bankes behaving badly.

We are all aware and angry at the way US banking bosses have behaved in this financial crisis but this example of greed is almost beyond belief.

Morgan Stanley vice president Richard Garaventa has just been jailed for six years .

His crime was that over a period of seven years he defrauded the company of $US2.5 million. Between 2001 and 2008 he wrote 50 cheques ranging from $3000 to $50000 to a company he had created.

The money was spent on luxury cars, landscaping, jewelery and travel.

I know many Americans have to take a second job to make ends meet so should we feel sorry for him?

Jerry

Don't feel sorry for his type at all!!

I wonder what would happen if banking customers were to take class action against these people? And against greedy corporate executives for sucking out unwarranted bonuses?

Having seen a reasonable amount of the world and paid particular attention to living standards where ever I go it is still surprising to see how little it takes to make most people reasonably happy and satisfied with life.

Some people just don't get it.

I expect that he's classed as a low risk offender so he probably won't be stuck in a cell with 'real' criminals.
I don't know what the answer is but it could start by stripping away everything that he finds important such as the jewelry, cars etc., stop him from ever getting a credit or debit card or a loan and fit him out with his clothes at the nearest charity shop.
Jim

Yes well! :rolleyes: That's not shoddy lending practices. That's actual theft. :doh: Maybe he felt he deserved all that money cos everyone hated him cos he worked for a bank. :shrug: :rolleyes:

There was a case reported not so long ago where a man had embessled a large amount of money from a company and he was sentenced to something like 25 years. Then not long after that a felloow was convicted of murder and only got 7 years. "Which is the worse crime" I thought at the time. Do the Americans regard life less important than the stealing of money?
Regards Rod

There's a lot to be said for rhymning slang.:D

Banks have had the general public by the throat ever since EFT was developed and wages were paid directly to the banks etc. They have a guaranteed "income" stream every Wednesday/Friday when people get paid and get, in many cases, to charge people for the privilege of accessing their own money.

Ever thought how it would be today if the banks were bypassed and workers, at all levels, were still paid in cash or cheque and the banks only got the "leftovers" of your wages rather than holding onto the lump sum until you take some of it. This, or something similar, of course will never happen again as the so called convenience, safety, attitude of the consumer toward the current system will not allow it - the banks and their shareholders would of course also fight this tooth and nail and as they have most of the population by the proverbial short and curlies they would win.

As to what is the answer - I don't really know - but I am sure that I would support any fair/valid moves to curb their excesses. I don't have a problem with anyone making a fair profit/return on investment but making billions seems a little excessive to me especially when most of these billions appear to come from fees and charges which appear to be way in excess of the actual costs of the "services they provide".

Regards,
Bob

I wholeheartedly agree with you Bob38S!!!
How dare they publise half yearly profits in billions of $ when we know us "little people" are the ones who would have contributed the most with our small everyday tranactions which we make just to live!!!

Two words - 'Credit Union'.

I remember years ago when Ms Hanson said she was going to get the banks. She was politically dead from that moment on.

yeah, that's what did it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bsrlee

Two words - 'Credit Union'.

---

You realize that the credit unions rely on the banking system??

Just have a bo peep and see what bank your credit union is attached to.

They may draw on a bank for their finance and they will have arrangements to use ATM's cards etc but as far as I know they are not divisions of the banks. Credit Unions are still member owned and independently managed. You can vote out the head of your credit union, try that with a bank.

Credit Unions are certainly better than banks [IMHO] however, their "service" to members has deteriorated from when they were first developed.

While they now provide a plethora of bits and pieces [just look at the brochures] - most of which seem to be ignored by many, the primary reason why many joined has slipped eg QTCU used to offer 10% pa interest on savings based on a monthly balance as did {I believe} most others - I'm talking the early '70's here - have a look at what you get now - while better than the banks they are closely aligned re charges and returns. I guess it is a little like getting bitten by a very small croc or getting bitten by a giant croc - we are all bitten just not as badly.

Regards,
Bob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sebastiaan56

They may draw on a bank for their finance and they will have arrangements to use ATM's cards etc but as far as I know they are not divisions of the banks. Credit Unions are still member owned and independently managed. You can vote out the head of your credit union, try that with a bank.

---

True sebastian , but the point really is that the banking system basically has everyone by the short and curlies.

And of cpourse the banks are backed by some strange and secretive - or at least unpublicized - government legislation.