A Napier man in the process of renting a house in the city after on-line conversations with the overseas "owner" decided to have a closer look at the property - only to discover there were people already living there.
He had been asked for a $1200 move-in fee when he realised he was dealing with a scammer.
The man became the second person local police are aware of who had been contacted by someone claiming to be a local property's owner and seeking tenants, via the internet.
"It is a scam," Napier Police Crime Prevention officer Paul Miller's said, adding that people seeking rental accommodation needed to be wary.
Police had come across similar incidents in Christchurch, Tauranga and Auckland. In all the cases the person purporting to be the property owner had used a New Zealand driver's licence which inquiries showed had been reported missing last year.
"They have scanned the licence and sent it as some sort of proof that they are on the level," Mr Miller said.
The property involved had been placed legitimately on a Trade Me site by another Napier man who was seeking to sell it. He posted a photo and details which were used by the scammer who had scoured "wanting to rent" websites and come across the man seeking a place to rent in the city.
The scammers sent an email to the man saying "my house is for sale but it can be rented".
"They entered into a dialogue over the property and he was told he could move in after paying $1200 - three weeks' rent plus a moving in fee."
The man asked if they could send him a key so he could go in and look around.
In response, he was told the owners had not taken the key with them when they went to the UK but would sort it out in good time.
They suggested he go and take a look at it, even saying that if he decided to move in could he safely put away a teddy bear which had been left in the living room.
"To make it all sound a little more realistic," Mr Miller said.
But the man became wary when the "owner" asked that he send the money via international fund transferring company Western Union as they had not had time to set up their own bank account in London.
Some of the email dialogue also caused suspicions.
"My husband has just gotten a job here and we want it to be in good hand."
The woman also referred to the house as "the apartment".
After checking out the property, and finding people already there, he was convinced all was not as it should be and contacted police.
In the second case, a Napier woman had been in similar on-line correspondence with the alleged owners of a property she was looking to rent and "came close" to sending the required $1200.
But she wanted to be completely sure and drove to the property, took a number from the property company sign there, and called it - to be told that no, it was not for rent.
Mr Miller said as far as he was aware the property scammers had not caught anyone out yet.
He said due to the on-line approach of the scammers there was little police could do to track their whereabouts as they moved around.