Rip off Britain

 

Subject: Rip off Britain.

Watching the BBC program “RIP Off Britain” revealed yet another series of scams or semi scam, where unscrupulous individuals place advertisements, on line to attract people into buying products which are sub quality or worse, where the adverts sets up a contact system which fleece the caller into giving information about foe instance their banking information with the predictable result.

The sheer number and complexity of the frauds plus the professionalism of the crooks leaves me to the conclusion that the internet is a minefield and a very dangerous place to enter.

Clearly the opportunities and the benefits of the internet are impressive. The ‘how to’ videos and the general information available is amazing. From maps and historical description to overviews regarding prices across a whole range of services. The inter connectivity between us all is precious with friends and family, scattered across the globe are easily drawn together by a click of a keyboard key.

Given its tremendous impact on our lives we only have the tech giants who run the platforms we connect to to ensure that we are not confronted by the gangs and individuals who wish us harm. There is no one else, our police are largely on the back foot playing a reactive not a proactive role and given the apparent difficulty in tracing people the Internet is a minefield of exploitation. Market forces and the bottom line are always the excuses for not imposing restrictions in who can set up an online business but it’s not good enough that the platforms like Google can't be charged as active participants in the scams. It should be their responsibility to ensure  proper vetting, to ensure that the companies who use their platform properly exist are legitimate and are represented by a responsible person who can be challenged if need be and who bears some sort of financial responsibility. It’s simply too easy to apply and start trading, and equally, its just as easy to disappear.  In cases where people are conned into believing they are speaking to a bona fide bank only to find that they have had their life savings diverted, is a real and growing problem.  I would initially put the onus on Google to reimburse the claimant, that would sharpen their attention as to who they allow onto their site since in many people's minds they are trading with a Google vetted company and so psychologically at least they become complicit in the transaction.

The Internet project which was a concept of 'barrier free' intercommunication has become a cesspit of fraudulence be it the vial things we say about each other on platforms like Twitter or the harmful scams on Google, the open market place has sadly become contaminated.

Or one could of course take the other view and say, as the Goldman Sachs boss famously said, in a Congressional Hearing investigating the Derivatives Market, that this was a market for "consenting adults" and therefore anything goes if you decide to partake in it.

Rules at entry may blunt the attraction of a free market search engine but a search engine which has become a danger to the people who use it should be 'off the road anyway whilst we conduct an MOT.