Why would you think you could get away with ripping off a bank for huge money using multiple forms of ID that point back to yourself? Like the banks are going to let that slip?
I saw some people on Twitter saying "oh but they let PPP loan fraud go without issue" and it's like. That's the government, they're great at wasting tax dollars. Banks? They'll evict an elderly woman dying of cancer with 3 days left to live who just wants to pass at her home because she missed a mortgage payment.
This happened on a smaller scale in Ireland recently. The bank just flat out let you withdraw more money than you had in your account. There was still a limit because our ATMS only let you take out €2000 at any one time, and the ATM doesn't have infinite money. In the end everyone who took part was issued a charge to repay it or face theft charges.
Chase should have a legit case against TikTok. But section 230 bishes. Rediculous, they edit and censor so kuch content and use AI and algorithms that they ARE a publisher. Maybe not back in 1999 but they sure are now.
People on Reddit do this all the time, they're the OGs for encouraging embarrassingly amateurish financial crimes. In fact, when was Tik Tok ever even mentioned? This really sounds like a Reddit thing, Tik Tok is the site for embarrassing dance trends not embarrassing financial crimes; that's what Reddit's for.
@@Loutron3030This was literally on tiktok. Most kids don’t use reddit. Example: the tiktok trend that had kids at my school and other schools stealing urinals and other school property
@@DreamingmercThat's the glitch part of the whole story - for some reason, Chase was reflecting the full check amount in the accounts before verification of the check. I'm guessing some feature had been pushed that makes all intra-bank transfers reflect instantly and they didn't include this variety of check fraud in their testing.
I know what a cheque is but I don’t understand any of this. Someone help me out. Were they writing cheques to themselves? How/why would you use money to take out a loan?
I don't get the loan part either. How does it interact with the checks or extra money? Seems like two separate acts of stupidity that don't directly relate to each other.
Yes, that’s my understanding. The photos I saw showed large overdrafts, so I believe they essentially used the checks to make Chase’s system think they had more available funds than they did, withdrew the money the system said was available, and then when Chase actually processed the check and realized it wasn’t good they removed the funds from the account which then made the balance go negative. The fact that Chase makes all check funds available instantly before confirming the validity of the check doesn’t sound like a glitch in the sense of a mistake by a programmer, but it does sound like the kind of error prone behavior that someone interested in preventing overdrafts by their customers would reconsider. Of course you have to also consider the desire of legitimate customers to access their funds right away so I suppose there’s no simple answer. How that relates to securing payday loans is beyond me, since the purpose of payday loans is to be no money down and use your upcoming paychecks as collateral for the loan. I imagine the types of populations interested in a check fraud-based get-rich-quick scheme also overlap heavily with payday loan customers, but if anything I’d imagine the money was used to pay off outstanding payday loans because you don’t need cash or really anything besides a job and desperation to get a payday loan if you want one.
So there is a rule that when you deposit a check, at least a part of the amount must be available to you by the next business day. So even if the check bounces later, the next day you should have access to at least a fraction of the check's amount. (I think the law says that at least $225 must be accessible, but I could be wrong on the amount.) The glitch part is this - when you would deposit a check at a Chase ATM, from yourself to yourself, the amount was reflected in its entirety as a deposit into your account without the debit side being validated. So you would see a deposit of, say, $10000 from your fraudulent check, and you could now withdraw this amount from the ATM. Because the amount was credited before the debit was validated, some people with very short attention spans thought this was a free money glitch, as though Chase wouldn't eventually get around to verifying whose account the debit was originating from. From my experience with bank systems on the back end, the original flaw (crediting the full amount immediately) was likely the result of implementing a bank-wide intra-bank settlement system that allowed funds to reflect in the destination before full validation is completed, probably as part of some feature that was supposed to make all intra-bank transfers real time. I'd wager that the feature went through design, development and testing too fast for this to have been missed.
Not only are those people stupid enough do it, but they were stupid enough to go that big that fast. Chase bank cracked down so hard and fast bc so many people were not only doing but they were all doing it in such large amounts. My parents taught me that if you’re going to do something stupid, be smart about it. They should’ve started out with small amounts and gradually work their way up to larger amounts.
The racism is getting tiresome. It should be mostly cleared up in November, though. I'll be glad when you guys go back under whatever rock you crawled out from under in 2017.
Best first line. "They thought check fraud was a glitch" 😆
my mom went to jail for this glitch in t he 90s
You can finally tell her she was ahead of her time.
Gonna be a common theme for gen alpha.
And here on my labor day weekend, I did laundry and painted minis.
I swear every old grift just gets a new, dumber coat of paint as tech advances.
We have this, and we also have mushroom foraging books written by AI. The internet is really speeding up natural selection right now.
I wish that it was but yet these people still live and still can vote. 😔
That one is literally unnatural selection, people are being given bad information and dying cuz of it, not cuz they were dumb
“like the TOWER OF BABEL” 😭
Why would you think you could get away with ripping off a bank for huge money using multiple forms of ID that point back to yourself? Like the banks are going to let that slip?
Well, see, when it’s a glitch they have to let you get away with it. That’s the law of glitches.
See that attitude is exactly why you’re still trapped in The Matrix-unlike me, who is currently fleeing the country.
I saw some people on Twitter saying "oh but they let PPP loan fraud go without issue" and it's like. That's the government, they're great at wasting tax dollars. Banks? They'll evict an elderly woman dying of cancer with 3 days left to live who just wants to pass at her home because she missed a mortgage payment.
This happened on a smaller scale in Ireland recently. The bank just flat out let you withdraw more money than you had in your account. There was still a limit because our ATMS only let you take out €2000 at any one time, and the ATM doesn't have infinite money.
