elmanchez exit scam, loan default

[DireWolfM14]

What happened::

On June 2, 2020 I gave elmanchez a loan for 0.3 ETH.
On June 3, 2020 I gave him another loan for 0.043 BTC.

On June 20 I received a message from elmanchez through telegram informing me that he will pay back the loans in time.  I have not communicated directly to him since then.  Shortly after that elmanchez deleted the telegram account he used in our communications.

Since then, the user account "elmanchez" has been associated with a banned user, suspected of attempting to use a banned account to feign trust as an established member, and suspected of selling Bitcointalk.org accounts.  After this revelation, on July 20, 2020 I sent elmanchez a personal message here on the forum asking him for clarification about the loans.  To this date I have not received a reply, and yet I believe he has been active using other accounts.  

At this point I am of the belief that elmanchez has no intention of paying back the loans.

 
Scammers Profile Link:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=profile;u=2553198


Reference Link:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5132594.msg54551013#msg54551013
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5132594.msg54556648#msg54556648
[Archive]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5263184.msg54835208#msg54835208


Amount Scammed:

0.3 ETH
0.043 BTC


Payment Method & Proof of Payment:

ETH:
0x2e22b87af9f9131ad16630c23e560872fd2e527b3d85578dded046a8917da33e

BTC:
ddb42b114ced565508b5e6b8fc576c113005314542dcafcde68193716089606f
7868574e8f998cde58d6d0773b6b371fba3d2a9a4036edd31bec99598a7adcb3


PM/Chat Logs:

 


Additional Notes:

Type 3 Flag link: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;flag=2163

[1713880321]

1713880321

[1713880321]

1713880321

[1713880321]

1713880321

[1713880321]

1713880321

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

Sorry to hear that bro! Flag supported and left a negative feedback. This is unacceptable. No one can recover your lose and I hope this is not a big amount for you.

At this point I am of the belief that elmanchez has no intention of paying back the loans.

His account has no reputation left so most possibly he is not coming back anymore.

[DireWolfM14]

Sorry to hear that bro! Flag supported and left a negative feedback. This is unacceptable. No one can recover your lose and I hope this is not a big amount for you.

No kids are going to starve, but any loss is painful nonetheless.  Unfortunately my lending activities are at a net negative as a result of one big loss, and now this one just makes it even harder to recover.

[LFC_Bitcoin]

Sorry about this buddy, seems like a real lowlife, imagining being so desperately poor you’re willing to scam & lose your account over that much money, fucking loser. The joke’s on him, hopefully he spends it on hookers & cocaine & dies of a heart attack or gets AIDS.

[BitcoinGirl.Club]

The joke’s on him, hopefully he spends it on hookers & cocaine & dies of a heart attack or gets AIDS.

How about getting Corona and listen to Trump for a whole night LOL

Sorry about the jokes, @DireWolfM14 this no collateral lending business is very risky now a days. I hope you move on and find few good clients to recover your lose in the business.

[electronicash]

sorry for your loss. you easily trust to give loans, you have been a victim many times already.
elmanchez has so much troubles in the past where he always encounter some disputes and scam accusation. the previous ones were not really very clear sign but this time it could be it. if a person has kind of brush with scams, you might wanna wait til he regains trust from other users.

[The Sceptical Chymist]

His account has no reputation left so most possibly he is not coming back anymore.

Yeah, the amount he scammed is worth way more than the value of his account so I'd agree this is most likely an exit scam. 

imagining being so desperately poor you’re willing to scam & lose your account over that much money

That account wasn't that old, nor was he exactly a trusted member.  I'm sure he's not regretting the fact that the account is now all but useless.  In any case, I seriously doubt scammers weigh the costs like we do after they've committed a scam--my guess is that most scammers on bitcointalk have multiple accounts anyway.

DireWolfM14, I'm not trying to pour salt in your wounds here, but why didn't you get any collateral from this idiot?  I know you've been around long enough to know that no-collateral crypto loans between complete strangers on the internet are as risky as loans can get.

[DireWolfM14]

DireWolfM14, I'm not trying to pour salt in your wounds here, but why didn't you get any collateral from this idiot?  I know you've been around long enough to know that no-collateral crypto loans between complete strangers on the internet are as risky as loans can get.

Believe me, I'm salty enough a little more is hardly noticeable.  I feel like an idiot myself.

[Avirunes]

Believe me, I'm salty enough a little more is hardly noticeable.  I feel like an idiot myself.

I am sure you learned the lesson.

Elmanchez reached me out in PM multiple times earlier to remove my neutral rating regarding his earlier loan repayment issues. I was feeling suspicious since then. Anyway will support the flag and add the rating unless resolved.

[suchmoon]

He made a couple of ridiculous borrowing attempts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5196718
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5206544

But then apparently figured out that requesting a loan like that attracts too much scrutiny, whereas chatting with a lender directly he can impart the con(fidence) more successfully.

[logfiles]

So sorry brother, these loan defaulters are really eating up your capital.  
Pay attention to low ranking accounts that are less than 2 years old here and seem to be applying for loans very frequently. I think they do it to first build trust while planning to pull of an exit scam.

[The Cryptovator]

I can't recall who had left but there was negative feedback on his profile at the beginning due to unreasonable loan requests. But we must say, elmanchez is a very clever person who knows how to manage people. He gained trust very fast and skip very fast as well. For lenders, it's become more difficult to spot the likely scammer. Hope OP will avoid such as borrower in the future and get a lesson from this story.

