Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 67 posts

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#51

Post by fakedang »

chrisstu wrote: post #16
fakedang wrote: post #5

> Eventually, she requested a refund through her bank and complained to the UK's Financial Ombudsman Service. A senior investigator there has provisionally recommended that the bank return $39,000 (£30,000) to Amy, according to documents seen by the BBC. She is still waiting for her bank to agree to the recommendation. Glad that this is possible in the UK. There are a ton of folks in Dubai itself who have fallen to s…

And guess who is paying for her mistake? Everyone except the perpetrator. That bank refund comes from somewhere.

Exactly, which is why banks are loathe to approve such transfers in the first place. I'm wholly surprised that the banking ombudsman is able to force such transaction reversals.

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#52

Post by harvey9 »

tapotatonumber9 wrote: post #22
fakedang wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but these tools are far from usable for the average run-of-the-mill guy. They are specifically tailored for developers and people who can code. The people who were scammed were literally average folks, a working mum, a tarot-card reader, a truck driver.... If a scammer wants to, they can flee from all repercussions without building anything, even if all the AI tools were available to them. While Josh Adler is…

This wouldn’t be the first time “tarot card reader” and “scammed” have appeared in the same sentence.

I'll give her the benefit of the doubt here. I'm also going to presume she wanted something that could be done with Squarespace and Stripe. Years ago I heard of someone calling Dell sales looking to set up file and printer sharing at a small business. Dell offered them a PowerEdge server.

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#53

Post by luckylion »

graemep wrote: post #41
graemep wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the bank just takes a loss if necessary. See my comment above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43810904

But it does not apply to international transfers: Apparently international payments are no covered: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints... Of course the victims might have transferred to an account the scammer has in the UK

Falling for a company that doesn't deliver the level of quality it promised seems to stretch the definition of "scam".

Is there any requirement of diligence, or can you basically jump on any "100% profit in 3 weeks" scam and get (most of) the money back when it doesn't work out?

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#54

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

catgary wrote: post #23
jongjong wrote: post #9

>> So don't tell the client that it cannot be done because we'll find [a contractor] that can do it when they've paid As a software developer (who did contract work in the past). I think this is actually sound logic within certain parameters... Sometimes clients do ask for impossible or infeasible things. But in most cases, the constraints are money and skills. Someone who is good at sales should not have to reject c…

> Someone who is good at sales should not have to reject clients because something is difficult. What does that even mean, honestly? Because I would argue that a salesperson who doesn’t accurately represent the product or service they’re selling is a conman, and I think there is a fair bit of established law on the subject.

Ideally, skillsets should align. If a person sells well, but the company can't deliver on that sale, something clearly is amiss. It could be that the salesguy overpromised, executives saw what they wanted to see, or that the delivering team failed.

FWIW, reading the article on that app, it did not sound particular awe-inspiring ( though kinda useful ) so it does not sound like level of technical challenge was the issue here.

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#55

Post by anshumankmr »

dsq wrote: post #35
anshumankmr wrote: post #24

I know a couple of people who have sort of done that, including one person who made an app to view all books in all libraries of Delhi. He bought a nice sedan with his seed money and bragged about it. (probably worth a few lakhs easily, not like a high end one but better than what I had cause I had just graduated and was interning)

>app to view all books in all libraries of Delhi Is this an example of a scam or a legit app? Sounds nice but not profitable.

I never used the app so cannot comment. The guy is legitimate. He works at a top tier company now is all I can say...

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#56

Post by A4ET8a8uTh0_v2 »

nikanj wrote: post #12
jongjong wrote: post #9

>> So don't tell the client that it cannot be done because we'll find [a contractor] that can do it when they've paid As a software developer (who did contract work in the past). I think this is actually sound logic within certain parameters... Sometimes clients do ask for impossible or infeasible things. But in most cases, the constraints are money and skills. Someone who is good at sales should not have to reject c…

"It's not impossible, you are just obstinate. Get it done or we find someone with more skills" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

'Surely it is not a difficult task' got me.

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#57

Post by salawat »

kasey_junk wrote: post #42
dakiol wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don’t get it. Cheaper ways of doing software have been always available; that doesn’t mean they are the best way. You get what you pay for, as usual. Anybody thinking that 2025 AI is some sort of magical “free lunch” device, is just delusional.

That paying more insures quality software delivered by humans is delusional as well. Half the early startup code I’ve seen delivered by agencies can best be described as performance art. At least with AI delivered code the most likely output is some middle of the road boilerplate.

[flagged]

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#58

Post by fakedang »

tapotatonumber9 wrote: post #22
fakedang wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but these tools are far from usable for the average run-of-the-mill guy. They are specifically tailored for developers and people who can code. The people who were scammed were literally average folks, a working mum, a tarot-card reader, a truck driver.... If a scammer wants to, they can flee from all repercussions without building anything, even if all the AI tools were available to them. While Josh Adler is…

This wouldn’t be the first time “tarot card reader” and “scammed” have appeared in the same sentence.

To be fair, I presume most of the folks getting their tarot cards read at some county fair are usually doing it for the cheap entertainment value rather than actual actionable advice. Pay $10 for a few laughs for some time.

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#59

Post by graemep »

luckylion wrote: post #53
graemep wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it does not apply to international transfers: Apparently international payments are no covered: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints... Of course the victims might have transferred to an account the scammer has in the UK

Falling for a company that doesn't deliver the level of quality it promised seems to stretch the definition of "scam". Is there any requirement of diligence, or can you basically jump on any "100% profit in 3 weeks" scam and get (most of) the money back when it doesn't work out?

No, but in this case I think it does meet the definition of scam.

There is a requirement for diligence, but this requires not being "grossly negligent". Even this is waived for people classed as vulnerable (I do not know exactly what that means).

Re: 'Tech entrepreneur took our money but failed to deliver our startup dreams'

#60

Post by retube »

fakedang wrote: post #51
chrisstu wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And guess who is paying for her mistake? Everyone except the perpetrator. That bank refund comes from somewhere.

Exactly, which is why banks are loathe to approve such transfers in the first place. I'm wholly surprised that the banking ombudsman is able to force such transaction reversals.

> wholly surprised that the banking ombudsman is able to force such transaction reversal

They can't force transaction reversals or clawbanks. They actually force the bank to take the hit.

Post reply on HN