neilly.Apparently this is doing the rounds on FB.
May be worth looking at by some , although I am not sure if it is true or not.
View attachment 115335
Cheers
Which from what I've read on the stolen section is most of them depending on how clued up the toe rag isThe scam would be a list of approved items which the thieves have learned how to defeat.
There is a post in the stolen section 6th January about north yorks and an associated police campaign, possibly genuine, but worth checking the letters are part of that campaign. The timing of the scam in this thread would be opportunistic. Forgive me if I have an overly suspicious outlook at the moment.Don't know if it's a scam but I had a letter and two other defender owners I know had them too
The scam would be a list of approved items which the thieves have learned how to defeat.
Just dug out my letter and it is not the same as the one on here and mine is signed by chief inspector Neil Hunter Rural Crime Lead.
It was posted in York which may be just an admin centre North Yorks Police headquarters is at Newby Wiske Hall Northallerton.
Also my address is hand wrirren on the envelope.
Might give them an e mail tomorrow just to ask.
Come on it aint ROCKET SCIENCE is itIt may be a silly question, but how did the Police get your address?
Well that seems to say they are warning people.Can't find specific mention of letters but N York's do have this on their website
https://northyorkshire.police.uk/news/land-rover-quad-bike-crime-prevention-warning-rural-residents/
Come on it aint ROCKET SCIENCE is it
So what did you change your name to, Sue?neilly.
As an ex-bobby. I'd be very sceptical about this. It's a scam.
That's why I asked - if it's from a DVLA database search then I'm a) quite impressed, b) a bit disappointed that it's not done here, where three or four have gone within the last few months, and c) surprised that the envelope was hand written.
But since the envelope was handwritten, it could have been from a watchful PC noticing a Landy on a drive and writing the envelope there and then, having got the owner's name from DVLA.
Similarly it could have been an observant reprobate as above, wanting to convince the owner to buy a device that can be bypassed as Wimblowdriver suggested, having found the owners name with a quick web search.
But my favourite is that it's the owner of the Thatcham site, similarly cruising around looking for Landys on drives and also wanting to convince owners to buy security gear - whether it can be bypassed or not.
And this is much more fun than rocket science.
Still don't see the sense in a thief encouraging extra security even if they can get past them.
Do the think they're a bit bored, lacking job satisfaction and want more of a challenge?
Just a guess, but if the thieves have got the capability to crack the electronics side of security, wouldn't it make sense for them to encourage mechanical upgrades (as suggested in the "memo" in the original post) which they know they can defeat, rather than the owner going for electronic upgrades which they might not be able to defeat?