Reference thread for flag on fake lending service.

[Poker Player]

So, there is a fake lending service that you can see in the following thread:

Loan Service new (Newbie Kingdo Loans)

The OP pretends to be giving loans without collateral to several users, probably to try to build up a reputation, but that those of us who have been doing this for years did not believe from the beginning.

There are no loans being given out here.  This "lender" is just a troll with a lot of alt accounts, using them to talk to himself.  Scammers have tried this kind of thing multiple times; he'll pretend to give himself a loan, then use his alts to leave positive reviews for his own accounts.  It's an effort to feign activity and trust.

Well, it's been nearly three days since the OP has logged on, and "payment day" is upon us with a little less than 6 hours remaining (UTC time.)  I never expected these loans to get filled, and so far they have not.  If you're going to try to fake some loans to your alts, at least make it believable by sending some sats to the addresses you posted.  What's up with the lack of follow-through?  Of course one needs to assume this lame-brain OP actually has BTC0.076 to transfer.  

Anyway, here's a table to help track the "borrowers" and their addresses.  Have fun!

||.User	|| Address	|| Amount	||
||.Amarjoob	|| 18SnZ6AEfdb6APiAwFNawqUkcaPq8qk3td	|| 0.006	||
||.Accesstx	|| 14hYd8Pn2apu6txZe3DFQwsxXbpodxzPXW	|| 0.01	||
||.masdd	|| 1MwfR7uGzoPAzN2XDeuYVbVTLNnRTEQW5W	|| 0.03	||
||.Dlogd123	|| 1FQVdKasUXfAa2iXCVVRoLBUdKGFQmd6x8	|| 0.03	||

As you can check, as of today, no funds have been transferred to those addresses. Such a person has no other intention than to scam.

I have created a type 1 flag so that especially guests and newbies will be careful when they get the warning. Please support it:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=3182

[1714208201]

1714208201

[1714208201]

1714208201

[1714208201]

1714208201

[1714208201]

1714208201

[1714208201]

1714208201

[shasan]

I don't know what is the actual reason. As a newbie who created this type of topic and not sent the fund, I think it is the purpose of scamming innocent people. Also once mentioned required collateral and another space non-collateral. So, it is self-contradictory.

[Timelord2067]

Is the lender asking for collateral? If not, then what is the scam?

[LoyceV]

It's just another beggar:

If u like my business donate to me to continue my loan service  my btc address :
~

I've reported the thread. Update: It's deleted.

[shasan]

Is the lender asking for collateral? If not, then what is the scam?

Probably you have neither seen the thread of the lender nor you have seen my post which is stated above your post. The user asked for the collateral and also at the same time asked for a donation. So the user can scam by taking donation by the name of fake lending as well as by taking collateral.

It's just another beggar:

It is a good thing that no one still donated anything.

[Timelord2067]

...

Actually yes, I have read the thread (and this one for that matter) having a "hunch" or a "suspicion" someone *might* do something isn't the same as someone is *going* to do something.

In this archived version of the thread https://ninjastic.space/topic/5454298 the OP asks for assistance in finding an escrow for their deals. (Post number five).

So, given the lender is asking for collateral (to cover losses by borrowers defaulting) and is prepared to use an escrow, what is the scam?

[shasan]

So, given the lender is asking for collateral (to cover losses by borrowers defaulting) and is prepared to use an escrow, what is the scam?

I could not tell them as a scammer and their activity could not be a scam activity. But the person has mentioned that s/he has sent the bitcoin to the borrower's wallet which s/he has not done. That means s/he was trying to scam by showing that s/he is providing a loan and s/he is a legit user which s/he is not.

[CryptoHeadlineNews]

So, there is a fake lending service that you can see in the following thread:

Loan Service new (Newbie Kingdo Loans)
Anyway, here's a table to help track the "borrowers" and their addresses.  Have fun!

||.User	|| Address	|| Amount	||
||.Amarjoob	|| 18SnZ6AEfdb6APiAwFNawqUkcaPq8qk3td	|| 0.006	||
||.Accesstx	|| 14hYd8Pn2apu6txZe3DFQwsxXbpodxzPXW	|| 0.01	||
||.masdd	|| 1MwfR7uGzoPAzN2XDeuYVbVTLNnRTEQW5W	|| 0.03	||
||.Dlogd123	|| 1FQVdKasUXfAa2iXCVVRoLBUdKGFQmd6x8	|| 0.03	||

Yes, I totally agree with you on this very statement of yours regarding this loan service, because with the fact that all the users which claimed to have received loan from this lender are all newbie forum members and yet 3 of the accounts were all created in the same moth of May 2023, it is a clear sign they must all be an alt. of same individual, while secondly, from the link you provided above, it clearly shows non of those wallet address have ever received a penny $.

