Has any politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
Folks, despite repeated requests for people to stay on topic, it has gone off topic numerous times.
I have now done a major edit of the thread which is very time consuming - it's till 6 pages instead of 8!
I will reopen it, but if there is nothing new and just continued bickering, I will close it again.
There probably won't be any more light but please observe the following guidelines in this thread - feel free to discuss other issues by starting new threads - but mainly in Letting off Steam.
1) Read the thread title and stay on topic.
2) Disagree as much as you like but try to avoid attacking other posters
3) Moderate your own language
4) If you feel that a post is in breach of the Posting Guidelines, then report that post. Don't respond to it or call for it to be moderated - that is a distraction.
As a general point, there has been a tendency for many threads to turn into yet another attack on Sinn Féin.
It is perfectly acceptable to criticise a Sinn Féin employee and councillor for defending what happened two week ago. But it should stop at that and not turn into another long rant against Sinn Féin. A lot of the people in this thread agree with what the Sinn Féin councillor said. It does not mean that they support Sinn Féin.
I have now done a major edit of the thread which is very time consuming - it's till 6 pages instead of 8!
I will reopen it, but if there is nothing new and just continued bickering, I will close it again.
There probably won't be any more light but please observe the following guidelines in this thread - feel free to discuss other issues by starting new threads - but mainly in Letting off Steam.
1) Read the thread title and stay on topic.
2) Disagree as much as you like but try to avoid attacking other posters
3) Moderate your own language
4) If you feel that a post is in breach of the Posting Guidelines, then report that post. Don't respond to it or call for it to be moderated - that is a distraction.
As a general point, there has been a tendency for many threads to turn into yet another attack on Sinn Féin.
It is perfectly acceptable to criticise a Sinn Féin employee and councillor for defending what happened two week ago. But it should stop at that and not turn into another long rant against Sinn Féin. A lot of the people in this thread agree with what the Sinn Féin councillor said. It does not mean that they support Sinn Féin.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
I will try to summarise the thread so far as it was I who asked the initial question: Why has no politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?
There seems to be 5 main themes in the answers.
1) It was theft and they are spineless and are afraid of offending people who might vote for them.
2) While it was theft, the Banks have robbed their customers for years and so it was justified.
3) It was not theft and there is nothing to criticise them for.
3b) It was not theft and so they cannot be criticised for theft/stealing. Criticise them as reckless, stupid, unethical. But not criminal. - Mugs Game argument
4) It was theft but sure aren't we all thieves - exaggerating insurance claims, putting Irish coins into German slot machines in the 80s, etc.
5) These people were desperate with their children going back to school next week and the cost of living crisis - The Focus Ireland argument.
There seems to be 5 main themes in the answers.
1) It was theft and they are spineless and are afraid of offending people who might vote for them.
2) While it was theft, the Banks have robbed their customers for years and so it was justified.
3) It was not theft and there is nothing to criticise them for.
3b) It was not theft and so they cannot be criticised for theft/stealing. Criticise them as reckless, stupid, unethical. But not criminal. - Mugs Game argument
4) It was theft but sure aren't we all thieves - exaggerating insurance claims, putting Irish coins into German slot machines in the 80s, etc.
5) These people were desperate with their children going back to school next week and the cost of living crisis - The Focus Ireland argument.
Last edited:
So do I understand you correctly; you believe that anyone who puts themselves into an unauthorised overdraft is a thief and should be condemned as such by those we elect to public office.
Is that the premise?
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
I know it's still a long thread Danny, but you do not understand me correctly.
Check out my Irish Times article and a few other posts by me on the topic.
Brendan
Check out my Irish Times article and a few other posts by me on the topic.
Has any politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?
I have seen a few public comments. The Minister for Finance wants a full report on the issue from the Central Bank. But made no criticism of the people who stole the money. People Before Profit and the ICCL criticised the Gardai for attending at the ATMs. But has anyone in authority...
www.askaboutmoney.com
Brendan
Allpartied
Registered User
- Messages
- 488
5. It wasn't theft, it was nothing remotley like theft, because the recipients of the money had a contractual arrangement to access cash from these cash machines. All of the interactions were recorded, liabilities for none agreed overdrafts were, clearly, stated in all terms and conditions. There is no law, passed in Dail Eireann, which nominates unauthorised overdrafts as criminal matters. The Garda Siochana have not and will not be instituting any criminal charges against any of the people who took unauthorised overdrafts.
