292
submitted 2 years ago by Wilshire@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] lonerangers1@lemmy.world 84 points 2 years ago

“They send you a check for $1,500, and they want you to send $500 back to them,” Adam Barbee with Arbor Sense said. “And then that way, they take $500, and you try to go cash the check, and the check is no good.”

If someone sends me a check for $500 more than they should have, I would just have them send me another and void the incorrect one. Checks that don't match invoices make for sloppy books.

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 5 points 2 years ago

And oddly the only way to buy weed on plastic around here (legally) is for you to use a debit card, which they round up to the next $5 and give you back the change (which most usually ends up in the budtenders tip jar anyway).

It’s because the way the law is written, it’s actually processed as an ATM transaction.

Obviously this is a legal loophole, but there are legitimate reasons to extract more than necessary.

[-] Hestia@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago

Man, I had to look that up. That's wild.

[-] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 years ago

It’s kinda silly but it’s really equally silly to use the stores ATM (or a neighbors) just to give them cash. Having cash, for me, though, is a weird thing. I’m pretty well disciplined with spending on credit cards, but the idea of having “finite money” with me is challenging. What is too much money to carry regularly? What is too little to get through the day, barring any unexpected expenses.

At least my bank reimburses ATM fees, including those from the dispensaries.

[-] SeabassDan@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Makes you wonder why so many are willing to just send some money back.

[-] zourn@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago

Usually they camp it in language where they are only able to cut one check (company policy of one check per PO, for example), but they need to pay two people, you and another facilitator such as a transport service. The extra money is to pay for the transport service, which is actually also the scammer.

[-] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago

Though in this case, the scammer is pretending to be a single person. But even if it was a company, the proper response is, "Well, I've already voided the check. Sort that shit out with your manager. We'll do the work when the check clears." That last line because the overpaying scam should be obvious these days. Sucks if you're desperate for some work but that's the kind of feeling these pieces of shit are targeting.

[-] SeabassDan@lemmy.world 1 points 2 years ago

Okay, that makes a lot more sense. I guess it just seems ridiculous because I don't see myself trusting a check from anyone nowadays.

[-] maness300@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago
this post was submitted on 28 Feb 2024
292 points (97.7% liked)

News

37907 readers
441 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS