the victim had already been warned that the police would not work. And the powers of the victim in the criminal process are limited to make the police work.



Moreover, even if the perpetrators are identified and convicted, it will be necessary to file separate claims in court in order to compensate the victim for harm.



That is, it will not do without a court. Therefore, it is possible not to wait for the police, but to independently declare demands for the recovery of unjust enrichment in the civil process.



The first question is, to whom should the claims be made?



To the telecom operator, of course.



It is clear that the operator himself may (!) The victim's money and did not appropriate, but the victim does not know other persons.



We need a formal defendant in court to initiate proceedings in the case.



Further, the victim declares in court to demand information about the person on whom the personal account is registered with the telecom operator.



After receiving the information, the bank's client can, as a defendant, change the telecom operator for an attacker or involve an attacker as a co-respondent together with a telecom operator.



It is important that the person to whom the personal account is registered may not be an intruder - the final recipient of funds.



Therefore, in the civil process for the recovery of unjust enrichment, it may be necessary to demand other evidence, which together will make it possible to identify the perpetrators and obtain a decision to recover money from them.



By the way, information from the bank about logs can also be useful here.



Unfortunately, we must not forget that getting a decision on collecting money does not mean getting the money itself.