Police warning over scam callers who ask 'Can you hear me?'Well, "I can hear you..."... But, which police force or authorities sent this warning?
What is odd is this is promoted on twitter by someone selling call blocking services. @CPRCallBlocker. They were on BBC Radio 5, and oddly their spokesman actually said "yes" during the interview, so allowing millions of people to record him saying "yes" to frame him in a contract! Or, so he would have you believe.
My own lawyer actually made a "call recording" (here) to prove the point, and I should hold him to it as I would love the @RevK twitter handle. That recording is entirely constructed from (many) call recordings of calls with him in the past. Nice job editing it...
The point here is that contracts are formed when parties agree to form a contract, and occasionally, when there is a dispute, there may need to be evidence of the contract and the terms. That evidence can be in testimony, evidence in call recording, in signed documents - even in scanned signed documents so no actual paper. Many ways. Evidence in the way the parties behaved and acted even.
It is simple to get the signature of a director of almost any company from companies house, but paste that in to a document and try and sue for breach of contract and you will need more evidence than that. Analysis of documents and call recordings can find the fakes, and even simple things like I have, on file, all of the calls from which that was made and could find them as a counter to any claim to show the recording was "constructed". At the end of the day a judge would decide.
What makes this even harder is scaling the scam - if you scam one person and do it well you may win - the judge may decide you have the "evidence" on your side, but it gets more and more suspicious as more people say "I never agreed to that", "that call never happened", and the scam falls down.
It also falls down on scale with one scam - make a call recording agreeing £1,000,000 for that twitter handle and that will be suspect and justify a lot of scrutiny and forensic analysis of the "recording".
At the end of the day a scam like this simply does not pan out, and the whole story pretty much has to be a hoax - maybe to sell call blocking services, who knows?
Please, Telegraph, fact check your stories. After all, you do not want to fall in to selling "fake news".
P.S. Neil has confirmed my side of that "recording" was all from a single call recording I posted on my blog some time ago, so anyone could have constructed that just the same. Well done Neil.