- Joined
- Mar 3, 2009
- Messages
- 496
- Points
- 0
Loanshark can call these 2 to send delivery to the victim's address.
Imagine every half an hour from midnight to 6am, an order was made by loanshark to send delivery to the victim's address.
So is McDonalds and KFC indirectly harrassing the victims on behalf of the loanshark ?
Either the loanshark runs out of runners, or they are penniless to pay their runner so resort to this free-of-charge tactics ??
McDonalds and KFC replied that there is no way to block people from making an order to an address even though the number does not belongs to the owner.
There is no system in place to verify the delivery orders. They should do something as it is a waste of food and also waste of resources.
And indirectly harrassing a victim by providing a free service.
Can the riders also be classified as runners ?
Imagine every half an hour from midnight to 6am, an order was made by loanshark to send delivery to the victim's address.
So is McDonalds and KFC indirectly harrassing the victims on behalf of the loanshark ?
Either the loanshark runs out of runners, or they are penniless to pay their runner so resort to this free-of-charge tactics ??
McDonalds and KFC replied that there is no way to block people from making an order to an address even though the number does not belongs to the owner.
There is no system in place to verify the delivery orders. They should do something as it is a waste of food and also waste of resources.
And indirectly harrassing a victim by providing a free service.
Can the riders also be classified as runners ?