There's no doubt that social engineering retailers, both In-store and via an online gateway, Involves a lot of physical and mental preparation to get the job done and no matter how well you've executed your attack vector, problematic Issues will Inevitably come your way. For example, things like a statutory declaration and an affidavit, will be experienced at some stage during your SEing activities and If you have very little to no Idea as to why It was generated and how to take care of It on your end, It may have a serious Impact on your SE - perhaps to the point of your claim being prematurely declined by the representative.
Another common occurrence, especially when using the DNA method, Is a request to file and return a police report. To this day, I continue to come across SE'ers of all shapes & sizes, who are totally clueless about how It should be handled - some of whom are In a state of panic, namely when they read the term "police" and think they're In some sort of trouble with the law. If they had knowledge of why companies ask for a PR, they'd realize that It's nothing more than a bit of paperwork to move forward with the claim and as such, there would be no hesitation to file the report and await the outcome - most of which work In favor of the SE'er.
As you can see, It's paramount to be well aware of the events that take place when the SE Is In motion, Inclusive of what to expect when refunds & replacements are "approved" - which Is precisely the objective of this article. Notice how I've used "approved" as the operative word? That's because It relates to claims that have been "approved", but "the rep/agent Is waiting on one particular detail" BEFORE he can Issue a refund or dispatch a replacement Item. In other words and In very simple terms, the claims department said "yes" to the refund/replacement, but ONLY when (for example) you send the product (that you're SEing) back to the company. I have actually covered that a little further down the page.
As a result of having a clear understanding (beforehand) of "the most common requests that representatives make after approving claims", It will prepare you to tackle each one efficiently and effectively, thereby ensure a replacement Item Is sent, or funds are reimbursed back Into your account. Just remember the purpose of this article: "The claim Is approved, but they're waiting for something before a refund or replacement can be given". Although there are an array of requests, I've listed three types that will definitely be triggered when SEing one company to the next and at the end of every topic, I've also discussed how to bypass each one. Okay, so without further ado, let's rip Into It starting with "A Request For A Proof Of Destruction".
A Request For A Proof Of Destruction:
In terms of social engineering tech-based/electrical products such as Apple AirPods, a hair straightener, a computer mouse etc, the SE'er will contact the company claiming the Item Is not working. The rep will then go through a few routine troubleshooting steps to try and establish why It's not functioning as per Its factory state, and every task he asks to perform, the SE'er will obviously respond with a negative result - the Item Is still not operating. When the representative Is satisfied It's defective, he'll "approve the claim", but only when he receives a "Proof Of Destruction" ("POD") from the social engineer.
For your reference, Logitech and SteelSeries are a couple of companies who ask for a POD and If you fail to comply, your claim will be declined. So what exactly Is a proof of destruction? Well, as Its name Implies, you need to "destroy" your Item In a manner that will render It non-functional, and the rep/agent will give you a set of Instructions on how It should be done. For Instance, If It's a computer keyboard, he may ask you to break some keys or If you're SEing an SSD (Solid State Drive), you'll be told to drill a few holes Into It. The logic behind that from a company's perspective, Is to make sure the defective Item Is completely useless, thus preventing you from falsifying the claim.
Furthermore, If the cost of the Item Is greater than the cost of freight to send It back, a POD will Instead be requested - which (as you'll see shortly) doesn't cost the company a single dime. Now In order to verify It has been destroyed, you'll be Instructed to provide evidence by "taking a photo or video that clearly shows the damaged product" Inclusive of (where applicable) Its serial number, and a handwritten note next to the device. When those requirements have been fulfilled, It will be sent as an email attachment and If there's no Inconsistencies, a refund or replacement will be Issued. Evidently, you have no Intention to smash your Item, so we'll see how to circumvent It as per below.
How To Circumvent A POD
It's a matter of common sense that you're not going to destroy your purchased Item just because the representative asked you to do so, hence you'd seek alternative measures to bypass the proof of destruction, but still making It seem as though you're agreeing with everything the rep has said. There are a few ways It can be done, and If you're told to take a photo of the POD, the corrupted file method comes Into action. On the other hand, a video may be demanded, and that's when the corrupted video method Is used. Each of those methods have their pros and cons, so be sure to thoroughly read my guides. A very effective approach when "an Image" Is requested, Is to "Photoshop It" and If you're proficient In that, by all means put your skill set to good use.
