Pune based Engineer looking for rental property duped under pretext of token amountÂ
Pune based Engineer looking for rental property duped under pretext of token amountÂ
PUNE: In June, Shyamlal Hansda, a 34-year-old engineer employed by a multinational company, was in search of a rental property in Balewadi, where he is currently employed.
Having resided in Pune for six years, Hansda came across an upscale 1BHK apartment listed on a reputable property-hunting website at an appealing rental price while conducting his search online.
Impressed by the photographs and the apartment’s proximity to his workplace, Hansda expressed his interest in the property by clicking on it. Subsequently, he received a message on WhatsApp and a phone call from an individual claiming to be the owner of the flat.
The supposed owner informed Hansda that he was welcome to visit the apartment, but would need to pay a token amount of Rs 2,500 as the housing society required it before issuing a visiting pass.
The fraudster assured Hansda that if the deal was finalized, this amount would be deducted from the first month’s rent. As Hansda was visiting his hometown at the time, he decided to secure the property before losing the opportunity.
After making the payment, the imposter, posing as the flat owner, demanded additional funds as a security deposit.
Persistently claiming that the transaction was pending, the fraudster coerced the engineer into transferring a total of Rs 3,06,529 lakh, resulting in his financial loss.
In the city, there has been an increase in the utilization of a new tactic by fraudsters to deceive individuals seeking rental apartments on various property hunting websites. Typically, these individuals list properties that appear luxurious at an attractive rental rate, enticing interested parties to pay token amounts under the guise of “strict housing society rules.”
Siddharth Dhende, a banker, recently encountered such a tactic while searching for a rental apartment in Model Colony, Pune. “On a listings website, I discovered a small apartment with a monthly rent of only Rs 12,000. Upon contacting the flat owner, I was informed that the society does not issue a visiting pass until the prospective tenant pays a token amount. The owner requested that I send Rs 2,500 through a UPI app. After inquiring with others, I discovered that the rental rate quoted was significantly lower than the area’s average. I became suspicious and declined to pay,” stated Dhende. Hansda’s case also illustrates how fraudsters coerce victims into sending additional funds by leveraging the money that has already been transferred to them.
Inspector Chandrashekhar Sawant of the cyber crime station of the Pune police has stated that in such fraudulent schemes, victims often send 70% of the money lost in an attempt to recover the 30% that they had already sent. The fraudsters typically request additional amounts in small instalments, which the victims comply with in an effort to “secure” their funds, without realizing that they are becoming further entangled in the scam. According to the complainant, Hansda, in his official statement, the fraudulent flat owner repeatedly insisted that the funds would not be returned until they were received in his account, which led to Hansda losing Rs 1.32 lakh.
When Hansda inquired about the status of his funds, the fraudster claimed that the funds were still being processed and demanded an additional Rs 49,500 as GST. The fraudster promised that this amount would also be refunded, but subsequently took an additional Rs 30,000 and Rs 20,000 from Hansda under the same pretext. After a week of attempting to contact the flat owner, Hansda discovered that the phone number was no longer in service. He then approached the cyber police, and after two months, an FIR was registered with the Chatrushringi police station on September 16.
Justin Raj, a seasoned real estate broker with 24 years of experience, emphasized the significance of prospective tenants conducting a physical visit of the property prior to engaging in any financial transactions with the owner or broker. Additionally, he recommended that online platforms undertake property verification procedures prior to listing them online.
According to Raj, housing societies do not levy any fees for issuing visiting passes. Prospective tenants must exercise caution and refrain from remitting any funds to any party prior to personally inspecting the property. Raj further cautioned that individuals may upload counterfeit images on online platforms, and that most platforms lack the capacity to monitor the authenticity of the properties posted.
