"Hello this is Lenny..."
Calling a real estate robocaller back
121–127 of 127 posts
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
The telephone network was designed with total trust for “network operators” who essentially have “root” to do anything. This worked OK when the only operators were the various national phone monopolies (Cap’n Crunch notwithstanding), but today that level of access is much easier to get and abuse, and is difficult to trace. There are efforts to bolt-on security to the telephone network but it’s really hard. I think it…
> Cap’n Crunch notwithstanding I assume you mean Captain Crunch, not the breakfast cereal... :-)
He probably does mean the cereal, since it had the whistle that gave Captain Crunch (AKA John Draper) his name.
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
Verizon’s scumbag lawyer was appointed as head of the FCC and promptly rolled regulation on robo-calls.
You got it backwards? https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-adopts-rules-help-block-ill...
No, he was against regulation and now that robocalls are the #1 FCC complaint, they’re telling telecoms to fix the problem. For example: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2018/03/ajit-pai-celebra...
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Am I the only one who thinks this is bullshit? How is PATLive not also complicit in the crimes they're looking for "Will" to prosecute in? I get so tired of these B2B service providers who get caught up doing borderline illegal shit and then just shrug their shoulders and say "not our responsibility." Everybody has these clauses doing the ass covering so they can sell services to anyone who knocks and they're never h…
On a related note - I've had the opposite experience but it wasn't with telecom related services - it was cloud services. A friend of mine started a business that focuses on the highly anticipated luxury clothing and sneaker releases. He basically does a proxy business that routes traffic through his network so that people can use multiple IPs that aren't banned on those retailers websites so that they can purchase m…
I hate your business helping middlemen scalpers. Middlemen scalpers are just barely different than phone scammers. It may not be technically illegal, but it's a detriment to society.
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Sounds OK in theory Sounds terrible in theory!
It’s not if the income stream and high yield rate from a seller financing deal is more important to you (as the maker of the note) than a lump sum of cash. Everyone has different financial requirements, collateral they’re willing to put at risk, etc. You’re using today’s dollars (or assets) to find ways to buy more of tomorrow’s dollars (“investing”). The paperwork isn’t too difficult to put together either.
I can't imagine why this ever would make sense. Only scammers would benefit would accept this, because of the lack of clarity in ownership, it's like a deliberate attempt to circumvent normal financial transactions, which only benefits scammers.
It strikes me as the same thing as the fake-check auto purchase scams that infest different on-line auto sales channels.
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
The patlive.com service does seem to be the obvious place to track down who their lawbreaking client is. It's a US company, which was probably a mistake. I assume "Will" could have contracted with a service outside the US. On the plus side, patlive.com charges $1/minute as their cheapest plan. Robodialing them back, with a sufficiently clever script, would be costly for "Will".
I looked at PatLive's FAQ and there's no contract required. You pay by Visa, MC, or AMEX. If you can use a reloadable card then they probably don't know who you are.
Since the patlive service and all those 'answering services' that you get are basically faciliating a scam, I'm sure a serious prosecutor could get a court order telling them to pass the information on that they had about the underlying person.
If it was a reloadable card, you can still figure it out with more effort. You threaten to sue them into oblivion as facilitating criminal actions, and you get them to get you on a real phone number with the scammer, and then you track them down that way. You just have to try harder.
A reporter could pursue this by getting a job with that firm and tracking backwards.
Re: Calling a real estate robocaller back
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s not if the income stream and high yield rate from a seller financing deal is more important to you (as the maker of the note) than a lump sum of cash. Everyone has different financial requirements, collateral they’re willing to put at risk, etc. You’re using today’s dollars (or assets) to find ways to buy more of tomorrow’s dollars (“investing”). The paperwork isn’t too difficult to put together either.
I can't imagine why this ever would make sense. Only scammers would benefit would accept this, because of the lack of clarity in ownership, it's like a deliberate attempt to circumvent normal financial transactions, which only benefits scammers. It strikes me as the same thing as the fake-check auto purchase scams that infest different on-line auto sales channels.
You should read more on seller/owner financing to understand why one would use it in a transaction before dismissing it as a scam. To think only scammers would benefit is an ignorant position to hold if you don't understand why counterparties in a real estate transaction would elect this financing mechanism over conventional financing. Ownership interest is still recorded with the local jurisdiction, so nothing is hidden (although with a land trust, you can hide beneficial interest [it's treated as personal property and handled with trust docs; you could think of it as tracking real estate ownership "off ledger" since it's not recorded with a deed] so people don't know who own a parcel).