Options

Throw crooked bankers in jail: says Bank of England chief

Jol44Jol44 Posts: 21,048
Forum Member
✭✭✭
Bank of England governor Mark Carney has said Lloyds staff involved in an astonishing scam to defraud taxpayers could be guilty of ‘criminal conduct’.

Lloyds was yesterday discovered to have ripped off the Treasury at the height of the financial crisis by lying about its creditworthiness.

This allowed the state-backed bank to gain access to tens of billions from a Government ‘lifeline’ scheme at favourable rates – but left taxpayers out of pocket.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2708969/Throw-crooked-bankers-jail-Clamour-grows-Bank-England-chief-says-Lloyds-traders-clearly-broke-law.html

Fine. However, talk is cheap. Get on with it.
«1

Comments

  • Options
    Fappy_McFapperFappy_McFapper Posts: 1,302
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Not holding my breath on that one.
  • Options
    bspacebspace Posts: 14,303
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    pointless waist of money to throw them in jail

    hit them where it hurts, huge fines and disbar them from working in any financial industry
  • Options
    TheTruth1983TheTruth1983 Posts: 13,462
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bspace wrote: »
    pointless waist of money to throw them in jail

    hit them where it hurts, huge fines and disbar them from working in any financial industry

    Now you're talking. This should be exactly the punishment for anyone in the banking industry who has broken the law.
  • Options
    Fappy_McFapperFappy_McFapper Posts: 1,302
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bspace wrote: »
    pointless waist of money to throw them in jail

    hit them where it hurts, huge fines and disbar them from working in any financial industry

    Now that is an idea I can get behind.
  • Options
    SideshowStuSideshowStu Posts: 11,960
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    bspace wrote: »
    pointless waist of money to throw them in jail

    hit them where it hurts, huge fines and disbar them from working in any financial industry

    Why? Every other type of big time thief can expect a prison sentence when they're caught so why should thieves who happen to be Bankers be treated any differently? and if it's a waste of money to jail them do you also think it's a waste of money to jail shoplifters or car thieves? If not, what's the difference?
  • Options
    postitpostit Posts: 23,839
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Why? Every other type of big time thief can expect a prison sentence when they're caught so why should thieves who happen to be Bankers be treated any differently? and if it's a waste of money to jail them do you also think it's a waste of money to jail shoplifters or car thieves? If not, what's the difference?

    Probably because they'd end up in the same country club jail as Chris Huhne and Rolf Harris. Far better to bankrupt them.
  • Options
    SideshowStuSideshowStu Posts: 11,960
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    postit wrote: »
    Probably because they'd end up in the same country club jail as Chris Huhne and Rolf Harris. Far better to bankrupt them.

    Possibly, but would you offer other thieves the same option of bankruptcy or prison? If you wouldn't you'd be in favour of a two-tier justice system*, wouldn't you?

    * Yes I know we've always had one but I'm not sure if it's ever been enshrined in British Law yet :)
  • Options
    LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    postit wrote: »
    Probably because they'd end up in the same country club jail as Chris Huhne and Rolf Harris. Far better to bankrupt them.

    I'd strip them of their ill-gotten gains and then throw them in prison. Though maybe we could make them do community service instead? Maybe working for free as tutors to poorer kids whose parents can't afford to pay for them themselves? Maybe train as debt advisers? They would then get the opportunity to see first hand the problems that their greed has caused.
  • Options
    MARTYM8MARTYM8 Posts: 44,710
    Forum Member
    Some might argue Mark Carney is a rather crooked banker!:D
  • Options
    BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    bspace wrote: »
    pointless waist of money to throw them in jail

    hit them where it hurts, huge fines and disbar them from working in any financial industry

    Well we could use huge fines to fund the jail.
  • Options
    LyricalisLyricalis Posts: 57,958
    Forum Member
    Well we could use huge fines to fund the jail.

    Going to be plenty of large houses we could convert into mini prisons if the government start seizing the assets that Russians paid for with assets they stole off other Russians.
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I have had a quick browse of the report (I suggest people rely on this rather than the Daily Mail - quite why the OP suddenly thinks this is gospel is a mystery), there are clear management supervision and procedural oversight and monitoring problems at the banks. Traders are in place to make money for their banks and for themselves, if conflicts of interests are not written into their procedures and not monitored then it's the bank that will face the punishment.

    If of course the traders are in breach of defrauding another party and this leads to a criminal trial then let the right process occur. No special favours and no witchhunt.

    The reality is that these benchmarks and others were not regulated at the time and the FSA/FCA were asleep at the wheel as were other regulators. Now there is an agenda to prove who is the "toughest" regulator and hence the ever-increasing fines.

    http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/final-notices/lloyds-bank-of-scotland.pdf

    I wonder if they will investigate the individual responsible for forcing Lloyds to merge with HBOS in the first place? The really big fish will get away...
  • Options
    BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It looks like the BofE are talking tough and aiming to reclaim bankers bonuses up to 7 years in retrospect.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9b8da354-1746-11e4-b0d7-00144feabdc0.html#axzz38t0835bc

    Has the BofE now taken back regulator duties ?

    http://news.sky.com/story/1309490/uk-bankers-face-toughest-bonus-rules

    For those with no FT access.
  • Options
    mRebelmRebel Posts: 24,882
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »
    I have had a quick browse of the report (I suggest people rely on this rather than the Daily Mail - quite why the OP suddenly thinks this is gospel is a mystery), there are clear management supervision and procedural oversight and monitoring problems at the banks. Traders are in place to make money for their banks and for themselves, if conflicts of interests are not written into their procedures and not monitored then it's the bank that will face the punishment.

