Felt so sad for lady @ supermarket with her latest African money transfer.

[BlueStocking007]

I popped in for a few bits and purchased them at the kiosk, I'm a regular and politely chit chat generally & vice versa.

Lady around 55-60, very well spoken, but did seem slightly tipsy was begging the two other serving staff ( a manager was called) because the lady was wanting to send thousands of pounds to Africa via money transfer. The staff were doing their utmost, to advise that it was very likely this money would be lost, that the gentleman's name had a slight variation ( from the last records) and she had now done this three times. The lady was pleading for them to complete the transaction, the staff did, but said it was the last time

Aibu, to say the staff should have refused.
I totally accept capacity/adult/her decision BUT surely NOBODY who was not vulnerable, lonely ( especially at this time of year) would be sending thousands of pounds to a man in Africa. The supermarket should have carte blanch,with sense and conviction to not do this.
They were clearly & verbally concerned.

Years ago I worked in Tesco and we did Moneygram Transfers. The cashier can check a box (without the customer knowing) which would notify Moneygram that the cashier has worries it was a fraudulent transaction so they would look into it more before the money was released on the other side.

It sounds like the cashiers should have refused but if it was Moneygram, they may have checked the box and the transaction may have been declined.

Some people are sadly just stupid so I'd have just let her get on with it

Can't the shop make a report to social services if they suspect a vulnerable person is being financially exploited?

@BlueStocking007

It sounds like a dating scam .... why oh why do these lonely middle aged women get sucked in by these online scams I will never know. I once received a bogus email from a man in Nigeria it was hilarious and I was tempted to string him along but I sent it to trash instead lol

Remember this

It would take somebody living under a rock, to not have any awareness of the millions of scammers from Africa in particular, confessing their love

Right, but that includes the lady herself.

They should have refused if they thought she was vulnerable and/or drunk but likely as not they get commission on the transfer.

Hopefully it will get lost in the ether and the scammer won't get it. I suggest people find some examples of men befriending middle aged women and demanding money that doesn't fit in with the stereotype.

They aren't able to refuse purely because they think she is vulnerable because if she is found to have had capacity to make that decision and they denied her, it's a breach of her right to make an unwise decision. The most they can do is report it to the local councils safeguarding team and possibly the company used to transfer the money if they have appropriate channels for it. Unfortunately there's not much that can be done. A family member may be able to make a best interest decision on her behalf if she is found to not have capacity but only if they are aware of the sending money in the first place.

As others have mentioned, too many people are quick to rule this as a scam because the money is being sent to Africa. There are dozens of perfectly innocent reasons for this dont forget. People are quick to judge when no one knows what is actually going on. I do find it sad that a lot of people are so negative nowadays.

I did explain in the thread that the staff highlighted it was highly likely she would not see this money again/lose it. It was clear, they recognised it was to the same man, there was no mention of her putting them right by explaining its family/it's work/it's business.
I havn't written down the conversation verbatim, but I had hoped readers would at least have read the lady acknowledged the risks, which she did and which I've mentioned.
I'm not in any way wondering if it was a scam, that was evident to all. Just not the poor lady who quite clearly has been suckered in due to a variety of any possible reasons, being vulnerable is the one that would be obvious as to her insisting, that he was insisting, that she definitely sent it, albeit discrepancies with his name.

Of course I highlighted the " African man" with the money being sent to "Africa" because it is probably the widest reached acknowledged scam to all.

Of course it isn't a judgement, the thread explains this.

There are a lot of valid points here but there are also a lot of hasty judgments based on a small amount of actual information. Yes, there is a possibility this could be a scam, but it could be many other things as well. Given that no one even knows this lady or the situation it's impossible to say.

OP - I understand your concern, I would probably feel the same but try not to be too hasty in your assumptions. How much do you know for sure about this lady and the money she is sending? Could the slight difference in name simply be a spelling mistake at one point? (Personally I struggle to spell the name of a lot of the African nurses I work with without checking multiple times) If I were you I'd contact the local council safeguarding team, or give their details to the shop staff as they may know more (her name etc) from what you've said.

Everyone else - Obviously everyone is entitled to an opinion but can we please try to remember how little we actually know? Isnt it meant to be the season of goodwill and kindness? Seems to me there's an awful lot of negativity in the world already, can we not try to keep an open mind about a situation we barely have any facts about? Yes, it could be a scam but that doesnt mean we should automatically assume it is based on one person's observations of a complete stranger interacting with shop staff.

