+- Sinisterly (https://sinister.li)
+-- Forum: Hacking (https://sinister.li/Forum-Hacking)
+--- Forum: Social Engineering (https://sinister.li/Forum-Social-Engineering)
+--- Thread: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal (/Thread-Hypothetical-Rolex-via-Paypal)
Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - durden666 - 07-27-2020
I keep seeing people offering paypal refunds for as high as upto 15k. With Expensive high end watches etc. Obviously the only logical method would be the SNAD via Paypal. Does anyone have any first hand personal experience with this? I have been thinking about the method these said refunders utilize and come to one conclusion, which is as follows: Order said rolex of upto 15k (as apparently if you go higher than 15k some more serious people within paypal get involved). When it arrives you claim SNAD. The store will obviously request proof. This is easy to forge, thus you supply said proof. Logically the next step is the store requesting that you send it back to them. Now you obviously simply box them with dry ice. Or send back a random catalogue/advert of equal weight to the watch, ensuring none of your personal details are on the label to the best of your abilities so they dispose of it when it arrives (obviously the barcode will still hold this info so lets go with dry ice boxing). The way I understand paypal works, is that it seems to mostly always side with the tracking number. Thus if your returns tracking number says delivered, paypal wont care and side with you. The weight is even an extra step just incase. So, as you sent the dry ice tracked, and weighted correctly initially, I dont see why paypal wont side with you. Can even provide a photo and video of you packaging everything and sending it.
Issues I see with this methodology:
1) They take pictures and video before sending and provide to paypal stating it IS actually as was described (hard to know for sure if they do this in advance). However you could claim it was damaged in transit.
2)Whom will liability fall on if you dry ice them for such an expensive item.
I have never surpassed a 5k SE however I really want to try it. But, obviously there are much greater risks involved. So I would find it very helpful to get some input from more experienced people, ideally in this exact field. Or am i getting too far ahead of myself with such a high value SE? Is it pointless trying?
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - mothered - 07-28-2020
Quote:I keep seeing people offering paypal refunds for as high as upto 15k. With Expensive high end watches etc. Obviously the only logical method would be the SNAD via Paypal.Watches are generally rather light, so on the grounds that the weight Is well-suited, the INR will also work.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - Oni - 07-28-2020
Just a reminder of our disclaimer:
Quote:The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Those are very nice watches, worth as much a car. Dry ice could get you a very lengthy prison sentence.
PS: I don't see you using a VPN.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - durden666 - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 05:28 AM)mothered Wrote:Quote:I keep seeing people offering paypal refunds for as high as upto 15k. With Expensive high end watches etc. Obviously the only logical method would be the SNAD via Paypal.Watches are generally rather light, so on the grounds that the weight Is well-suited, the INR will also work.
Can you please elaborate on what the INR is? Or atleast the acronym. As I don't believe I am familiar with it at all. Thanks.
(07-28-2020, 05:52 AM)Oni Wrote: Just a reminder of our disclaimer:
Quote:The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Those are very nice watches, worth as much a car. Dry ice could get you a very lengthy prison sentence.
PS: I don't see you using a VPN.
No need to remind me. I already stated that this is a hypothetical/ made up scenario.
Also, why would I need to use a VPN? As far as I'm concerned I'm a legit buyer who legitimately got a item that was not as described, and legitimately returned the watch back to the retailer.
Please elaborate.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - mothered - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 06:20 AM)durden666 Wrote: Can you please elaborate on what the INR is? Or atleast the acronym. As I don't believe I am familiar with it at all. Thanks.Sure.
INR= Item Not Received. In our social engineering parlance, It's similar to the missing Item/partial method.
It also relates to the DNA.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - durden666 - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 06:40 AM)mothered Wrote:(07-28-2020, 06:20 AM)durden666 Wrote: Can you please elaborate on what the INR is? Or atleast the acronym. As I don't believe I am familiar with it at all. Thanks.Sure.
INR= Item Not Received. In our social engineering parlance, It's similar to the missing Item/partial method.
It also relates to the DNA.
Ah I understand now. I have considered this also, and despite it being completely possible in theory, I feel as if the retailer I might choose will take this method super seriously and personally, and overall it will just seem more suspicious than hitting them right at the end. Also when dealing with a paypal dispute, as far as I am aware, as soon as the retailer provides PayPal with a tracking number that says "delivered" PayPal will auto side the seller. Despite the fact that yes, perhaps i did not ever personally recieve anything. So unless if I could somehow get the watch posted, and get out of the couriers possession whilst keeping the tracking as "in progress" and not in the "delivered" status.
This is just how PayPal seems to operate 95% of the time, from what I have seen both personally as a seller on eBay, and from reading other people's reports.
