Preface
Not long ago, someone in the circle of friends reminded of a new type of bill fraud, in which a scammer pretended to be a central enterprise to find a bank as an agent endorsement to defraud the bank of funds. I suddenly remembered that at the beginning of the month, a friend consulted this business in the background, can the company endorse it to the bank?
Is it a new type of bill Ponzi scheme to find a bank to endorse as an agent?
1. A casual consultation
At the beginning of the month, a friend sent me a private message in the background, saying that there was a person who claimed that a central enterprise said that they could issue invoices and directly endorse the bank.
At that time, my reply was that the payee and endorser could not be the bank. The Negotiable Instruments Law stipulates that the issuance, acquisition and transfer of negotiable instruments shall have a real transaction relationship and a creditor's rights and debts relationship. Normally, there is only a financing relationship between the bank and the enterprise, and there is no trade relationship, so the payee and endorser will not be the bank, and the enterprise will find a bank for financing, which is discounting.
One exception I can think of is when the technology department of a bank makes a software system for a company, and the company issues or endorses bills to it, which is theoretically in line with the law of negotiable instruments, but I have never heard of such a situation.
Is it a new type of bill Ponzi scheme to find a bank to endorse as an agent?
I didn't think it was right at the time, but in hindsight it may be hiding a new type of bill fraud.
2. Review and reflection
A successful scam, fraudsters often grasp the psychological weakness of the victim, just like the deceived urban investment company not long ago, which is precisely the pain point of its short-term financing needs. What are the weaknesses of the deceived bank in the context of strict supervision of the bill business, and the pain point of circumventing the regulatory constraints through the innovation of the bill business.
Returning to this case, the fraudsters pretended to be subsidiaries of central enterprises, packaged the fraud as a new bill business model, and even claimed to have been recognized by the bill exchange to find some small and medium-sized banks to commit fraud. From the bank's point of view, if there is no God's perspective, will you be deceived in the game?
If you want not to be deceived, details determine success or failure, and there are two obvious shortcomings in this fraud link, one is that the authenticity of the subsidiary of the central enterprise can be verified, and the other is whether this business model is feasible can also be verified by the ticket exchange.
Is it a new type of bill Ponzi scheme to find a bank to endorse as an agent?
In hindsight, this fraud model actually does not work at all, and the bill exchange system does not support the role of the bill payee is the bank, and only supports the enterprise to endorse the bank through discounting, and there is no so-called agency endorsement. In fact, no banks have been deceived, and the scammers are simply doing their jobs.
Source: Ticket Notes
(Tianxiatong Commerce - your personal bill expert, the leader of bill service, no longer confused in the face of commercial bill financing)