Can Western Union Sue or press Charges
Date: Thu, 03/20/2008 - 01:16
Some money was sent and collected, via a credit card. Neither "sender" nor "receiver" participated in the transaction. It was fraud, so the credit card company reimbursed the card holder.
Western Union threatens collection and/or charges.
The total amount was $99.
What you're describing sounds an awful lot like felony identity
What you're describing sounds an awful lot like felony identity theft. I think you ought to speak to a good lawyer immediately. Paying back the $99 wouldn't hurt, either.
If someone used the cardholders card without their permission th
If someone used the cardholders card without their permission then the card holder would need to file a police report.
Sounds like she did a dispute on the charge, that appeared on hi
Sounds like she did a dispute on the charge, that appeared on his card, with the credit card company and won it. The CC then reversed the charge, not holding the card holder responsible for it.
It's been a long time since I dealt with any rules concerning unauthorized CC charges and how they affected the merchants and/or card holder. However, I would think, since there is fraud involved and the CC company agrees with Monaleesa by having reversed the charge oh her credit card, Western Union needs to be taking it up with whoever was originally involved in the transaction. If money was sent and received using Monaleesa's card, then there should be some kind of record of whoever sent it and received it. If the sender was not Monaleesa, as she seems to state in the OP, then Western Union should be following up with that person, not Monaleesa.
I've never sent or received anything by western union; however, shouldn't there be some kind of record as to who the sender and receiver is? Doesn't the sender have to provide some kind of contact information? If the money was sent directly to the receiver's bank account, there should also be some sort of record of where it was sent. All western union would have to do in that case is reverse the ACH or recall the wire (if it was sent by wire.)
And J's correct too, if there was some sort of fraud with her card, Monaleesa should follow up with the authorities, providing WU with the police report. If she truly did not authorize the $99 charge, then WU needs to go after either the sender or receiver.
I think, however, there is more going on here than we know.
Western Union sent a letter to me saying the money was ordered f
Western Union sent a letter to me saying the money was ordered from my telephone. Well, it wasn't. It must be a form letter to anyone who has Western Union charges removed from their credit card.
When I send money via Western Union, I ask that the receiver show ID. The person whom Western Union says collected the money, was not in town...so, I know ID wasn't required to get the cash.
The same day, my credit card number was used else where, to get cash.
So, Western Union is threatening to report me to a collection agency or the police.
They can't report me to a collection agency becasue they don't have my SS#. They can't expect the police to chase me down when it was a credit card transaction...it was not a robbery in person.
Western Union sent a letter to me saying the money was ordered f
Western Union sent a letter to me saying the money was ordered from my telephone. Well, it wasn't. It must be a form letter to anyone who has Western Union charges removed from their credit card.
When I send money via Western Union, I ask that the receiver show ID. The person whom Western Union says collected the money, was not in town...so, I know ID wasn't required to get the cash.
The same day, my credit card number was used else where, to get cash.
So, Western Union is threatening to report me to a collection agency or the police.
They can't report me to a collection agency becasue they don't have my SS#. They can't expect the police to chase me down when it was a credit card transaction...it was not a robbery in person.
youdont know how WU works, I am guessing. This is why WU is use
youdont know how WU works, I am guessing. This is why WU is used all the time for fraud--because the receiver can pick up the money anywhere. You can send a WU payment to someone in Little Rock, Arkansas, and that person can access that money, and pick up the payment, from San Francisco, CA. It happens every day. This is why people all over the world have used WU to defraud others....because it is basically untraceable. If you think youre sending a WU payment to someone in London, England, and they pick it up in San Juan, Puerto Rico, then the authorities wont have any way to even know that.
This all means this--the person that they say collected the payment could have done so from anywhere. Out of town doesnt matter. All that is needed unless ID is specifically required by the sender is the Money Transfer Control Number. If someone knows that number and the dollar amount and sender, regardless of their actual name, then they can pick up that payment.
I called the police and they are investigating. WU doesn't have
I called the police and they are investigating. WU doesn't have my SS# so they can't report to a credit agency. And, if they call the police, the police will just say there is an ongoing investigation.