    If of course the traders are in breach of defrauding another party and this leads to a criminal trial then let the right process occur. No special favours and no witchhunt.

    The reality is that these benchmarks and others were not regulated at the time and the FSA/FCA were asleep at the wheel as were other regulators. Now there is an agenda to prove who is the "toughest" regulator and hence the ever-increasing fines.

    http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/final-notices/lloyds-bank-of-scotland.pdf

    I wonder if they will investigate the individual responsible for forcing Lloyds to merge with HBOS in the first place? The really big fish will get away...

    But the procedures are written by people.
  • Options
    MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »

    I wonder if they will investigate the individual responsible for forcing Lloyds to merge with HBOS in the first place? The really big fish will get away...

    now that is a trial I would like to see..:D
  • Options
    BrokenArrowBrokenArrow Posts: 21,665
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Majlis wrote: »
    now that is a trial I would like to see..:D

    Was his initials GB by any chance?
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    mRebel wrote: »
    But the procedures are written by people.

    Correct, but that means that you may not be able to pin personal blame on the traders. Imagine you worked for any company and you were not given the right work procedures and you did something wrong, would it necessarily be right to blame the worker or should you blame the management or department responsible for creating the procedures?

    Also if regulators want to stop things happening across the banking world it makes more sense for them to hit the banks hard so they fix their processes rather than have trials of relatively junior traders who were performing a role as instructed by their banks that they should not have been.
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    MartinP wrote: »
    Correct, but that means that you may not be able to pin personal blame on the traders. Imagine you worked for any company and you were not given the right work procedures and you did something wrong, would it necessarily be right to blame the worker or should you blame the management or department responsible for creating the procedures?

    Also if regulators want to stop things happening across the banking world it makes more sense for them to hit the banks hard so they fix their processes rather than have trials of relatively junior traders who were performing a role as instructed by their banks that they should not have been.

    Ah! The old "Ve ver only obeying hors d'oeuvres" get-out!
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Ah! The old "Ve ver only obeying hors d'oeuvres" get-out!

    I think you need to read that paragraph again. I am talking about the motivation of the regulator to ensure this doesn't happen again.

    Strangely you would normally be on the side of the exploited worker rather than the greedy capitalist owner.... what's brought about this change of heart?
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    MartinP wrote: »
    I think you need to read that paragraph again. I am talking about the motivation of the regulator to ensure this doesn't happen again.

    Strangely you would normally be on the side of the exploited worker rather than the greedy capitalist owner.... what's brought about this change of heart?

    I think most would prefer the banking industry to motivate themselves not to break the law.
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think most would prefer the banking industry to motivate themselves not to break the law.

    Yes and this is done by putting in improved regulation and monitoring as well as big fines.

    Back to my other comment - strangely you would normally be on the side of the exploited worker rather than the greedy capitalist owner.... what's brought about this change of heart?
  • Options
    MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think most would prefer the banking industry to motivate themselves not to break the law.

    why would you expect them to be any different from any other strata of society? :confused:
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    MartinP wrote: »
    Yes and this is done by putting in improved regulation and monitoring as well as big fines.

    Back to my other comment - strangely you would normally be on the side of the exploited worker rather than the greedy capitalist owner.... what's brought about this change of heart?

    Big fines? Why shouldn't bank fraudsters be subject to prison in your view, like such in all other walks of life?

    Regarding "exploited workers" - are you talking of bank call centre workers/counter staff here and their like? :confused:
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    Majlis wrote: »
    why would you expect them to be any different from any other strata of society? :confused:

    But they are being treated differently by the Establishment - that is the whole point.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 14,922
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »
    I have had a quick browse of the report (I suggest people rely on this rather than the Daily Mail - quite why the OP suddenly thinks this is gospel is a mystery), there are clear management supervision and procedural oversight and monitoring problems at the banks. Traders are in place to make money for their banks and for themselves, if conflicts of interests are not written into their procedures and not monitored then it's the bank that will face the punishment.

    If of course the traders are in breach of defrauding another party and this leads to a criminal trial then let the right process occur. No special favours and no witchhunt.

    The reality is that these benchmarks and others were not regulated at the time and the FSA/FCA were asleep at the wheel as were other regulators. Now there is an agenda to prove who is the "toughest" regulator and hence the ever-increasing fines.

    http://www.fca.org.uk/static/documents/final-notices/lloyds-bank-of-scotland.pdf

    I wonder if they will investigate the individual responsible for forcing Lloyds to merge with HBOS in the first place? The really big fish will get away...

    That old nonsense about HBoS again?

    Lloyds were only too happy to jump at the chance to acquire it after competition regulations were relaxed to allow them to take over a competitor on the cheap. They couldn't do it in normal times. When it turned out Lloyds failed to do due diligence investigations, or inadequate ones, then suddenly they looked to blame someone else. Well, correction, Tory supporters looked to blame someone else. Lloyds shot themselves in the foot in their haste to expand, a one off offer which they jumped at but failed to do their homework.
Sign In or Register to comment.