CCTV

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

Not really expecting to get any money back from anywhere, the victim is resigned to the fact this is unlikely & their security which was to see them out their days is gone forever. For someone who has been a hardworking, honest & a proudly independant person who has never owed a penny in their whole 85years it is heartbreaking to see them stripped of all self-esteem & having to ask for financial help.

The thief has offered no defence & has gone into hiding, they use the same bank as victim & during early enquiries younger bank staff let it be known to us the person is clearly in major financial trouble. The thief does own a porperty but this may well be remorgaged to hilt & we have learnt it has a charge against it - it looks like this elderly victim may be in a long line of debters albeit this was theft.

This person is definately the thief & not the bank but it is possible (& would seem highly likely) that the bank were lapse in there security procedures & safety checks which allowed the thief to cash in the £20,000 shares. Of course if this is the case then they are part responsible for the victims loss of the shares.

Initially it did not even enter into any of our heads that the bank could be at fault, we were just on a mission to discover all the facts. It is the authorities that pointed out much later on that the victim could have some recourse with the bank if they were lapse in there procedures over the shares...our eyes have been well & truely opened about so many things on this journey & I find myself questioning the safety in all sorts of financial procedures that I naively never ever considered posed any risk at all before.

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

Oh dear from what you have said I now fear we may have inadvertantly tipped off the bank during our initial enquiries before the police were involved. The perpretrator is a very very close relative of the victim & was in a position of trust (but with no POA) so when this was first discovered it was a terrible shock & not something any of us wanted to believe could be true. We, with the victim (who was & is absolutely devastated) desperately searched for a feasable explanation & we gathered a great deal of the evidence ourselves including transcripts, meetings with the bank, requesting back statments & meticulously created a detailed file trailing all the victims transactions & the dubious transfers. Eventually when the unthinkable sank in the victim contacted social services & faced with the truth it soon became evident that no actual real help was available to the victim without involving the police & reporting the crime. Despite the persons dispicable actions & their subsequent total lack of concern for the victim who was left penniless this was still not easy for the victim to do.

In hindsight the bank had witheld details quite early on saying they could only discuss certain things with the police & after a crime is reported as it would be classed within the bank as 'tipping off'. We of course trusted the bank & took this to understandably be the bank safeguarding themselves against bogus claims but now I wonder if we may actually niavely have 'tipped them off'. The police are without any doubt about the crime that has taken place & are collating evidence but it is a waiting game while proceedures take there course & the outcome is not inevitable :0(

This is typical of LTSB and one major reason for effective banking regulation, regardless of the inevitable howl that is likely to go up from the City of London. The police officers who are dealing with the case, I have to say, are being thorough and have worked hard to collate the evidence. Do not forget that it is an offence for anyone to obstruct a police officer in the execution of their duty, which includes the conduct of an investigation. LTSB are known for the sort of behaviour you describe and the police will need to keep pushing them, if necessary, getting tough to the point of threatening to arrest or actually arresting bank staff who are unco-operative and/or obstructive. The LIBOR scandal and loan fraud by banks has changed the way people view banks, including the way the police view them. One bank is currently being investigated for loan fraud by the Serious Fraud Office. And they don't touch any case below £1 million.

You still have a hill to climb, but if you have police officers who are meticulous and methodical in their investigation, it can make that climb a bit easier. Also, bear in mind the Civil Evidence Act, which may be useful in any civil proceedings that may be brought against LTSB. This means that any evidence in any criminal trial may be brought to the attention of a court in civil proceedings. However, speak to a legal professional about this.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

This is typical of LTSB and one major reason for effective banking regulation, regardless of the inevitable howl that is likely to go up from the City of London. The police officers who are dealing with the case, I have to say, are being thorough and have worked hard to collate the evidence. Do not forget that it is an offence for anyone to obstruct a police officer in the execution of their duty, which includes the conduct of an investigation. LTSB are known for the sort of behaviour you describe and the police will need to keep pushing them, if necessary, getting tough to the point of threatening to arrest or actually arresting bank staff who are unco-operative and/or obstructive. The LIBOR scandal and loan fraud by banks has changed the way people view banks, including the way the police view them. One bank is currently being investigated for loan fraud by the Serious Fraud Office. And they don't touch any case below £1 million.