I agree. I'd be very pissed off, having an obvious disability, if someone tried to stop me sending money to my parents in a South American country 'cause they thought I was 'vulnerable'.

My mum got scammed into sending regular donations to a ficticious church in Africa. These people target vulnerable people by trawling through the electoral roll amongst other things. She lost a great deal of money.

The Council's safeguarding team won't investigate this - for a start they'd need the consent of the woman to take a referral from the shop staff, and for her details to be passed on to them. A woman of this age is unlikely to be classed as a vulnerable adult for the purposes of safeguarding.

It is sad if the woman is being scammed, all too common for people who are lonely at this time of year.

IT WAS A SCAM!
Thousands of people genuinely send money via money transfer perfectly legitimately in their trillions. In this instance, this was not legitimate, I've said this so very clearly. I KNOW this was not legitimate.
I havn't made an assumption and asked people if I am being unreasonable.
I'll highlight, confirm and reiterate this was a scam!
The AIBU was my thoughts in the staff proceeding knowing this.
Not guessing, not judging, not assuming.

The manager was called, as this was a requirement, flagged for this lady personally.
Where the money was going to, had already been determined previously.
This was the third time she has sent the same person thousands of pounds.

Why had posters responded with " let's not judge" It isn't a judgement!
I understand that although all this advice was given ( AND TWICE BEFORE) and she was still adamant, they then proceeded.
EVERYBODY KNEW IT WAS A SCAM.HENCE ME ASKING WHY THEY WENT AHEAD.

I watched a documentary about old grannies who went to Africa to get with young men for sex. They had no intention of marrying these men but just went there for a good holiday .... not my kind of thing but they were not hurting anyone. Their families especially their children were embarrassed by them and I know my children would think the same of me if I suddenly went off with a much younger man.

For those saying it’s not the supermarket’s job to police her spending, the terms and conditions of Western Union reserve the right to refuse a transaction they suspect is fraudulent:

www.westernunion.com/gb/en/faq-send-money-online.html#Q11

From my experience working with the safeguarding team in Wiltshire they will investigate as far as determining if she is vulnerable and take it further if necessary. Age is not the only reason a person can be classed as vulnerable - they will be able to assess for any potential mental impairment as well. Granted, if she is sound of mind there is nothing more they will be able to do and it'll be the family's place to try to intervene. It is sad that a lot of people get sucked into scams and you can't do much about it.

Having read a lot about these scams on middle aged women I think friends and relatives have tried to stop them from giving their money away but have not succeeded. These are grown women and should know better. I was once lied to by a man on the internet which did not involve money but it has made me realize that there are a lot of liars on the net. I now don't trust anyone unless I actually speak to them face to face in person.

Out of interest what country was the money being sent to?

Also, does the transaction itself satisfy ‘fraud’? If it’s her money and she is intentionally sending it then while she is being conned I don’t think the transaction itself is fraudulent?

I agree with you OP. There’s no way I’d have made the transaction.

If she was visibly intoxicated, I'm surprised that they were not able to say she wasn't necessarily of sound enough mind right then and to come back once she was sober.

This isn't a legal standpoint, just armchair opining. I don't think I'd feel comfortable processing a transaction totalling thousands of pounds from someone visibly drunk.

What the staff can do is say that the system is down. A colleague of mine arrived at a Western Union office when his wife was trying to send 3000 dollars to ‘validate’ a (scam) lottery win. He asked the cashier not to do it and the cashier said oops, the system’s down. The wife senti it from a different office...

The staff cannot reject doing a transaction if the customer insists on it, and isn’t obviously incapacitated or criminal/money laundering, and even that is quite restricted. they can check the “please investigate” box if it exists, but that’s it. Same with a bank, all they do is call you to ask you if you really want to do this.
Just imagine your bank would reject transfers because they don’t like how you spend your money! there would br an outcry.

I’ve got Moneygram adverts on this page right now.

I was in our local bank recently and the lady in front of me was wanting to get a large sum of cash out. The bank teller questioned the amount as they knew her well and it was a lot more than usual. She asked lots of questions prior to the transaction and it turned out that some dodgy traders had been at her house repairing the gutters and then demanded a huge payment and even drover her into town and were waiting around the corner for her!

The lady was quite distressed so the bank manager made her a cup of tea and I sat with her whilst they waited for the police and one of the staff went to get the reg number of the van.

Not sure how much power they have though if the person is adamant they want the transaction to go ahead. If the bank staff hadn’t questioned this lady and she told them what was going on then she would have simply paid these rogues a lot of money and no doubt they would have been back for more....