the geek,

I'm just another guy next door.
Stop bothering me if you have nothing for me.

Wednesday, December 06, 2006

so long since i last posted. i was on hwz forums lately reading some articles and some sales thats going on at the forums. well, it happened that i came accross this case on some kinda fraud. so here's the scenerio :

Person A who recently intend to recontract with starhub maxonline to get a free laptop and intends to sell the laptop off. He posted this info on the forums, hoping people to purchase the laptop from him.

Person B, saw the post and shows interested in it. He then contacted person A but was told to give a deposit of $100. Its been like more than a week and he hear no notice from the person A.

My personal opinion is that he can jolly well report this case to the police as some kinda fraud coz he got cheated. That is if he got person A's contact number, bank account number and those proof of the deal.

However, upon further reading on the thread, I found out that another person got cheated as well. He said this in response to the above case. I aint sure how long ago it happened but this was how he described-

Originally Posted by al###blank
There's no case at all for this type of cheat. Police don't even wanna care, was cheated $700++ when I transfer $ to bank transfer. In black and white that I did transfer in my bank statement but there's no link from the case to this. They can say I transfer out of my own will and cook up some lies to say the other party cheat me. F**ked up system.

So, he's trying to say that the police doesnt handle this kinda case. In this thread, one fella mentioned that this is under civil suit and not criminal suit, so they cant help. Below I will show the part stated in the statute. note the ones that are in bold.

Penal Code (Chapter 224)

Cheating.
Section 415.
Whoever, by deceiving any person, fraudulently or dishonestly induces the person so deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to consent that any person shall retain any property, or intentionally induces the person so deceived to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and which act or omission causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to that person in body, mind, reputation or property, is said to “cheat”.

Explanation 1.
A dishonest concealment of facts is a deception within the meaning of this section.

Explanation 2.
Mere breach of contract is not of itself proof of an original fraudulent intent.

Illustrations
(a) A, by falsely pretending to be in the Government service, intentionally deceives Z, and thus dishonestly induces Z to let him have on credit goods for which he does not mean to pay. A cheats.

(b) A, by putting a counterfeit mark on an article, intentionally deceives Z into a belief that this article was made by a certain celebrated manufacturer, and thus dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

(c) A, by exhibiting to Z a false sample of an article, intentionally deceives Z into believing that the article corresponds with the sample, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to buy and pay for the article. A cheats.

(d) A, by tendering in payment for an article a bill on a house with which A keeps no money, and by which A expects that the bill will be dishonoured, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to deliver the article, intending not to pay for it. A cheats.

(e) A, by pledging as diamonds articles which he knows are not diamonds, intentionally deceives Z, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend money. A cheats.

(f) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to repay any money that Z may lend to him, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to lend him money, A not intending to repay it. A cheats.

(g) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A means to deliver to Z a certain quantity of pepper which he does not intend to deliver, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to advance money upon the faith of such delivery. A cheats; but if A, at the time of obtaining the money, intends to deliver the pepper, and afterwards breaks his contract and does not deliver it, he does not cheat, but is liable only to a civil action for breach of contract.

(h) A intentionally deceives Z into a belief that A has performed A’s part of a contract made with Z, which he has not performed, and thereby dishonestly induces Z to pay money. A cheats.

(i) A sells and conveys an estate to B. A, knowing that in consequence of such sale he has no right to the property, sells or mortgages the same to Z without disclosing the fact of the previous sale and conveyance to B, and receives the purchase or mortgage money from Z. A cheats.

(j) A, playing with false dice, or marked cards, wins money from B. A cheats.

So that was what it can be found in the statute. It seems that in our 1st scenario, this person is at a little disadvantage with this illustration highlighted in red. BUT as for the $700 case, I dun get it leh. Why wun the police help ar? If i were him i would have write in to the newspaper already. He also got a friend who got cheated as well. haa. sad for him. Well, i will be updating on this case atm. do catch up for some latest news.

0 comments