3 ms·

>Seemingly on cue, Tristan followed up. “Time for some coming clean,” he confessed. “I’m actually a scammer and the owner of HCH doesn’t have anything to do wit

>Seemingly on cue, Tristan followed up. “Time for some coming clean,” he confessed. “I’m actually a scammer and the owner of HCH doesn’t have anything to do with this.” That's on odd admission from the scammer, when they could have said nothing,

matsemann 3y ago
To me it almost sounds like the scam is to get the goods into a storage facility they own and extort the owner of the goods for a high storage fee to get it released. And also rack up the fees by denying any claim of actual ownership for some period. Aka the scammer wants the victim to know where the goods are. So almost like a shady towing company taking a car.
- lawlessone 3y ago
  That is what I am thinking too.
- Matthias247 3y ago
  It sounds like it, but it still doesn't make sense to me. A scammer would want to be anonymous so they can't be prosecuted. But a warehouse owner would be well known.
  - TheCleric 3y ago
    That’s the thing. You have the “unassociated” scammer admit to it otherwise they don’t know to come get the shipment (and pay the fee).
    - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
      Maybe the scammer got stuck on the storage fee and paperwork too while he spent the time searching for a buyer for this unique product. Then when he identified the fence he was into storage fees deeper than his liquidity (beyond merely cutting the scam in half-- his first plan). So he had the broker pay storage, release the product, then targeted the broker a second time with the same scam-- same board, same method, this time laser-focused and with success.
    - atombender 3y ago
      Why does the scammer need to contact them? Why can't the warehouse call and go "Uh, we seem to have your shipment, I don't know why it was off-loaded here, but now that it's here you need to pay us"?
zoky 3y ago
Especially when they hadn’t even made any money on the scam, according to the article. What’s the angle here? It’s a bit far-fetched I suppose, but the only possible explanation I can see for all of this is that this is an attempted (but bungled) insurance fraud scheme on the part of Bokksu. Especially given the conclusion of the article, where it turns out that a Bokksu subsidiary was in charge of handing off the shipment to the supposed trucking company. I wonder if there were actually Kit Kats in the shipment at all…
- unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
  Easy to find out since half are still at the warehouse....
  - zoky 3y ago
    It occurred to me though that it could also be a “double-dipping” scam. The fake shipping company supposedly “loses” the merchandise, an insurance claim is filed, then the Kit Kats are quietly retrieved and resold. In that case, even if the insurance company refuses to pay out (as they did) it's not a total loss, as they're only out a few grand in storage fees. It'd be fairly low risk as well, as there wouldn't be any tangible evidence of fraud, and in the worst case it wouldn't be hard to recover the Kit Kats and pretend they were miraculously found. It still seems sort of unlikely to me that Bokksu was attempting to commit insurance fraud, but it's hard to deny that the facts seem oddly to fit. Why would the scammer take the truckload to a cold storage facility, rather than, say, just abandoning the containers somewhere? Why would he admit to being a scammer, if not in order to provide a basis for an insurance claim? What possible benefit was there to the scammer, when he didn't even get any money for his role in the scheme (at least, not from the trucking broker)? And why would Bokksu not disclose until well after the fact that they owned the company that was responsible for releasing the containers to the trucking company? For a company valued at $100M, $110K does seem like a trifling amount of money to commit fraud over, but stranger things have certainly happened.
    - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
pstrateman 3y ago
Suspiciously convenient for filling an insurance claim to have a direct admission of fraud.
- closewith 3y ago
  Not convenient enough, given the claim was denied.
  - pstrateman 3y ago
    They tried and failed.
busyant 3y ago
> That's on odd admission from the scammer, when they could have said nothing, Whenever I read stuff like this, I end up feeling like I'm not imaginative enough to scam people. Also, this isn't the same thing, but ... years ago, when Craigslist was running strong, I responded to a CL post to purchase a used laptop. The CL post was really well done, quite detailed (I remember it had photos and talked about how it was in tip-top shape except for the screen having a dead pixel in the lower left). But the price was juuuuust a little too good to be true. I eventually emailed the guy and said something like, "This feels like a scam." To my surprise, he came clean and asked me not to report it to CL!!! Humanity often confuses me.
- neilv 3y ago
  > To my surprise, he came clean and asked me not to report it to CL Sounds like a stoner or kid? (There definitely seemed to be a lot of stoners on CL, at least responding to forsale posts.)
anigbrowl 3y ago
Feels like insurance fraud.
qingcharles 3y ago
When I was awarded MVP by Microsoft in like, 2004, they sent me a really nice watch by DHL. I went to DHL warehouse and picked up the shipping box. I opened the box as I walked to my car. Inside was the watch box. I opened the watch box. Inside was no watch. Inside was a folded piece of DHL-headed yellow paper which had the following hand-written on it: SORRY I STOLE YOUR WATCH
- jldl805 3y ago
  I need a follow up...what happened? Did they send you another?
  - qingcharles 3y ago
    Yes, Microsoft, bless them, sent me another out right away. I don't think anyone followed up with DHL. I went back in the DHL office after I found the piece of paper and showed them and we all had a good laugh, but I think they told me to just call Microsoft to sort it out.
eduction 3y ago
My theory on this - they placed the goods in storage and could not fence them quickly but had found a buyer. Paying the storage fee would kill their profit. So they tell him where the goods are, betting he will 1. Pay the fee 2. Be stupid enough to seek a driver in the same fashion as he found the scammer. Notice, the person who picked up goods for him after he paid a storage fee was also a scammer. My guess is it is the same as the first scammer or in cahoots.