[nutildah]

So, given the lender is asking for collateral (to cover losses by borrowers defaulting) and is prepared to use an escrow, what is the scam?

They are being deceitful in an attempt to build up a reputation on the forum. That is inherently untrustworthy and a scam does not have to have occurred / be in progress in order for a red trust or flag to be left.

Flag language:

Due largely to the factors mentioned in this topic, I believe that anyone dealing with xxx is at a high risk of losing money, and guests would be well-advised to avoid doing so. This determination is based on concrete red flags which any knowledgeable & reasonable forum user should agree with, and it is not based on the user's opinions.

Red tag language:

You think that trading with this person is high-risk.

Notice the lack of the word "scam" in either instance.



PS: the only thing your feedback on Poker Player does is suggest you don't understand how the trust system works

[Poker Player]

PS: the only thing your feedback on Poker Player does is suggest you don't understand how the trust system works

To say that I don't understand how the system works, I would expect you to refer to several poorly written feedbacks, and not just one, but while we're at it, would someone who has been on the forum as long as you and has as much experience mind explaining it to me to see if I understand it and decide to change the wording of the feedback?

For me, simply, someone who offers that kind of service is not to be trusted, it is risky to deal with him.

I am editing this because I misunderstood before and though that you were referring to me about my feedback on Loansik12.

Yeah, well, a neutral feedback from non-DT member I don't care much about but I would add that it is not only the feedback, but also that he is the only one who opposes the flag with the arguments he gives.

[holydarkness]

[...]

So, given the lender is asking for collateral (to cover losses by borrowers defaulting) and is prepared to use an escrow, what is the scam?

If we have to venture into the realm of possibilities, there are several that I can think of.

One, merit fishing, hoping that people thought their action is an act of kindness and give them merit and later on sell them.

Two, almost similar to merit fishing, trust fishing. Perhaps they hoped that, encouraged by the "successful" transaction between their alt and fake deals, and possibly the alts themselves left feedback that'll encourage members to leave similar ones, they'll farm the trust and sell them, or use the built-up trust to make a huge loan themselves which will be defaulted.

Three, and this is a long reach, attempting to steal the collateral. When there is someone asking for deal and they asked for collateral, they might went, "you go first, send me the collateral." and later never actually send the loan to the borrower. Though they do asking for escrow on their now-deleted thread, it seems that was just barks, not the bites.

Whatever that is, wouldn't the fact that they fake deals is enough to warrant some suspicion and advise people to exercise caution upon doing any deal with them?

[Timelord2067]

Whatever that is, wouldn't the fact that they fake deals is enough to warrant some suspicion and advise people to exercise caution upon doing any deal with them?

I was going to say something along those lines but I would also add that there are no TX details (faked or actual), so at best there is only a suspicion that the accused might take the collateral (assuming that after they had said they are prepared to use an escrow a potential borrower were to then go ahead and send that collateral to the lender direct).  

As you pointed out, it may be that the lender was trying to make themselves look worthy of conducting business with, but we don't even have solid proof ^{(i.e. use of the same wallet, email, twitter etc)} that the borrowers were alts - just a suspicion.


Given that unlike other parts of the Forum where there are strict rules forbidding admin/mods from deleting posts, now that the thread had been wiped, we may never know other than to have a hunch something untoward was going to occur.

...

Your opportunity to convince me with solid proof was little more than a personal attack.  Ironic really when the shoe was on the other foot you choose to lash out rather than convince me.

Flag Opposed ^{(unless of course you have actual proof, not just a hunch??)}

[holydarkness]

Whatever that is, wouldn't the fact that they fake deals is enough to warrant some suspicion and advise people to exercise caution upon doing any deal with them?

