Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

It doesn't cost as much as you might think. We used to have this shifty guy, signed up on a mobile contract and racked up $8k worth of bills. Knowing Orange (when they used to sell Optus network) would probably cane us since we processed him so we went and hired a PI and debt collection agency to track him down. Cost us $450 (that was 5 years ago) and we found him, Orange brought him to court and everyone's happy. If I remember correctly, we got that $450 back from him as well as it is cost incurred for recovering the outstanding fee.

Its not over till i get my money back, i doubt that person would be him - doesnt make sense bank being nearly 200kms from the whitepages guys place.

The BSB is where you set up the account so even if he had move his BSB would remain as the Newcastle one.

Dont bother doubting it, give it a try. Could be a bank account he opened there and has moved away since.

Also, I'm not sure how it works with net banking between two independant people but I know with credit cards/debit cards and a business if you have a dispute the bank will immediately return your money and make the business prove that the transaction is legitimate before giving there money back.

all u have to do is contact your bank and tell them you have made a bank transfer by mistake and only found this out recently...what they can do is make a demand letter to this person to return or transfer back the money.---> this is wat i did when i got dodged buying mags on ebay and took me 2 months to track him down... bank would charge you maybe $50 for this request but its worth it.

Police would take a while to sort them out for sure..good luck anyways.

I'm with Westpac. I'll give them a call and tell'em I transferred money to the wrong account, see how that goes. If no luck, ill try police. But if there are any of you out there who can possibly find out who and where he is via friends at CBA, it would be the easiest way to find him.

Mate, you have been given a website that actually states that the account that you sent money into is theirs (ILR). I would be calling them up first and asking for the manager. Also, I don't think that he gave you his correct name.

http://www.isonliveradio.com/accounts/

Ah yes. My mistake. D'oh.

Anyway, I will check that name out for you, allblitz, but I don't think that is his real name. Wll let you know what I find via PM.

Thanks man. Never knew I would get this much response. Thank's to everyone for the help. Lets just hope I can get the $$$ back.

ALWAYS KEEP ONE THING IN MIND

**********ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS*********

Pay via credit card

Reason---> All banks have Fraud dept which is dedicated for Credit Cards only. Any issue like this is resolved in a matter of few days.

Post his name and account number, I will see what i can do.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...