In the end everyone who took part was issued a charge to repay it or face theft charges.
@@nw42 You're a real one, and I salute you from my vat of goop.
TikTok just casually teaching kids financial crimes 🤦♀ jfc
Chase should have a legit case against TikTok. But section 230 bishes.
Rediculous, they edit and censor so kuch content and use AI and algorithms that they ARE a publisher. Maybe not back in 1999 but they sure are now.
Nah teaching them how to get locked up. Like this is advanced levels of stupid cause it's their own account.
People on Reddit do this all the time, they're the OGs for encouraging embarrassingly amateurish financial crimes.
In fact, when was Tik Tok ever even mentioned? This really sounds like a Reddit thing, Tik Tok is the site for embarrassing dance trends not embarrassing financial crimes; that's what Reddit's for.
@@Loutron3030This was literally on tiktok. Most kids don’t use reddit.
Example: the tiktok trend that had kids at my school and other schools stealing urinals and other school property
A little conspiratorial of me, but I’m fully convinced that TikTok is a psyop cyber weapon by the CCP
I bet this is a lot like the tide pods thing, a couple people did it, but the rest is just jokes or something, makes a good headline.
Shawty did that in college, she thought she was so smart until that phone rang
The phrase "there are no new scams only new idiots" proven yet again...
There a $100 max on funds made available via atm check deposit.
That's the glitch part - for some reason, Chase was making the full amount available. They fixed the error as soon as they found out.
Real life glitches are just frauds. Makes sense.
"With their own debit cards"
Hardly anyone is pointing out this is the unusual part of this type of fraud.
I'm still confused about how some people got thousands of dollars out of the ATMs? Like my bank flags transactions over $400, and I get a phone call.
@@Dreamingmercright, my bank held a fkin Steam purchase the other day
@@DreamingmercThat's the glitch part of the whole story - for some reason, Chase was reflecting the full check amount in the accounts before verification of the check. I'm guessing some feature had been pushed that makes all intra-bank transfers reflect instantly and they didn't include this variety of check fraud in their testing.
This story is hysterical 😂😂😂
Some people haven't seen Catch Me if You Can and it shows.
Wait, wait, wait. Gen Z has access to checks and knows how to write one out. No they don’t 😂😂😂
TFW you remember these people vote and breed
Vote? Not for long
@@SortOfEggish Depends on the state.
@@JJ-qo7thyou’ll never have to vote again!
I also had the same conversation with my wife. And her response was tik tok needs to be banned.
They really said "guess it must be free ha ha"
I know what a cheque is but I don’t understand any of this.
Someone help me out.
Were they writing cheques to themselves? How/why would you use money to take out a loan?
I don't get the loan part either. How does it interact with the checks or extra money? Seems like two separate acts of stupidity that don't directly relate to each other.
Yes, that’s my understanding. The photos I saw showed large overdrafts, so I believe they essentially used the checks to make Chase’s system think they had more available funds than they did, withdrew the money the system said was available, and then when Chase actually processed the check and realized it wasn’t good they removed the funds from the account which then made the balance go negative. The fact that Chase makes all check funds available instantly before confirming the validity of the check doesn’t sound like a glitch in the sense of a mistake by a programmer, but it does sound like the kind of error prone behavior that someone interested in preventing overdrafts by their customers would reconsider. Of course you have to also consider the desire of legitimate customers to access their funds right away so I suppose there’s no simple answer.
How that relates to securing payday loans is beyond me, since the purpose of payday loans is to be no money down and use your upcoming paychecks as collateral for the loan. I imagine the types of populations interested in a check fraud-based get-rich-quick scheme also overlap heavily with payday loan customers, but if anything I’d imagine the money was used to pay off outstanding payday loans because you don’t need cash or really anything besides a job and desperation to get a payday loan if you want one.
So there is a rule that when you deposit a check, at least a part of the amount must be available to you by the next business day. So even if the check bounces later, the next day you should have access to at least a fraction of the check's amount. (I think the law says that at least $225 must be accessible, but I could be wrong on the amount.)
The glitch part is this - when you would deposit a check at a Chase ATM, from yourself to yourself, the amount was reflected in its entirety as a deposit into your account without the debit side being validated. So you would see a deposit of, say, $10000 from your fraudulent check, and you could now withdraw this amount from the ATM. Because the amount was credited before the debit was validated, some people with very short attention spans thought this was a free money glitch, as though Chase wouldn't eventually get around to verifying whose account the debit was originating from.
From my experience with bank systems on the back end, the original flaw (crediting the full amount immediately) was likely the result of implementing a bank-wide intra-bank settlement system that allowed funds to reflect in the destination before full validation is completed, probably as part of some feature that was supposed to make all intra-bank transfers real time. I'd wager that the feature went through design, development and testing too fast for this to have been missed.
I think they knew this is te alibi they have concocted
They need to teach people this in school… people don’t know what that is.
And now those people have royally screwed themselves.
Saw this at 420 views
It isn’t kiting.
Not only are those people stupid enough do it, but they were stupid enough to go that big that fast. Chase bank cracked down so hard and fast bc so many people were not only doing but they were all doing it in such large amounts. My parents taught me that if you’re going to do something stupid, be smart about it. They should’ve started out with small amounts and gradually work their way up to larger amounts.
"who did this"
We wuz kangs people
The racism is getting tiresome. It should be mostly cleared up in November, though. I'll be glad when you guys go back under whatever rock you crawled out from under in 2017.
@LordScrambles1 look a example of the frauds
Damn.
He came so close to stating the truth with that BBQ comment.
You need to clarify it's only black dudes lol. Then she'll get it