Horry <horacewachope@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> DavidBee <DavidBee.38een5@no-mx.phorums.com.au> wrote

>>> I'm writing this on behalf of my 17 year old daughter.

>>> Her mobile phone was stolen last month. Someone used it and
>>> ran up a bill of over $400.00. When we received the bill we found
>>> that the thief made premium SMS calls on the number 19942226
>>> which were used to buy credits from the Habbo Hotel. We believe
>>> that the person was someone from my daughter's school.

>>> We're going to make out a police report and the police will require
>>> details of the account. Does anyone know the legal situation and the
>>> best way to approach it. There are privacy laws, but as this is a
>>> criminal act can the police get details of the Habbo Hotel account holder?

>> Corse the cops can get any details they want when criminal activity like theft is involved.

> Isn't "Habbo" based overseas? They may have an Australian arm,
> but if my memory serves me correctly, they're based in the UK.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habbo_Hotel

> If that's the case, he may have trouble convincing the cops here in
> Australia to arrange for the British authorities to obtain and serve a
> subpoena in London -- when the subject-matter of their investigation
> is $400 worth of Habbo credit. (I doubt Habbo will cough up their
> subscriber's details without some form of legal process.)

We'll see...

Its unlikely they would be stupid enough to require anything
to be served in pomland etc with something so trivial.

> My suggestion would be for the OP to fax a copy of the police
> report to Habbo's head office, together with a letter explaining the
> situation and requesting that the credit be refunded (enclosing a
> copy of the phone bill highlighting the fraudulent purchases, etc).

> He may well get fobbed off, but it'd be a better shot that expecting
> the cops to start an trans-national investigation over $400.

You havent established that any 'trans-national investigation' is involved with something so trivial.

> (Not that you suggested they would do that.)