The people who got the cash will have to pay back the cash and could be subject to interest rates, penalty fees and other charges.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
Thanks Allpartied
That is 3) above. They are shortened rather than a repeat of all the arguments.
Brendan
That is 3) above. They are shortened rather than a repeat of all the arguments.
Brendan
Counts 4 but proceeds to list five, must be a thief somewhere changing your numbers
My position is a variation of 3:
3b) It was not theft and so they cannot be criticised for theft/stealing. Criticise them as reckless, stupid, unethical. But not criminal.
No politician is going to criticise them even if they secretly agree with you, they stand to lose more votes by publicising such an opinion.
The moral hazard view point is interesting. People should not engage in reckless borrowing. People should pay back their debts. People should not abuse system errors which could take down a bank. Banks should invest in robust IT systems and the state and Central Bank should hold to account critical infrastructure which does not have robust systems. Banks should not facilitate reckless lending. Banks should not apply wholly unfair interest rates or contract terms or miscalculate liabilities, leading people to lose their homes ...
The bank bears equal responsibility for the unauthorised overdrafts here (although that's no justification were it a criminal act).
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
I have not seen it either.
Indeed, but that doesn't make it criminal.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
I wonder are we at cross purposes here because
1) I can't understand why people don't see this as theft
2) Many of you don't understand why we see it as theft.
I think that those who don't regard it as theft probably misunderstood what actually went on.
There are three categories
1) People who went to the bank as usual on Tuesday afternoon and withdrew €200 thinking that they had it in their account. If there had not been a systems glitch, then they would have been prevented from taking it out. I don't think anyone is accusing these people of doing anything wrong. Their next lodgement will clear the overdraft and that will be the end of the story.
2) Some people - I would imagine very, very few
a) knew that they had no money in their account, and
b) knew that they could take an unauthorised overdraft, and
c) knew that they would have to pay it back and it will be cleared by the next lodgement.
I think that is wrong. It's a bit like in the old days writing a cheque with a bank guarantee card knowing that the retailer would be ok, but that you would be going into the red. But it's probably not theft.
3) Those people who
a) Heard on social media that they could get money from an ATM machine
b) That BoI would have no record of it
c) And so they wouldn't have to give it back.
That is theft. Their intention was to take money which did not belong to them and not to return it.
If they subsequently returned it, it was still theft, but they have partially redeemed themselves.
If they subsequently heard that future social welfare and salary payments would go against their overdraft until the account was back in the black, and so they opened a bank account elsewhere to receive their salary or social welfare, that compounds the theft.
Does anyone think that category 3) is not theft?
1) I can't understand why people don't see this as theft
2) Many of you don't understand why we see it as theft.
I think that those who don't regard it as theft probably misunderstood what actually went on.
There are three categories
1) People who went to the bank as usual on Tuesday afternoon and withdrew €200 thinking that they had it in their account. If there had not been a systems glitch, then they would have been prevented from taking it out. I don't think anyone is accusing these people of doing anything wrong. Their next lodgement will clear the overdraft and that will be the end of the story.
2) Some people - I would imagine very, very few
a) knew that they had no money in their account, and
b) knew that they could take an unauthorised overdraft, and
c) knew that they would have to pay it back and it will be cleared by the next lodgement.
I think that is wrong. It's a bit like in the old days writing a cheque with a bank guarantee card knowing that the retailer would be ok, but that you would be going into the red. But it's probably not theft.
3) Those people who
a) Heard on social media that they could get money from an ATM machine
b) That BoI would have no record of it
c) And so they wouldn't have to give it back.
That is theft. Their intention was to take money which did not belong to them and not to return it.
If they subsequently returned it, it was still theft, but they have partially redeemed themselves.
If they subsequently heard that future social welfare and salary payments would go against their overdraft until the account was back in the black, and so they opened a bank account elsewhere to receive their salary or social welfare, that compounds the theft.
Does anyone think that category 3) is not theft?
Brendan
Your view is in line with the statutory law on theft.
Section 4 of the Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act 2001 states the following:
“4.—(1) Subject to section 5 , a person is guilty of theft if he or she dishonestly appropriates property without the consent of its owner and with the intention of depriving its owner of it.”
“Depriving” means “means temporarily or permanently depriving” under subsection 5 of the above section.
“Property” means “money and all other property, real or personal, including things in action and other intangible property”.
Section 5 lists exceptions to theft, which would not appear to be applicable in the within instance (eg good faith transfers for value, mushrooms and wild creatures).
A person who mistakenly withdrew money (in your example, the €200 cash) in the belief that they had it in their account is not acting dishonestly.