You still have a hill to climb, but if you have police officers who are meticulous and methodical in their investigation, it can make that climb a bit easier. Also, bear in mind the Civil Evidence Act, which may be useful in any civil proceedings that may be brought against LTSB. This means that any evidence in any criminal trail may be brought to the attention of a court in civil proceedings. However, speak to a legal professional about this.

Today we have been told that there is no CCTV available as although many of their branches do send the CCTV to the central location this particular branch does not. This is despite the branch manager telling us 3 months ago that they do :0(

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

Today we have been told that there is no CCTV available as although many of their branches do send the CCTV to the central location this particular branch does not. This is despite the branch manager telling us 3 months ago that they do :0(

Quelle surprise. Nothing surprises me where LTSB is concerned. Do the police know about this "revelation" by the branch manager? Perhaps they should pay the manager an unexpected visit - which bank managers don't like - and ask them some searching questions.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

Quelle surprise. Nothing surprises me where LTSB is concerned. Do the police know about this "revelation" by the branch manager? Perhaps they should pay the manager an unexpected visit - which bank managers don't like - and ask them some searching questions.

We did tell the officer before he enquired with the bank and understood he was going to speak to the manager but aparantly he spoke to another staff member who definatively assured him they dont keep footage in branch back that far and although she was aware other branches do send theirs to a central location this branch doesnt. We really wish the officer had spoken to the manager as cant understand why manager told us what he did :0(

[leclerc]

Re: CCTV

We did tell the officer before he enquired with the bank and understood he was going to speak to the manager but aparantly he spoke to another staff member who definatively assured him they dont keep footage in branch back that far and although she was aware other branches do send theirs to a central location this branch doesnt. We really wish the officer had spoken to the manager as cant understand why manager told us what he did :0(

Cos the manager is a twonk and probably does not know his arse from his elbow

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

Cos the manager is a twonk and probably does not know his arse from his elbow

You're right there, Leclerc!

When I was with CID, as soon as you walked into a branch, the staff - evil sods - would ask if you had come to take the manager away. When you finally got to see the manager - if they didn't do a runner out through the back door - as you were speaking to them, you would notice their backsides were playing tunes - especially if you put a signed consent form or a warrant down in front of them. :grin:

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

Cos the manager is a twonk and probably does not know his arse from his elbow

The trouble is we have had so much contradictory information from various bank staff from day one it is hard to know who actually knows what - they all come across as efficient & knowledgable - how can you tell which ones are twonks & which are being evasive :0(

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

The trouble is we have had so much contradictory information from various bank staff from day one it is hard to know who actually knows what - they all come across as efficient & knowledgable - how can you tell which ones are twonks & which are being evasive :0(

If the police want to be super-efficient, they can formally interview the entire staff of a branch. I only ever saw this happen once and that is because a customer was a company that had ripped-off the taxpayer to the tune of £750,000 and we were being given the runaround as you are. Sooner or later, the police are going to get seriously pissed-off with LTSB and go in on the offensive. The fact that a vulnerable person is involved will give them an incentive to do so.

[CleverClogs]

Re: CCTV

One bank is currently being investigated for loan fraud by the Serious Farce Office. And they don't touch any case below £1 million.

I've fixed your post for you. :grin:

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

I've fixed your post for you. :grin:

There is some truth in what you say, Cloggy. They have fecked up some investigations.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

If the police want to be super-efficient, they can formally interview the entire staff of a branch. I only ever saw this happen once and that is because a customer was a company that had ripped-off the taxpayer to the tune of £750,000 and we were being given the runaround as you are. Sooner or later, the police are going to get seriously pissed-off with LTSB and go in on the offensive. The fact that a vulnerable person is involved will give them an incentive to do so.

There is a question mark over who actually took the required documents into the bank to be verified as the victim has absolutely no recolection of doing so & is adamant he did not - this is why the CCTV footage was crucial. It would seem now that without the CCTV the officer is satisfied that although the person who verified the ID is no longer employed by the bank he was reliable & infers this person could not possibly have made ANY mistakes. However we know a different bank employee did initially make a mistake over verifying the documents because the share company rejected the first verification and whoever withdrew the shares had to represent the documents for verification again some days later.

Basically the thief could easilly have posed as the victim but we now have no way of knowing - in your experience do you think this could scupper the whole case against the thief irrespective of any comback from the bank? There is a lot of very obvious damning evidence against the thief who the police know has lied on tape & under caution yet it feels like the victims credability is under the most scrutiny.