| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 101569 | 2009-07-19 21:22:00 | Westpac to Sack Staff Member over the Missing Money | pctek (84) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 793113 | 2009-07-20 23:00:00 | ... The guy got off the charge! The teller was subsequently fired. In this case it's the teller's mistake but in the multi-million dollar "error' I strongly think that it was the bank's fault. Westpac is well known for NOT having a proper system. :D:D |
bk T (215) | ||
| 793114 | 2009-07-20 23:13:00 | and if there is a serious safety issue involved that endangers the worker or others then summary dismissal is justified too. Except for the fact the dismissed employee can challenge the dismissal based on the fact the company should have had systems in place to stop them endangering other people (and this is what OSH believes), which is exactly the same argument you have put foward for the chump who gave away 10 million dollars. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 793115 | 2009-07-20 23:15:00 | My brother is a lawyer. He had a client he defended who was charged with criminal intent or some such thing. This guy went into the local branch of his bank, filled out a withdrawal form, and took the cash. The problem... he was given $5000 instead of the $50 he requested, which of course he didn't have in his account. The prosecution claimed he knew exactly what he was receiving, and therefore it was essentially theft. My brother's client said he had no idea of the amount he received, as he immediately went out and bought cannabis with, what he thought was 50 bucks. Prosecution used as evidence the bank's video surveilance footage to show that the guy was looking closely as the female teller counted and handed over the cash. My brother countered that, because the teller was rather well endowed in the chest area, that he was looking at the woman's breasts, not the cash. The guy got off the charge! The teller was subsequently fired. So when this person bought the $50.00 cannabis package he didn't get change from the $5,000.00? Must have had his mind addled or was the drug dealer a woman with rather large ones as well? |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 793116 | 2009-07-20 23:41:00 | So when this person bought the $50.00 cannabis package he didn't get change from the $5,000.00? Must have had his mind addled or was the drug dealer a woman with rather large ones as well? The story doesn't stack up on several points. Even if the teller couldn't pick the difference between "fifty" and "five thousand", if the account didn't have that much how did the system let her hand out the money? My last experience with counter service was pretty much like an ATM with a human to hand you the cash (after finding enough notes). |
PaulD (232) | ||
| 793117 | 2009-07-21 02:10:00 | Believe me sacking someone in New Zealand nowdays is nigh impossible unless following labour dept guidelines to the exact letter. She can not be sacked for this offence, not that I am saying she shouldnt be. |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 793118 | 2009-07-21 03:18:00 | good, who the hell thinks they should get away with a 10 million dollar mistake? The treasury does it on a regular basis in my view. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 793119 | 2009-07-21 04:54:00 | So when this person bought the $50.00 cannabis package he didn't get change from the $5,000.00? Must have had his mind addled or was the drug dealer a woman with rather large ones as well? The guy clearly knew he had received $4950 too much. So you can bet he didn't hand it all over to the drug dealer. The issue was simply that the prosecutor couldn't prove that he was culpable, so the judge had to determine that he was not guilty. |
Greg (193) | ||
| 793120 | 2009-07-23 04:29:00 | My brother is a lawyer. He had a client he defended who was charged with criminal intent or some such thing. This guy went into the local branch of his bank, filled out a withdrawal form, and took the cash. The problem... he was given $5000 instead of the $50 he requested, which of course he didn't have in his account. The prosecution claimed he knew exactly what he was receiving, and therefore it was essentially theft. My brother's client said he had no idea of the amount he received, as he immediately went out and bought cannabis with, what he thought was 50 bucks. Prosecution used as evidence the bank's video surveilance footage to show that the guy was looking closely as the female teller counted and handed over the cash. My brother countered that, because the teller was rather well endowed in the chest area, that he was looking at the woman's breasts, not the cash. The guy got off the charge! The teller was subsequently fired. Check this out and tell me if distraction wasnt a fair enough defence. images.google.com |
prefect (6291) | ||
| 793121 | 2009-07-23 04:36:00 | Surely the bank teller would not be wearing a moist bikini though...I still say no excuse. :drool | wratterus (105) | ||
| 793122 | 2009-07-23 05:19:00 | This is a good story about how well they treat their cusomters, and the trust they have in them. Amazing that these banks could lend nearly 100% mortgages to people to buy a house and have never borrowed before, but someone like this can't get a relatively small mortgage. www.stuff.co.nz |
robbyp (2751) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||