Employee at bank assisting criminal ?

[Guest]

Re: Employee at bank assisting criminal ?

I get that, M. LeClerc. It annoys me, however, when I am told what 'Would have' or 'Should have' been done by various institutions, when in fact what 'Actually has' been done is neither. I have been fobbed off by that sewage so many times, now. You know what I'm talking about, I'm sure.

It annoys me, also, when your opinion and mine, your questions and mine - and those of others here - are viewed as "interference" by such institutions.

When those opinions and questions are similarly viewed by those running this site, I lose faith entirely. It has yet to be restored.

I am not in the business of giving false hope. The OP asked if banks were obliged to keep records of who accessed certain accounts and if so, would they also be obliged to hand that information over. The answer to both is no but even if it were yes, the OP is no further forward and gains no benefit from that knowledge. Neither, for that matter do the police.

This site and others like it arose out of a desire by consumers to assert their authority as customers, in large numbers and to force banks and other large companies and institutions to abide by the protections afforded to us by Parliament, for example, but also to insist on good customer care.

Our strengths do not extend in the direction of criminal law and given that it is complex and the consequences of bad advice are of far greater significance than anything a civil court could dispense, it remains my advice that criminal matters are best left to the police.

[Garlok]

Re: Employee at bank assisting criminal ?

Hi Guys,
The fundamental problem with all of this is that fraud is notoriously difficult to prove. As in the case I mentioned above the evidence was both clear in "Hardware" (or lack of it) on the ground and in the documentary evidence which was also a matter of record in several places. The accountancy in it is basically primary school arithmetic anyway.

This is compounded by the fact (and this really going to upset some people) that most police forces (or should that be "services" now?) throughout the country have dedicated "financial investigators" seemingly of detective sergeant rank. It is is a thankless non-glory task and hence those doing it are not necessarily the brightest stars in the firmament and the alleged fraudsters, being much brighter, run rings around them.

Hence in this case should ROAR's problems with the FA's sister/girlfriend bank employee become circumstantial fact, it would be very difficult to argue this was used in the fraud in a court. As Cetelco has said this is criminal law and proof has be "beyond reasonable doubt" (i.e absolute) NOT on the balance of probability that we all argue about on here and other forums when we are dealing with civil law issues.

I also note that the publishing of the story in the newspapers has been mentioned. Anything like this would completely scupper, totally and utterly, any ateempt to bring the case before a court on the basis of no possibility of a fair trial.

Just an opinion
regards
Garlok