On the other hand, those who knew they had no money and withdrew it anyways, would be acting dishonestly and therefore would seem to be engaging in theft.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
Thanks Johnno
What about category 2? Taking an unauthorised overdraft but always with the intention of clearing it with the next salary?
I imagine that if I take money from your wallet without your permission but intend to give it back to you next week, that is theft.
But the argument from many people here, if I understand it correctly, is that taking an overdraft from a bank is in their ordinary course of business.
Brendan
What about category 2? Taking an unauthorised overdraft but always with the intention of clearing it with the next salary?
I imagine that if I take money from your wallet without your permission but intend to give it back to you next week, that is theft.
But the argument from many people here, if I understand it correctly, is that taking an overdraft from a bank is in their ordinary course of business.
Brendan
In my view, this scenario falls within the definition of theft but a lot turns on whether the punter was acting dishonestly. That would be a matter for the judge to decide in the circumstances.
In reality, if the money is returned in full with the lodgement of the next pay cheque, the DPP wouldn’t bother to prosecute.
That said, there have been successful prosecutions for theft where the money was returned (albeit after the person was caught!)
Flybytheseat
Registered User
- Messages
- 165
I'm sorry but I'm with Brendan on this one and cant understand how any reasonable person could share your opinion.
RichInSpirit
Registered User
- Messages
- 1,149
Hi Brendan.
Getting back to your original question
"Has any politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?"
I doubt that any politician has criticised the people who took advantage of the Bank of Ireland glitch on 15th August.
I would imagine it would be political suicide for most politicians to do so. Unless they were right wing leaning maybe.
I guess that a lot of people see the banks as fair game. They are not an individual person, but large corporate entities. Ultimately backed up by the state and more ultimately backed up by the EU.
The people who did exploit the glitch all had nearly zero euros in their bank account.
You could say that they were poor. Yet they had a bank account. The bank obviously views them as valuable customers. Maybe because they are more likely to generate referral charges. More likely to go into unauthorised overdrafts.
They may be more profitable customers for the bank than those with large bank balances, who probably qualify for free banking.
Maybe some took advantage of the glitch so that they could gamble the money, have a few pints, indulge in some recreational drugs, etc.
The gambling and drinks industry could be said to be benefiting from the glitch. Boasting the economy.
The drugs industry is not meant to exist but obviously does exist.
Does poverty absolve some of the blame for robbery. I believe it does to some degree. Robbing food to feed your family would be permissable in my book.
Some robbers were poor when they started robbing but are now rich from robbery. But robbery has become a way of life for them. They have become institutionalised robbers. Probably unemployable in any other area because of their reputation.
I have been the victim of robbery and trespass, vandalism etc. You get worked up when it happens but you can't dwell on it for ever. You take whatever counter measures you can and move on with life.
Getting back to your original question
"Has any politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?"
I doubt that any politician has criticised the people who took advantage of the Bank of Ireland glitch on 15th August.
I would imagine it would be political suicide for most politicians to do so. Unless they were right wing leaning maybe.
I guess that a lot of people see the banks as fair game. They are not an individual person, but large corporate entities. Ultimately backed up by the state and more ultimately backed up by the EU.
The people who did exploit the glitch all had nearly zero euros in their bank account.
You could say that they were poor. Yet they had a bank account. The bank obviously views them as valuable customers. Maybe because they are more likely to generate referral charges. More likely to go into unauthorised overdrafts.
They may be more profitable customers for the bank than those with large bank balances, who probably qualify for free banking.
Maybe some took advantage of the glitch so that they could gamble the money, have a few pints, indulge in some recreational drugs, etc.
The gambling and drinks industry could be said to be benefiting from the glitch. Boasting the economy.
The drugs industry is not meant to exist but obviously does exist.
Does poverty absolve some of the blame for robbery. I believe it does to some degree. Robbing food to feed your family would be permissable in my book.
Some robbers were poor when they started robbing but are now rich from robbery. But robbery has become a way of life for them. They have become institutionalised robbers. Probably unemployable in any other area because of their reputation.
I have been the victim of robbery and trespass, vandalism etc. You get worked up when it happens but you can't dwell on it for ever. You take whatever counter measures you can and move on with life.
Brendan Burgess
Founder
- Messages
- 52,118
Hi Richie
Not really.
The banks are obliged by the Central Bank to provide a Basic Bank account to people. They can't just refuse someone because they are on social welfare or because they are lower paid.
BoI would love to close these accounts after the money is recovered but they would not be allowed to.
Brendan