5 ms·

That's messed up — it pushes the blame onto the victims for not monitoring.

by rectang 5y ago

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
_jal 5y ago
Rather similar to "identity theft", the strange name for a particular form of (usually bank) fraud.
- K0balt 5y ago
  It’s called identity theft to make it more the victims problem. If it was bank fraud, the bank would definitely have to deal with all aspects. As it is, consumers get a big chunk of the burden.
kelnos 5y ago
Please don't throw around accusations of victim-blaming like this. No one is claiming that the victim is at fault. But I do think it's useful information to pass along that it's possible to get notified of things like this before they become big problems. It's like... it's not my fault if I get mugged at 3am in a part of the city known for being full of violent crime, but I also should have known better than to be walking around in a part of the city known for violent crime at 3 in the morning. Just because I am the victim, it doesn't mean I couldn't have avoided an incident if I'd used common sense. It's about outcomes and reality: sometimes we have to take on a little extra responsibility in order to make it less likely a bad thing will happen. That's not fair or just, but it's the way the world works.
- rectang 5y ago
  The problem is the absurdly unjust system that needs monitoring. It's not "just the way the world works", because it doesn't have to be the way that it is, and it should not be the way that it is. A system that requires constant, complicated intervention to function properly ensures that those with the resources and background to know that they have to exercise constant vigilance against malfeasance will come out ahead over the long run.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - wins32767 5y ago
    In general that's true, but in this particular case I'm not sure it follows. This is a very infrequent occurrence, which is why it made the news. From a societal perspective, further investment in security here is probably a net drag since all those security measures will also apply to every valid sale and there are vastly more of those. The pot of money that pays out to victims of fraud doesn't make those people whole, but it's enough to solve the problem well enough that it's probably reasonably close to a global minimum in terms of total cost across everyone in society. For those that are concerned about the personal risk, being able to do your own monitoring is a nice enhancement.
    - lazide 5y ago
      It is a infrequent yet catastrophic risk however for everyone that owns any land or property in the UK - and it would definitely keep me up at night if I had any property there!
      - blitzar 5y ago
        > it would definitely keep me up at night if I had any property there If that would keep you up at night, then given all the actual dangers in the world you have never slept.
  - OJFord 5y ago
    What is unjust? There's (claimed) fraud committed, and it's under investigation. 'Justice has not yet been served', sure, but maybe let 'the system' work before decrying it as 'unjust'? What would you have be done differently, immediately turf out the new 'owner', who in his eyes paid for it fair and square? Assuming it's all true, presumably it will be returned to the true owner, the transaction reversed, and the cheated non-owner will have a solid civil case against the defrauder for the inconvenience and expense.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  > Please don't throw around accusations of victim-blaming like this. You're pissing into a hurricane. Complaining of victim blaming at the slightest opportunity will persist so long as it is rewarded with up-votes. You get what you incentivize.
dahfizz 5y ago
This is a pathetic and harmful attitude. You should not encourage victims (or would be victims) to be helpless.
- eropple 5y ago
  I immediately parsed 'rectang's post as not implicating the failure-prone system that allows this and necessitates having the victims of such fraud be vigilant in such a manner. And they are correct.
sdenton4 5y ago
Truth. A much better system would be for the titles office to proactively get in touch with owners through a second channel to inform them of any activity/changes, including change of communication details.
hypertele-Xii 5y ago
Security and freedom are both active pursuits. Anything unattended will be repurposed and recycled by law of nature, in one way or another. We humans can and do try to fight against nature. But that's exactly what it is, a fight! And I doubt the Art of War said "Pay no attention to your enemies. They will leave you be."

That's messed up — it pushes the blame onto the victims for not monitoring.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

_jal 5y ago

Rather similar to "identity theft", the strange name for a particular form of (usually bank) fraud.

K0balt 5y ago
It’s called identity theft to make it more the victims problem. If it was bank fraud, the bank would definitely have to deal with all aspects. As it is, consumers get a big chunk of the burden.

kelnos 5y ago

Please don't throw around accusations of victim-blaming like this. No one is claiming that the victim is at fault. But I do think it's useful information to pass along that it's possible to get notified of things like this before they become big problems. It's like... it's not my fault if I get mugged at 3am in a part of the city known for being full of violent crime, but I also should have known better than to be walking around in a part of the city known for violent crime at 3 in the morning. Just because I am the victim, it doesn't mean I couldn't have avoided an incident if I'd used common sense. It's about outcomes and reality: sometimes we have to take on a little extra responsibility in order to make it less likely a bad thing will happen. That's not fair or just, but it's the way the world works.

rectang 5y ago
The problem is the absurdly unjust system that needs monitoring. It's not "just the way the world works", because it doesn't have to be the way that it is, and it should not be the way that it is. A system that requires constant, complicated intervention to function properly ensures that those with the resources and background to know that they have to exercise constant vigilance against malfeasance will come out ahead over the long run.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- wins32767 5y ago
  In general that's true, but in this particular case I'm not sure it follows. This is a very infrequent occurrence, which is why it made the news. From a societal perspective, further investment in security here is probably a net drag since all those security measures will also apply to every valid sale and there are vastly more of those. The pot of money that pays out to victims of fraud doesn't make those people whole, but it's enough to solve the problem well enough that it's probably reasonably close to a global minimum in terms of total cost across everyone in society. For those that are concerned about the personal risk, being able to do your own monitoring is a nice enhancement.
  - lazide 5y ago
    It is a infrequent yet catastrophic risk however for everyone that owns any land or property in the UK - and it would definitely keep me up at night if I had any property there!
    - blitzar 5y ago
      > it would definitely keep me up at night if I had any property there If that would keep you up at night, then given all the actual dangers in the world you have never slept.
- OJFord 5y ago
  What is unjust? There's (claimed) fraud committed, and it's under investigation. 'Justice has not yet been served', sure, but maybe let 'the system' work before decrying it as 'unjust'? What would you have be done differently, immediately turf out the new 'owner', who in his eyes paid for it fair and square? Assuming it's all true, presumably it will be returned to the true owner, the transaction reversed, and the cheated non-owner will have a solid civil case against the defrauder for the inconvenience and expense.
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
> Please don't throw around accusations of victim-blaming like this. You're pissing into a hurricane. Complaining of victim blaming at the slightest opportunity will persist so long as it is rewarded with up-votes. You get what you incentivize.

dahfizz 5y ago

This is a pathetic and harmful attitude. You should not encourage victims (or would be victims) to be helpless.

eropple 5y ago
I immediately parsed 'rectang's post as not implicating the failure-prone system that allows this and necessitates having the victims of such fraud be vigilant in such a manner. And they are correct.

sdenton4 5y ago

Truth. A much better system would be for the titles office to proactively get in touch with owners through a second channel to inform them of any activity/changes, including change of communication details.

hypertele-Xii 5y ago

Security and freedom are both active pursuits. Anything unattended will be repurposed and recycled by law of nature, in one way or another. We humans can and do try to fight against nature. But that's exactly what it is, a fight! And I doubt the Art of War said "Pay no attention to your enemies. They will leave you be."