Elizabeth Linkel i was to purchase a 2004 honda civic xe i sent the money but didnt recieve the car Kearney, Nebraska

If it's true that the person who originally posted this ripoff report sent money, then... well... I wish s/he had read more, on the Internet, about the various automobile-related ripoffs that are out there.  Also, the ad, in most cities, originally appeared on Craigslist, which goes out of its way to warn posters about being wary, so they don't get ripped off.

Because it's so difficult to believe that anyone would actually send money, I wonder if this ripoff report is maybe a little bit embellished in order to more strongly make the point of what could have happened, and so, thereby, better warn people.  However, as I reveal near the very end of this posting, I have yet another, more sinister suspicion.  Keep reading...

There's no question, in any case, that it's a ripoff.  I saw the ad, too, here in the San Francisco Bay area; and I knew, pretty much right away, that it was likely not real, for a number of reasons.

The headline of the ad was:

2oo4 Honda Civic XE 16V #319395 - $1949 

Sadly, the ad has since been "flagged for removal" on Craigslist, so I can't now link the reader, here, to it.  Someone who's likely as good at spotting scams as am I probably flagged it.  Good for him/her.

At any rate, that $1,949 price is quite literally four to six times less than a car of that year, with the mileage and in the condition claimed in the ad, would be worth.  So, right there was the first red flag.

Also, the ad was entirely a graphic image, so there's no text on which Craigslist or anyone else could search for it.  

The ad was further obfuscated by a headline which contained letters where digits belonged (specifically, 2oo4 instead of 2004), which is a classic scammer trick to keep the ad from being easily searched for.  

Another classic scammer move was saying that the Civic was an "XE" model, when anyone who knows the Civic, at all, knows that it would have to be an "EX" (with the other two models being the "DX" and the "LX"), also to inhibit search.

The final tip-off, for me, was that I saw the ad posted in several different geographic areas in the SF Bay area, none of them even remotely close to one another, and all of them advertising the vehicle for slightly different prices.

I'm quite expert at catching these guys; and, in fact, I helped police down near Monterey, California, just last week, to walk right up to a guy who had been advertising a Volvo for only a fraction of its true value, and put handcuffs on him.  I won't go into all the telltale signs in his ads, but it was the same sort of grabage I've herein described for this Honda Civic.  I'd do the same with this seller, too, except that it's unclear precisely where s/he is, geographically. Even the email header seems obfuscated... which, right there, suggests that the sender's a pro.

So, then, maybe it's a bit more understanable that someone might be sucked-in.  A truly professional con artists can be very convincing, indeed.  Still, no one should send money regarding something like this, through the mail, or by any other means.  With cars, one goes and sees it in-person, has a mechanic check it out, gets a CarFax report, has the DMV verify that it's got a clear title, and then pays in-person and gets said paperwork on the spot.

A couple days ago I sent an email to the Civic's "seller," email address (from the ad):  elizl1962@gmail.com

NOTE:  Please, Ripoff Reports editors, don't remove that email address or any other identifying information, herein.  It is incontrovertibly that of a scammer; and, so, people need to be warned!

I was blunt in my email, saying that I couldn't believe the price, and demanding to know the reason because it was a huge red flag.  I assured the seller that before I put a penny of my money for the car into his/her hands, I would know the cold, hard truth about it, with or without his/her help; and so s/he might as well just be up-front with me and help me to understand, right now, why the car was for sale for one-fourth or less its value; what's wrong with it, etc.

On Thurs 28 Mar 2013 at 7:41 PM PDT (note that that was after the ripoff report to which I'm now reponding was posted), I received an email from "Elizabeth Linkel" whose quite-likely-fake Google+ page may be viewed by clicking here.  She (and if this scam is like most others, it's probably really a "he") replied as follows:

Hello,
I'm sorry for the delay,the car is still for sale. Thanks  for being interested in buying my 2004 Honda Civic XE Automatic Transmission. It is in a  good condition, no scratches, no damages, never been implicated in any  accidents, no problems at the engine, runs very well. It has an 1.7L engine 84,000 miles, clear title. The price is $1,900. The only thing I am selling its because I divorced with  my husband and after the divorce I own this car, now as a woman I  don`t need it...
Also, I  can send you the pictures and more details too. Just let me know if you  are still interested.
Thank you very much,
Elizabeth

As most anyone can easily see, the response didn't really address anything I wrote in my inquiry; it's clearly boilerplate.

The price in it is different from what was in the ad... at least the ad to which I responded.  

Photos needn't have been offered since the original graphic ad contained no end of them.  

And the writer is clearly English-challenged... and I don't mean because of poor American education.    

Note, for example, the phrase "no damages" which is plural, where most Americans would write "no damage."

Note the phrase "never been implicated in any  accidents."  No American would write "implicated" and would, instead, write "involved."  So, right there is a common cultural/translation error.

Note, also, the phrase "no problems at the engine." Most Americans would write "with" instead of "at."  

Most Americans would also write "a 1.7 L engine" and not "an 1.7 L engine."

Finally, note the ridiculous -- and straight from the 1950s, as far as most Americans would be concerned -- explanation of why "she" is selling the car, to wit:  "The only thing I am selling its because I divorced with  my husband and after the divorce I own this car, now as a woman I  don`t need it..."  

