Alpha, as a new user you may not be in a position to interpret the earlier responses as extreme sarcasm! Unfortunately for you, the bottom line is that whatever process took place internally, should certainly be referred to the Bank's fraud department as has the appearance of a fraudlent transaction, but it cannot be used to absolve you of the obligation to repay the money you borrowed.
The underwriter was not keen in approving the loan. It would seem that the Bank Manager made up a security (value of 300K) that I had offered to the bank as security. This seemed to have put the underwriter at ease. The loan was then approved.
This security never existed and I only found out about it thru reading the internal notes.
The security did not appear in the special conditions of the loan but did seem instrumental in the approval of the loan.
I would say certain bankers who post on this forum are doing celebratory dances at the thought not only have they got away with their past activity, they have got rewarded for it through their bonuses at the time, and these same banks have been bailed out.The poor man was probably in the middle of a celabratory dance around his kitchen
Cases of fraud by the banks such as this are surfacing - I am aware of a similar case. Some people are in a mess because certain individuals in banks did behave recklessly / fraudulently. OP, in other countries activity like this by banks would not have been permitted. Would you consider going to the media, who are investigating these cases? Like the CRC scandal, I think people will be amazed at what will eventually come out.
I would say certain bankers who post on this forum are doing celebratory dances at the thought not only have they got away with their past activity, they have got rewarded for it through their bonuses at the time, and these same banks have been bailed out.
I agree. Lots of things "should" have been done that were not done and lots of things that were not done should have been done. So how do you suggest the bankers responsible "never be allowed work in financial services again"? And what the best way of ensuring they are "forced to return any performance related bonus earned at that time"?Any banker that engaged in behaviour like that should never be allowed work in financial services again. They should also be forced to return any performance related bonus earned at that time.
You really think bankers are the victims? Are you aware of any bankers who have co-operated in investigating fraudulent and imprudent lending practices like that outlined above?...never mind any bankers who have sacked their colleagues as a result? As far as I was aware up until now, it was the borrower who was taking all the pain.They are the victims.
You really think bankers are the victims? Are you aware of any bankers who have co-operated in investigating fraudulent and imprudent lending practices like that outlined above?...never mind any bankers who have sacked their colleagues as a result? As far as I was aware up until now, it was the borrower who was taking all the pain.
Sunny has made it quite clear that it is the banks who are the victims, not the bankers.
Sunny said "The bank was defrauded in this situation through their own employee and their own incompetence. They are the victims. Not the OP."
In the situation Sunny is talking about, the bankers in the bank involved
got their pay, pensions and bonuses. They are in all likelihood sleeping ok at night, without financial worries or stress, unlike the OP. I agree "banks" are victims of rogue or unscrupulous bankers, but have the banks, as Sunny suggested should happen, done anything to ensure the bankers responsible "never be allowed work in financial services again"? And have the bankers done anything to ensure they are "forced to return any performance related bonus earned at that time"?
To me, it looks a bit like the CRC scandal, only worse.
Sunny/Alpha.
It is very unlikely that Aib will take action on the staff member here. , Too many of AIB staff were at (unusual) practices, opening one case of poor lending will only continue to show the contamination that permeated AIB.(AIB have a lot of form over unethical practices over the years)
Whilst there is no (reckless lending) law , if Alpha can show loss Aib will be forced to at least try to be fair.
I do NOT read that Alpha was just wanting to absolve from Alphas responsibility.
He was asking for comments.
Maybe he is a chancher but on info given , methinks Mr Chancher is Mr AIB ?
Hear, hearBut can we stop indulging people and giving them hope when they post things like this. This site is better than that.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?