The same way as when people open a dispute with Curry's hoping the retailer doesn't reply, as they have a habit of this, and said people are advised to go with SNAD and not INR in PayPal's resolution center as their reason for opening a dispute. As with SNAD you still have other options where as with INR PayPal is virtually guaranteed to side with the seller, providing they have supplied PayPal with a tracking number that says delivered. I've even heard of sellers providing completely random tracking numbers belonging to other people's orders, and PayPal still siding with the seller.
Let me know your thoughts and opinions.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - mothered - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 07:01 AM)durden666 Wrote:For the most part, I know that PayPal does In fact base their decision on the tracking number "shown as delivered", as opposed to the package reaching Its destination by being "physically delivered".(07-28-2020, 06:40 AM)mothered Wrote:(07-28-2020, 06:20 AM)durden666 Wrote: Can you please elaborate on what the INR is? Or atleast the acronym. As I don't believe I am familiar with it at all. Thanks.Sure.
INR= Item Not Received. In our social engineering parlance, It's similar to the missing Item/partial method.
It also relates to the DNA.
Ah I understand now. I have considered this also, and despite it being completely possible in theory, I feel as if the retailer I might choose will take this method super seriously and personally, and overall it will just seem more suspicious than hitting them right at the end. Also when dealing with a paypal dispute, as far as I am aware, as soon as the retailer provides PayPal with a tracking number that says "delivered" PayPal will auto side the seller. Despite the fact that yes, perhaps i did not ever personally recieve anything. So unless if I could somehow get the watch posted, and get out of the couriers possession whilst keeping the tracking as "in progress" and not in the "delivered" status.
This is just how PayPal seems to operate 95% of the time, from what I have seen both personally as a seller on eBay, and from reading other people's reports.
The same way as when people open a dispute with Curry's hoping the retailer doesn't reply, as they have a habit of this, and said people are advised to go with SNAD and not INR in PayPal's resolution center as their reason for opening a dispute. As with SNAD you still have other options where as with INR PayPal is virtually guaranteed to side with the seller, providing they have supplied PayPal with a tracking number that says delivered. I've even heard of sellers providing completely random tracking numbers belonging to other people's orders, and PayPal still siding with the seller.
Let me know your thoughts and opinions.
That's PayPal's way of Interpreting and concluding claims, but It obviously doesn't end there. If a chargeback via your credit card provider or a bank reversal with your merchant succeeds, then PayPal must Issue a refund- Irrespective of their original decision to decline It.
As such, PayPal's merchant will get the funds from PayPal Itself, and they (PayPal) will grab It from the Seller and credit the buyer's account thereafter.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - durden666 - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 07:14 AM)mothered Wrote:(07-28-2020, 07:01 AM)durden666 Wrote:For the most part, I know that PayPal does In fact base their decision on the tracking number "shown as delivered", as opposed to the package reaching Its destination by being "physically delivered".(07-28-2020, 06:40 AM)mothered Wrote: Sure.
INR= Item Not Received. In our social engineering parlance, It's similar to the missing Item/partial method.
It also relates to the DNA.
Ah I understand now. I have considered this also, and despite it being completely possible in theory, I feel as if the retailer I might choose will take this method super seriously and personally, and overall it will just seem more suspicious than hitting them right at the end. Also when dealing with a paypal dispute, as far as I am aware, as soon as the retailer provides PayPal with a tracking number that says "delivered" PayPal will auto side the seller. Despite the fact that yes, perhaps i did not ever personally recieve anything. So unless if I could somehow get the watch posted, and get out of the couriers possession whilst keeping the tracking as "in progress" and not in the "delivered" status.
This is just how PayPal seems to operate 95% of the time, from what I have seen both personally as a seller on eBay, and from reading other people's reports.
The same way as when people open a dispute with Curry's hoping the retailer doesn't reply, as they have a habit of this, and said people are advised to go with SNAD and not INR in PayPal's resolution center as their reason for opening a dispute. As with SNAD you still have other options where as with INR PayPal is virtually guaranteed to side with the seller, providing they have supplied PayPal with a tracking number that says delivered. I've even heard of sellers providing completely random tracking numbers belonging to other people's orders, and PayPal still siding with the seller.
Let me know your thoughts and opinions.
That's PayPal's way of Interpreting and concluding claims, but It obviously doesn't end there. If a chargeback via your credit card provider or a bank reversal with your merchant succeeds, then PayPal must Issue a refund- Irrespective of their original decision to decline It.
As such, PayPal's merchant will get the funds from PayPal Itself, and they (PayPal) will grab It from the Seller and credit the buyer's account thereafter.
Exactly what I was thinking too. The only reason I'm still opting for SNAD over INR is that I suspect the merchant may request a police report or an affidavit with an item this expensive. Which I obviously would like to avoid.