matsemann 3y ago

To me it almost sounds like the scam is to get the goods into a storage facility they own and extort the owner of the goods for a high storage fee to get it released. And also rack up the fees by denying any claim of actual ownership for some period. Aka the scammer wants the victim to know where the goods are. So almost like a shady towing company taking a car.

lawlessone 3y ago
That is what I am thinking too.
Matthias247 3y ago
It sounds like it, but it still doesn't make sense to me. A scammer would want to be anonymous so they can't be prosecuted. But a warehouse owner would be well known.
- TheCleric 3y ago
  That’s the thing. You have the “unassociated” scammer admit to it otherwise they don’t know to come get the shipment (and pay the fee).
  - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
    Maybe the scammer got stuck on the storage fee and paperwork too while he spent the time searching for a buyer for this unique product. Then when he identified the fence he was into storage fees deeper than his liquidity (beyond merely cutting the scam in half-- his first plan). So he had the broker pay storage, release the product, then targeted the broker a second time with the same scam-- same board, same method, this time laser-focused and with success.
  - atombender 3y ago
    Why does the scammer need to contact them? Why can't the warehouse call and go "Uh, we seem to have your shipment, I don't know why it was off-loaded here, but now that it's here you need to pay us"?

zoky 3y ago

Especially when they hadn’t even made any money on the scam, according to the article. What’s the angle here? It’s a bit far-fetched I suppose, but the only possible explanation I can see for all of this is that this is an attempted (but bungled) insurance fraud scheme on the part of Bokksu. Especially given the conclusion of the article, where it turns out that a Bokksu subsidiary was in charge of handing off the shipment to the supposed trucking company. I wonder if there were actually Kit Kats in the shipment at all…

unyttigfjelltol 3y ago
Easy to find out since half are still at the warehouse....
- zoky 3y ago
  It occurred to me though that it could also be a “double-dipping” scam. The fake shipping company supposedly “loses” the merchandise, an insurance claim is filed, then the Kit Kats are quietly retrieved and resold. In that case, even if the insurance company refuses to pay out (as they did) it's not a total loss, as they're only out a few grand in storage fees. It'd be fairly low risk as well, as there wouldn't be any tangible evidence of fraud, and in the worst case it wouldn't be hard to recover the Kit Kats and pretend they were miraculously found. It still seems sort of unlikely to me that Bokksu was attempting to commit insurance fraud, but it's hard to deny that the facts seem oddly to fit. Why would the scammer take the truckload to a cold storage facility, rather than, say, just abandoning the containers somewhere? Why would he admit to being a scammer, if not in order to provide a basis for an insurance claim? What possible benefit was there to the scammer, when he didn't even get any money for his role in the scheme (at least, not from the trucking broker)? And why would Bokksu not disclose until well after the fact that they owned the company that was responsible for releasing the containers to the trucking company? For a company valued at $100M, $110K does seem like a trifling amount of money to commit fraud over, but stranger things have certainly happened.
  - unyttigfjelltol 3y ago

pstrateman 3y ago

Suspiciously convenient for filling an insurance claim to have a direct admission of fraud.

closewith 3y ago
Not convenient enough, given the claim was denied.
- pstrateman 3y ago
  They tried and failed.

busyant 3y ago

> That's on odd admission from the scammer, when they could have said nothing, Whenever I read stuff like this, I end up feeling like I'm not imaginative enough to scam people. Also, this isn't the same thing, but ... years ago, when Craigslist was running strong, I responded to a CL post to purchase a used laptop. The CL post was really well done, quite detailed (I remember it had photos and talked about how it was in tip-top shape except for the screen having a dead pixel in the lower left). But the price was juuuuust a little too good to be true. I eventually emailed the guy and said something like, "This feels like a scam." To my surprise, he came clean and asked me not to report it to CL!!! Humanity often confuses me.

neilv 3y ago
> To my surprise, he came clean and asked me not to report it to CL Sounds like a stoner or kid? (There definitely seemed to be a lot of stoners on CL, at least responding to forsale posts.)

anigbrowl 3y ago

Feels like insurance fraud.

qingcharles 3y ago

When I was awarded MVP by Microsoft in like, 2004, they sent me a really nice watch by DHL. I went to DHL warehouse and picked up the shipping box. I opened the box as I walked to my car. Inside was the watch box. I opened the watch box. Inside was no watch. Inside was a folded piece of DHL-headed yellow paper which had the following hand-written on it: SORRY I STOLE YOUR WATCH

jldl805 3y ago
I need a follow up...what happened? Did they send you another?
- qingcharles 3y ago
  Yes, Microsoft, bless them, sent me another out right away. I don't think anyone followed up with DHL. I went back in the DHL office after I found the piece of paper and showed them and we all had a good laugh, but I think they told me to just call Microsoft to sort it out.

eduction 3y ago

My theory on this - they placed the goods in storage and could not fence them quickly but had found a buyer. Paying the storage fee would kill their profit. So they tell him where the goods are, betting he will 1. Pay the fee 2. Be stupid enough to seek a driver in the same fashion as he found the scammer. Notice, the person who picked up goods for him after he paid a storage fee was also a scammer. My guess is it is the same as the first scammer or in cahoots.