Quote
Originally posted by: snidely333 I'm not sure MrMarcus's position on whether or not the man can keep the money as he argues that the bank consented to the withdrawal.
It's not criminal if the company's officers acted in good faith and were not aware of the bank's error.
If you would read my original post, you would know my position on your first query.
Again, why should it be our responsibility, as members of society, to provide and pay for a criminal trial, if a bank accidentally loans too much to a corporation? Do you know how much that costs? Why should WE pay to remedy a misunderstanding about the terms of a loan?
I believe this problem is called "moral hazard." If someone doesn't bear the full burden of their own mistakes, they make more mistakes than they otherwise would.
I am not suggesting that the banks should be deprived of justice. However, by making these CRIMINAL matters, we are passing costs onto the public at large, and I am suggesting these costs should remain with the banks. A lot of things in life are a zero sum game. Query whether the amount spent (and yet to be spent) on this particular "thief" could be more reasonably allocated elsewhere, whilst the bank itself (or its insurer) pays to remedy its own mistake.
Quote
Originally posted by: treegirl
He claims to have lost it all. I hope he was smart enough to have hidden a big chunk.
Do YOU want to help pay the bill for determining what he did with the money? Do YOU want to help pay to monitor this guy for the rest of his life, and figure out where every dollar he spends comes from? Do you want to PAY to keep track of all his friends and family? How is that part of our duties as citizens? Why are WE picking up the bill for a bank's defective robot??