I reckon the chances of them requesting such documents are significantly less with the SNAD method. Don't you think ?
(07-28-2020, 07:27 AM)durden666 Wrote:(07-28-2020, 07:14 AM)mothered Wrote:(07-28-2020, 07:01 AM)durden666 Wrote: Ah I understand now. I have considered this also, and despite it being completely possible in theory, I feel as if the retailer I might choose will take this method super seriously and personally, and overall it will just seem more suspicious than hitting them right at the end. Also when dealing with a paypal dispute, as far as I am aware, as soon as the retailer provides PayPal with a tracking number that says "delivered" PayPal will auto side the seller. Despite the fact that yes, perhaps i did not ever personally recieve anything. So unless if I could somehow get the watch posted, and get out of the couriers possession whilst keeping the tracking as "in progress" and not in the "delivered" status.For the most part, I know that PayPal does In fact base their decision on the tracking number "shown as delivered", as opposed to the package reaching Its destination by being "physically delivered".
This is just how PayPal seems to operate 95% of the time, from what I have seen both personally as a seller on eBay, and from reading other people's reports.
The same way as when people open a dispute with Curry's hoping the retailer doesn't reply, as they have a habit of this, and said people are advised to go with SNAD and not INR in PayPal's resolution center as their reason for opening a dispute. As with SNAD you still have other options where as with INR PayPal is virtually guaranteed to side with the seller, providing they have supplied PayPal with a tracking number that says delivered. I've even heard of sellers providing completely random tracking numbers belonging to other people's orders, and PayPal still siding with the seller.
Let me know your thoughts and opinions.
That's PayPal's way of Interpreting and concluding claims, but It obviously doesn't end there. If a chargeback via your credit card provider or a bank reversal with your merchant succeeds, then PayPal must Issue a refund- Irrespective of their original decision to decline It.
As such, PayPal's merchant will get the funds from PayPal Itself, and they (PayPal) will grab It from the Seller and credit the buyer's account thereafter.
Exactly what I was thinking too. The only reason I'm still opting for SNAD over INR is that I suspect the merchant may request a police report or an affidavit with an item this expensive. Which I obviously would like to avoid.
I reckon the chances of them requesting such documents are significantly less with the SNAD method. Don't you think ?
Also I would like to avoid having to do a CC chargeback at all costs. The highest CC limit I have is 6k. Therefore I would need to transfer the balance of 2/3 CC's to one account. And I don't imagine the process being that smooth if I have to chargeback two or even three CC's simultaneously. Debit card chargebacks are also much harder to accomplish from what I'm aware too.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - Oni - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 06:20 AM)durden666 Wrote:(07-28-2020, 05:28 AM)mothered Wrote:Quote:I keep seeing people offering paypal refunds for as high as upto 15k. With Expensive high end watches etc. Obviously the only logical method would be the SNAD via Paypal.Watches are generally rather light, so on the grounds that the weight Is well-suited, the INR will also work.
Can you please elaborate on what the INR is? Or atleast the acronym. As I don't believe I am familiar with it at all. Thanks.
(07-28-2020, 05:52 AM)Oni Wrote: Just a reminder of our disclaimer:
Quote:The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Those are very nice watches, worth as much a car. Dry ice could get you a very lengthy prison sentence.
PS: I don't see you using a VPN.
No need to remind me. I already stated that this is a hypothetical/ made up scenario.
Also, why would I need to use a VPN? As far as I'm concerned I'm a legit buyer who legitimately got a item that was not as described, and legitimately returned the watch back to the retailer.
Please elaborate.
Fair enough, haha.
RE: Hypothetical Rolex via Paypal - mothered - 07-28-2020
(07-28-2020, 07:27 AM)durden666 Wrote: The only reason I'm still opting for SNAD over INR is that I suspect the merchant may request a police report or an affidavit with an item this expensive. Which I obviously would like to avoid.I certainly agree.
I reckon the chances of them requesting such documents are significantly less with the SNAD method. Don't you think ?
The INR Is (obviously) purely not receiving the Item which Is classed as a loss, hence a police report/affidavit Is warranted under such circumstances. It's not to say that It "will" happen, but rather the possibility that It "may" happen.
(07-28-2020, 07:27 AM)durden666 Wrote: Also I would like to avoid having to do a CC chargeback at all costs. The highest CC limit I have is 6k. Therefore I would need to transfer the balance of 2/3 CC's to one account. And I don't imagine the process being that smooth if I have to chargeback two or even three CC's simultaneously.Chargebacks can get rather messy and complicate matters at the best of times, so I understand your decision to avoid them. Moreover, you'd want to maintain a good relationship with your bank.
That said, If you haven't performed any or perhaps just the one, then It's something to consider.