CCTV

[marleymouse]

Can anyone tell me how long banks keep archived CCTV please. We need to access footage of a fraudulent transaction but they say they have no footage in branch. It was only two years ago so surely they keep it in an archive somewhere. Does anyone know if this worth persuing? How long do/should banks keep this sort of thing please?

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

Can anyone tell me how long banks keep archived CCTV please. We need to access footage of a fraudulent transaction but they say they have no footage in branch. It was only two years ago so surely they keep it in an archive somewhere. Does anyone know if this worth persuing? How long do/should banks keep this sort of thing please?

First things first. Have you reported this fraudulent transaction to the police?

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

First things first. Have you reported this fraudulent transaction to the police?

Yes and there is a crime under investigation, the police have asked the branch to check in branch CCTV for the date in question and apparantly there isnt any still available. I have learnt that banks dont keep CCTV in-branch for long but some larger banks have a central archive location where they send & store all CCTV for a longer period but its a longer process to access. Is this correct?

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

Yes. It is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. However, Leclerc is the best person to confirm this.

The bank in question will have to co-operate with the police, otherwise they could be accused of complicity in the offence. Can I ask why you are trying to access the CCTV footage when it has been reported to the police and, therefore, now their responsibility?

Also, could you enlighten us as to what has happened in the manner of a fraudulent transaction, please?

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

Yes. It is correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. However, Leclerc is the best person to confirm this.

The bank in question will have to co-operate with the police, otherwise they could be accused of complicity in the offence. Can I ask why you are trying to access the CCTV footage when it has been reported to the police and, therefore, now their responsibility?

Also, could you enlighten us as to what has happened in the manner of a fraudulent transaction, please?

A family member has fraudulently taken a very elderly relatives life savings, lots of evidence already but CCTV would remove any element of doubt. When the incident first came to light the bank manger reluctently indicated there could be CCTV but any footage is only kept for short period in-branch but it then goes to a central location and is stored for a longer period. He said all footage can only be requested by police investigation & whilst in-branch its fairly straight forward any achived footage needs a more formal request & takes a while to access.
Since then the police have begun investigations but it sounds like they have only asked for the in-branch CCTV footage, this is not least because the information came back very promptly & going by what the bank manger previously told us we expected it to take a while especially over Xmas period.

I dont want to tread on toes but it doesnt sound like the bank readilly volunteer information & we want to be sure the police have explored this fully & we want to check it is feasable to request this before putting it to the investigating officer. We are not for one minute saying the officer is not doing his job but he is very busy with more than this case & we ourselves have discovered lots of conflicting information during this problem whereby employees in many organisations are not always fully aware of procedures, lots of things have been overlooked or misrepresented along the way & there is sadly too often a need to push a good deal further before you get all information available.

Basically it is the police who are investigating & their responsibility & it may be that all the avenues have been explored with the bank but we need to be sure & dont want stuff to be missed through feeling unable to ask how far the police have actually requested the bank to probe.

The crime itself has created a great deal of mistrust & misinformation along this journey has evoked a need to check & check again with everything :0(

[wales01man]

Re: CCTV

I am no expert but I suspect the bank will not have the CCTV now ,its not in their interest to have any evidence they or their employees are implicit in this alleged crime.

[leclerc]

Re: CCTV

I doubt that they will have CCTV from two years ago, depending on whether they used videotape at that time or digital CCTV. In the days of videotape CCTV then it would have been 30 days...in terms of CCTV footage that is digitised, then I have to say that I don't know. I assume that the police have requested that the bank look for that footage so at the stage I am not sure whether any advice we give has any relevance unless the police have already contacted their central archived site and it has been stated that the footage did not exist.

I don't think necessarily that footage will be the decider whether to prosecute or not because clearly there is an ongoing investigation and other factors will come into the case.

[leclerc]

Re: CCTV

How did they take the savings? Was it via over the counter transaction? Those transaction slips which were signed should still be in existence.

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

I would ask the Investigating Officer for an update, which you can do. What sum of money is involved, as this will give some indication as to which team within the police will eventually deal with it. The Investigating Officer may have had to pass the matter to such a team.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

It was the closing of shares...police have a established a clear paper trail of transfers, have a long in-depth damning recording of a fake call to the bank plus the perpetrator has blatantly lied under caution, the police have a lot of other very clear evidence but some documents were verified by the bank without the shareholder being present.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

I would ask the Investigating Officer for an update, which you can do. What sum of money is involved, as this will give some indication as to which team within the police will eventually deal with it. The Investigating Officer may have had to pass the matter to such a team.

It is under the Police Safeguarding Vunerable Adults team & the total sum is £62,000 but this particular part is £20,000.

[bluebottle]

Re: CCTV

It is under the Police Safeguarding Vunerable Adults team & the total sum is £62,000 but this particular part is £20,000.

The figures you mention are more within the domain of a police force's Economic Crimes Unit (sometimes called a Financial Crimes Team).

From what you have said, it appears the police have done quite a lot of work on the case, but have come up against the corporate machine of LTSB, a bank I had many dealings with during my time as a CID officer and can vouch for their history of obstruction, obfuscation and other wrongdoings.

If LTSB are deliberately attempting to withhold information in order to protect themselves from litigation, then they are being very silly indeed. IMHO, they are only delaying the inevitable compensation they will have to pay. On the other hand, if someone within LTSB is involved or the suspect is known to them, that is a lot more serious.

[CleverClogs]

Re: CCTV

How did they take the savings? Was it via over the counter transaction? Those transaction slips which were signed should still be in existence.

And spraying the slips with ninhydrin (link) should "develop" any latent fingerprints left by the culprit.

[marleymouse]

Re: CCTV

The figures you mention are more within the domain of a police force's Economic Crimes Unit (sometimes called a Financial Crimes Team).

From what you have said, it appears the police have done quite a lot of work on the case, but have come up against the corporate machine of LTSB, a bank I had many dealings with during my time as a CID officer and can vouch for their history of obstruction, obfuscation and other wrongdoings.

If LTSB are deliberately attempting to withhold information in order to protect themselves from litigation, then they are being very silly indeed. IMHO, they are only delaying the inevitable compensation they will have to pay. On the other hand, if someone within LTSB is involved or the suspect is known to them, that is a lot more serious.

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(

[wales01man]

Re: CCTV

Is there any chance of getting the money back from the alleged thief or are the OP and family after getting it back from the bank?

Would explain the banks actions,we have all read on the threads about ebay fraudulent sales and the banks defence of themselves in any wrongdoing.