Sorry for your loss.

[LoyceV]

He made a couple of ridiculous borrowing attempts:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5196718
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5206544

In the second topic, I was surprised TMAN gave the Newbie a loan: https://loyce.club/archive/details/topic_5206544.html

That happened 2 days before TMAN started TMAN's Services Bitches.. You want to be seen? TMAN is keen..
From TMAN's feedback on elmanchez:

This user took a loan from me with no collateral, I think I was probably drunk to agree with it. since then he has repaid the loan x4 with work that I required. I trust this user, I am not advising anyone else to lend, but I do believe elmanchez will be a great addition to the crypto community

It looks like he wasn't paid back in Bitcoin, but in services provided. I saw that topic back then, but didn't remember who started it. Now it's starting to make sense

Flag supported.

[smyslov]

Is this the guy who offer free logo and banner design, I have seen some of this design not really bad but his talents of scamming people is better than creating logo and banner, oh I get it he will tried to gain a lot of trust but once he gain trust he will scam people, he is a scammer clothed in a designer skin.

[Pffrt]

But we must say, elmanchez is a very clever person who knows how to manage people.

He was a clear feedback farmer from the beginning if I can remember correctly. The problem with us is we have way more of DT member these days and as a result it's easy for someone to gain positive feedback by impersonating a genuine guy which later they take advantage by scamming other people. We have seen such cases a lot of time but we are yet to learn.
Sorry OP, I didn't mean to hurt you. But that's the reality. The feedback these days almost mean nothing other than some random comments. You should have worked with collateral only loan. Hope you will recover the loss soon.

[sujonali1819]

Ops, Another loan default. I have confused about this loans when DireWolfM14 told here that there are two active loans to elmanchez. And now I am seeing this. Really very sad news for DireWolfM14.
I was also confused that elmanchez is lying when I got a pm by the user about a month ago maybe. I was trying to clear it that something suspicious about elmanchez here . But I did not get enough response from others due to (telegram message).

btw thanks flag is supported.

[Upgrade00]

The problem with us is we have way more of DT member these days and as a result it's easy for someone to gain positive feedback by impersonating a genuine guy which later they take advantage by scamming other people. We have seen such cases a lot of time but we are yet to learn.

The problem isn't really from the number of DT members but how the trust system is viewed and handled. I personally rarely give positive feedbacks except after multiple interactions with the said user overtime and I would only give out as much as I can manage at a time, to be able to review changes in the account easily.
Every member should also get involved in the trust system as anyone can leave a feedback which would be visible on the trust page even if it's not on the user's profile information.

Also, trust feedback should only be viewed as a suggestion from other users and everyone should do their own personal research before dealing with any user.
@DireWolfM14 is usually very good in discerning users to give no-collateral loans to. Flag supported.

[suchmoon]

The problem isn't really from the number of DT members but how the trust system is viewed and handled. I personally rarely give positive feedbacks except after multiple interactions with the said user overtime and I would only give out as much as I can manage at a time, to be able to review changes in the account easily.

Positive feedback should be given only if the user is unlikely to scam. Obviously there is some room for opinion here but for example in trading I think you shouldn't give positive feedback to someone whom you didn't risk money with. If you make a 100 trades with Alice but Alice always goes first (i.e. your money/property/etc is never at risk) then you probably can't be sure if Alice would scam or not. Same with escrows, loans with collateral, etc. Those should not result in positive feedback.

But again, it's not always quite that simple. A determined long con scammer will figure out a way to farm trust. Example: shasan's trust rating for elmanchez. No-collateral loan, so shasan was risking money, trust feedback seems justified - shasan might genuinely have thought that elmanchez is unlikely to scam.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?action=trust;u=2553198;dt


Edited 2020-11-30 to fix a broken image

Shortly thereafter elmanchez takes a loan from the OP, likely with an intent to scam.

[Upgrade00]

Positive feedback should be given only if the user is unlikely to scam. Obviously there is some room for opinion here but for example in trading I think you shouldn't give positive feedback to someone whom you didn't risk money with. If you make a 100 trades with Alice but

I can understand the purpose of this. Although, there could be some variations depending on the interaction before the trade, if someone insists on going first during a trade then they passed up an opportunity to potentially scam willingly and this could prove trustworthiness.

But again, it's not always quite that simple. A determined long con scammer will figure out a way to farm trust.

In such situations traders should only risk as much as they feel the user would not be willing to lose their account over at that time. So a long con scammer should not be giving an amount potentially higher than their collateral, if the collateral in this case is a forum account it's more difficult to calculate, but judging by how much effort and time a user has put in, a figure can be calculated (the lowest possible amount preferably).
Users should also not be trusted while they have a pending trade so they can't accumulate funds.

[suchmoon]

I can understand the purpose of this. Although, there could be some variations depending on the interaction before the trade, if someone insists on going first during a trade then they passed up an opportunity to potentially scam willingly and this could prove trustworthiness.

Scammers are crafty. They can do that on purpose to farm trust. Similarly they can say "I take PayPal" or "escrow available" to make it seem like it's a no-risk transaction and then sweet-talk the victim into a risky no-escrow crypto-only deal.

Granted if someone has been around long enough to make 100 deals they can probably be trusted with small amounts. Most of the time you can see who is genuinely engaged in trading and who is only building up reputation.