MSE News: MPs demand answers from banks on 'understated' fraud figures

agarnett

Uxb wrote: »

..and nor do you care about how many workers die and are poisoned out in India, China, Vietnam etc in appalling working conditions and H&S just so that you can get cheap computers, cheap T-shirts and the rest do you?
All you want when shopping is the lowest cost.

But of course it is all out of sight out of mind out there a long way away in the Far East from you isn't it - so you can pretend it isn't happening or that it isn't your responsibility.

Perhaps unlike you (you don't say) I have been to the Far East and seen a little of how they live and work. My newest computing device is an gifted second hand iPhone4 I have had for just 6 months which has been fixed three times. My previous phone is now six or seven years old and also gifted second hand to me. My laptop is 5 years old (gifted secondhand if I could fix it which I have done about 5 times) and actually uses a bigger and better hard drive I fitted myself which I bought in person in the area of the world you say I know nothing about :rotfl: My vehicles are even older and I maintain them largely myself using recycled parts where safe to do so. My newest shirts and T shirts were also haggled for in the Far East, so was my newest watch. But that would never do for a banker would it? Would be rumbled immediately by your peers and forever labelled as a cheapskate

You and the rest of the UK's consumers are no better than the bankers you all profess to hate. Try looking in the mirror.

Er, I think you chose the wrong person to try that one on. You weren't to know of course, but travel does open the mind if you are prepared to venture off the beaten tourist paths.

Who are you anyway, to talk of "the rest of the UK's consumers" in such dismissive tones ? I myself have called most of most countries citizens mere sheep when it comes to politics, but what causes you to single out UK consumers as if they are a bad taste in your mouth?


By the way, you are very much avoiding the main issue when you claim that ownership of money is lost by mere consumers as soon as they entrust it to a bank. I suggest that is not a very honest comment given the nature of the thread.

Armorica

It is simply the difference between gross and net?

agarnett

Armorica wrote: »

It is simply the difference between gross and net?

You make it sound like banks treat fraud as just another line of turnover ... I wish I wasn't so close to the truth when I suggest that ...:mad:

pmduk

Surely the whole point of making banks record fraud figures rather than the police was to reduce the numbers?

Bloomberg

Uxb wrote: »

..and nor do you care about how many workers die and are poisoned out in India, China, Vietnam etc in appalling working conditions and H&S just so that you can get cheap computers, cheap T-shirts and the rest do you?
All you want when shopping is the lowest cost.

But of course it is all out of sight out of mind out there a long way away in the Far East from you isn't it - so you can pretend it isn't happening or that it isn't your responsibility.

You and the rest of the UK's consumers are no better than the bankers you all profess to hate. Try looking in the mirror.

It is also worth remembering that if we didn't buy these goods then some of the low paid workers in the Far East would have even less. I am not condoning the exploitation of cheap labour but like it or not it is here to stay. Why single out the Far East? Many of the fruit and vegetables which come from the UK are picked by people from Eastern Europe who are earning far less than what would be a living wage.



You talk about people dying in India and such places, how many people are killed and injured on building sites here in the UK? How many fisherman die catching the fish which we eat from the North Sea? I think we need to look a bit closer to home before vilifying the Far East and big corporations.

Linton

agarnett wrote: »

If you are a bank you are responsible for safekeeping of money you hold in trust for your customers. At no point, contrary to the rash assumptions made daily by banksters, does the bank own that money.

Completely wrong. If you deposit money with a bank they DO own the money and are entitled to do what they want with it - eg lend it out to someone else. What you own is a commitment that your money will be paid back on request. Your deposit is an asset on the banks books matched by a liability (debt) to you.

agarnett

Linton wrote: »

Completely wrong. If you deposit money with a bank they DO own the money and are entitled to do what they want with it - eg lend it out to someone else. What you own is a commitment that your money will be paid back on request. Your deposit is an asset on the banks books matched by a liability (debt) to you.

Oh do give it a rest. The population are not just assets on your books or anyone elses to be exploited according to a few lines of bloody small print in your mind to describe your justification for bankers and other financial services players doing what the hell they like.

My main point is that banks (and other financial institutions) owe a much greater duty of care to their customers than almost any other type of business because all the staff of a bank operate in a position of trust put in them by the customer. If they break that trust (as has happened so often as to have completely pulled the rug from under the whole industry and put it under continuous suspicion) then because of that special position of trust, the individuals responsible should expect to be punished much much more heavily than any petty burglar on the street. More along the lines of armed robbers, I'd say. And the courts agree. Broadly that heavy force of the law to punish employees in positions of trust has been brought down on lower level employees only so far e.g. when small groups of local branch staff get together to rifle gullible OAPs' accounts and the like. More complicated scenarios are harder to prosecute because the documentation and trails of evidence require industry knoledge to unravel. That has let many big crooks off the hook so far.

That inadequacy of prosecution can only be expected to reduce as bigger and bigger fish come under the spotlight.

You carry on doing what you like with punters' money and livelihoods if you and your City towers peers still dare, but expect no agreement from the general public in forums like this.

JuicyJesus

Oh dear, agarnett appears to be one of those.

agarnett

One of those anti-prevailing bank culture, non-believers who most certainly is proud not to be an employee of any bank?

Well spotted :cool:

JuicyJesus

agarnett wrote: »

One of those anti-prevailing bank culture, non-believers who most certainly is proud not to be an employee of any bank?

Well spotted :cool:

Well actually I'd have said a b3llend but we'll go with that.