I was going to say something along those lines but I would also add that there are no TX details (faked or actual), so at best there is only a suspicion that the accused might take the collateral (assuming that after they had said they are prepared to use an escrow a potential borrower were to then go ahead and send that collateral to the lender direct).  

As you pointed out, it may be that the lender was trying to make themselves look worthy of conducting business with, but we don't even have solid proof ^{(i.e. use of the same wallet, email, twitter etc)} that the borrowers were alts - just a suspicion.

The lack of TX details themselves, in my opinion, are the evidence. There is something suspicious by the silence. Let's put ourselves on the shoes of those people whose username put by DireWolfM14, they --or rather, we-- got a promise that our non-collateral loan was acccepted and then we never received it. If we are real and not the alt of Loansik12, wouldn't one of us, at least one of us, ask for clarification that goes along the line, "hello good sir, how do you do. When can I have my loan?", or "My good sir, I have not yet received the payment." or, "Sir, plz good sir, I need the loan to buy shiba 5 years and be millionaire, I need helping."

None did.

It'll be a different case if Loansik12 PMed them and rejected each of their loan. That'll nicely explain why there is no transaction on each of the wallet and none protested. But that'll be a breach of implicit --or could it be even a written one?-- contract. Loansik12 agreed upon a "contract", and then rejected them behind the screen, and most likely unilaterally. At the very least, it entitled them a suspicion. Why else would someone offered a non-collateral service, agreed, only to decline it later on behind the screen?

And ultimately, the silence itself. The thread spread from 28th of May to 12th of June, if they're not guilty, or they've send the payment, perhaps to a different address that's changed by mutual agreement behind the screen, they surely would try to defend themselves, provide TX ID, ask the borrower to made testament, or at the very least, those borrower will say something themselves and provide statement that'll defend Loansik12.

Can we agree on these?

[rby]

If it's difficult to determine if the lending is fake, the alternative is to prove that the accounts involved are controlled by one person. That alone is enough reason to leave tags on them.
You cannot pretend to enter into transaction with your alts. That is an attempt to deceive the forum members.

[DireWolfM14]

Is the lender asking for collateral? If not, then what is the scam?

He was asking for collateral, here's the archive of the unedited original post in his first lending thread: https://ninjastic.space/topic/5454298

After he was asked about escrow for the collateral in his first (now deleted) thread he started a second thread which was a copy of the first, but he crossed out the part about collateral.

It's just another beggar:

If u like my business donate to me to continue my loan service  my btc address :
~

I've reported the thread. Update: It's deleted.

Not the only one.  Here's another that I reported a couple of days ago that's nothing more than a request for a handout; https://ninjastic.space/post/62375765

The second loan thread is still active despite also asking for donations.

This is probably the same alt-farm-troll that's been spamming the lending board for the last year.  He seems to have switched his tactics from asking for loans to offering them.  I suspect he's using one of his many alts to appear like a "legit" lender.   I have no evidence just yet, so I'll refrain from mentioning the account name in this post.

[examplens]

I would almost completely agree with DireWolfM14's statement, maybe this whole discussion wasn't necessary after that

There are no loans being given out here.  This "lender" is just a troll with a lot of alt accounts, using them to talk to himself.  Scammers have tried this kind of thing multiple times; he'll pretend to give himself a loan, then use his alts to leave positive reviews for his own accounts.  It's an effort to feign activity and trust.

What I would add, we have often seen Newbies complain that they can't get a loan and that they are discriminated against here in that way. I also think that this is not the first time that a super lender appears and given loans exclusively to newbies.
It is quite possible that it is not even an attempt to build a fake reputation, but just trolling.

If it's difficult to determine if the lending is fake, the alternative is to prove that the accounts involved are controlled by one person. That alone is enough reason to leave tags on them.
You cannot pretend to enter into transaction with your alts. That is an attempt to deceive the forum members.

We cannot make any special conclusions about alt accounts, because they are mostly beginners without any history that would indicate any connection.

[Timelord2067]

We cannot make any special conclusions about alt accounts, because they are mostly beginners without any history that would indicate any connection.

Which was the point I made in an earlier post.  In any event, I will withdraw my opposition to the flag as the last four posts are sound and should have been contained in the OP.

Thanks.