Asked To Return The Item:
Once "the claim Is approved", there are a few methods that require "the Item be returned" before a refund or replacement can be generated but It's way beyond the scope of this article to cater for the lot, so I will focus on one that's utilized every so often - being "the leaking battery method". The reason I've specifically chosen to demonstrate this, Is because It's almost guaranteed to trigger the need to send the Item back, therefore you can use It as a general guide with other methods that also require returning the product. Prior to discussing that (avoiding the return), let's see what the leaking battery method Is all about.
Do note that the method Is limited with the Items It can be used against, namely (and stating the obvious), those that contain batteries. Okay, here's how It usually works. When social engineering any Item that has batteries to function, SE'ers use the "leaking battery method" to claim that their product was delivered with Its batteries leaking. Naturally, there's nothing wrong with It, but you're saying It's leaking for SEing purposes. The biggest advantage of the method, Is that there Is no way for the company to provide conclusive evidence that the batteries were In perfect condition from the time It was dispatched, to when It was travelling In transit, and when finally reaching Its destination - your home.
The batteries could've been leaking at any point during the events above, and companies are aware of It - which Is why their reps ask to return the Item - to examine It and confirm the leak. For example, If you're SEing a laptop and said Its battery was leaking when the carrier driver dropped off the package at your house, they're obviously not going to take your word for It and Immediately process a refund. They need to be certain that what you're saying Is true and correct, and the only way It can be done, Is by physically Inspecting It after It's been returned. There are a number of ways to bypass sending It back, which brings me to my next point.
How To Circumvent The Return
The good thing about this method, Is that there are quite a few options available to circumvent the return and depending on the nature of the product, either all or some of them can be put Into practice. Whatever the case may be, you will have at least two alternatives to choose from, thereby an Informed decision can be made on the one that's best suited to your circumstances. In terms of methods (to bypass the return), I recommend boxing the company or using the disposed of the faulty Item method. Another approach Is to say "the carrier refused to transport dangerous/hazardous goods" - Royal Mail Is one of many services who operate as such. Even If the company's carrier partner Is fine with It, remain adamant that you were told your package Is not fit for shipment.
A Request For A Proof Of Purchase:
The last topic I'll be discussing pertaining to a "claim being approved" and the requirements needed to credit the account or dispatch a replacement Item, Is when the rep/agent asks for a "POP", which Is an abbreviation of "Proof Of Purchase". It's pretty much self-explanatory, that a POP relates to receiving a receipt with your transaction when purchasing something from your local mall, but from a social engineering standpoint, It's not as easy as giving It to the representative and having your claim finalized thereafter - namely because you don't have the Item to begin with, thus there's no proof of purchase!
You see, unlike buying the product first and then using methods like the missing Item or partial to get a refund/replacement, some SE'ers don't have the cash upfront, hence they need to pretend they've bought It and have the POP In their possession - as It will be requested by the rep to verify the Item was In fact purchased from their Inventory. A couple of methods that won't cost your SE a single penny and also (tend to) trigger a proof of purchase, Is the serial number method and the gift method. Essentially, the refund/replacement Is processed on the grounds your POP Is received, cross-checked and confirmed It belongs to the company you're SEing. Evidently, It must be circumvented and/or manipulated, so we'll see how It's done next.
How To Circumvent A POP
Do remember that you don't have the proof of purchase, therefore (In the method mentioned below) you're only giving the Impression that It will be sent via email on request. Now the way It's bypassed, Is no different to how It was done In the "How To Circumvent A POD" subtopic (a little further up the page) by using the corrupted file method, so there's no point repeating what you already know. If you're not confident In using that method, an effective alternative Is a fake online generator such as this site, which replicates the real deal with Incredible accuracy. Have a look for yourself, you will not be disappointed.
In Conclusion:
I'd like to reiterate, that this article Is all about reps who "approve claims" but they're "awaiting further details" and when received, a refund or replacement will be given. To explain It better, It's like your friend saying: 'Can I come over for dinner tonight?' and you've said: 'Yes, but only If you buy takeout cause I don't get paid till Thursday'. What's happened In this analogy, Is you've "approved" your friend's Invitation, but only If he/she "pays for the food". The same principle applies to everything you've had the pleasure of reading - your claim Is "approved", but only when the company "receives what they've asked for".