First, there's the problem of "divorced with my husband," when any American, given the context, would write "divorced my husband."  Of course, "she" could be saying that the divorce left her with her husband's car, and so she needs to sell it; however, no American judge would order anything like that.  Even people in bankruptcy, or who are applying for Medicaid (and so can't own very much in life), get to keep their cars.  Plus, the phrase "now as a woman I don't need it" suggests a cultural value system which relegates women to not needing a car in life...

...exactly as someone from an oppressive and native culture in such as Africa would believe; and so s/he would not think there'd be anything wrong with writing such a sexist and offensive-to-women thing.

I would normally suggest that Elizabeth, believe it or not, could be real.  After all, lonely American women meet men online, and get sucked-in by their scam; and then many of them believe when their new online boyfriends tell them a complex yet believable story about why the woman should receive and then forward mail or packages on his behalf, or conduct business on his behalf, and cash checks and send money to him, etc.  Shows like CBS's 60 Minutes, and NBC's Dateline, and ABC's 20/20 have done numerous stories on such things over the years.

However, I suspect that "Elizabeth" doesn't exist; that the scammer is a man, maybe located in the US, but probably not... most likely in Africa, which tends to be where scams like this originate.

It could also be the Russian mob, though; they're increasingly active in such things in the US, now.

If the money was, indeed, sent to Texas, by US Mail, then the US Postal Inspection Service should be immediately contacted, and a complaint filed because anything connected with a scam which involves the US Mail is automatically within the Postal Inspection Service's purview; and those guys carry guns, badges and handcuffs... they're federal agents, just like the FBI or NCIS.

Whether or not the money was sent by US Mail, the consumer protection division of the Texas Attorney General's office, if that's the state where the money was sent, needs to be contacted, and a complain filed.  Since Nebraska would seem to be involved, then so, too, should its states AG be contacted, and a complaint filed therewith.  And the person who paid the money should also contact, and file a complaint with, his/her own state's attorney general's office.

The Nebraska address, in any case, appears to not exist, exactly as given; and the closest thing to it is rural, and seemingly single-family, and so there's no "#1" (or any other numbers) involved.  That is yet another game they play.

As far as the name "Bradfort Moore," in Texas (as he to whom the money was allegedly sent), the "t" at the end of the first name "Bradfort" makes the name sufficiently unique that it's quite likely a stolen identity from a man who died in Hancock County, Georgia on February 18, 1924.  That's a pretty common thing for these scammers to do:  Steal the name of someone dead, making sure, though, that the name's sufficiently unique that any mail directed at it will not be lost or misdirected; or that any money transferred to it will not be thought intended for anyone else.  

The scammer, no doubt, has a very sophisticated and authentic-looking photo ID -- probably even with appropriate holographic anti-fake-ID images on it -- for which he paid a fair amount of money to get from likely a Chinese supplier, where the best of such IDs are made, these days.  

He probably also has a very impressive-looking birth certificate -- maybe even on erasure-proof "bank" paper of the type that some states use -- complete with all the appropriate stamps and signatures and whatnot; and  from some state other than one he's actually in so that if he presents it, no one there will know enough about how it's supposed to look to challenge it.

In another pocket, though, I guarantee that he has his real ID, and his passport, so he could hightail it for an airport at a moment's notice, and get out of the US if he needed to.  Of course, I honestly believe that he's not in the US, at this point.  But, who really knows.

I'm sorry the person who posted this ripoff report got ripped-off; though, that said, s/he should have known better.  However, I'm not sure he got ripped off at all.  Ripoffs this egregious are far less common than people realize.  I'm actually thinking that s/he (who posted this ripoff report) may be part of the gang.  Yes, believe it or not, I'm thinking maybe s/he's angry with either or both of whomever are the real persons behind the names "Bradfort Moore" or "Elizabeth Linkel"; and that maybe he was even the guy who placed the ads...

...or that maybe s/he felt that someone like me was onto him/her and so just like the person who commits a crime using his/her own car, and then immediately reports it stolen so that s/he could have plausible deniability, maybe the ripoff report poster is trying to get whomever's onto him/her off his/her scent...

...because, just look:  S/he, too, used, in his/her ripoff report, letters where numbers belonged in his/her "I sent 1900.oo to purchase a car" phrase.  Hmm.  That's just like "2oo4," in the headline of the ad, no? Coincidence?  Unlikely.

In this work, I've learned not to believe in coincidences.  Law enforcement should contact this website's owners and ask for the name, address, telephone number and email information associated with the user, "tammy," who originally posted this ripoff report.  I'm not saying s/he's involved; rather, I'm simply saying that  coincidences like that two-lower-case-o's-instead-of-two-zeros coincidence is worthy of routine law enforcement follow-up, just for the heck of it.

Gregg L. DesElms
Napa, California USA
gregg at greggdeselms dot com (email)
http://tinyurl.com/deselms-card (business card)

Now we know the answer to the question: Is it ok to send money to someone I've never met to purchase a car I've never seen or taken for a test-drive?

You wanted to buy your daughter a safe, trouble free dependable car, right?  So how do you go about doing this???  You send your money off to somebody you don't know, to buy a USED car which you don't even know exists...a car you've NEVER seen...a car you've NEVER test driven...a car you've NEVER checked for fit, finish, body damage or rust...a car on which you've NEVER heard the engine run...a car you've NEVER checked to see if all the accessories work...a car you've NEVER had checked over by your own mechanic to be sure it had even a chance of being a safe, troublefree and dependable car for your daughter!  You need some serious, professional help.