4 ms·
It's unbelievable how the bank didn't notice for that long. That goes to show the power of what a sysadmin at a bank can have, take money and cover his/her trac
by sflcnetwork 10y ago
It's unbelievable how the bank didn't notice for that long. That goes to show the power of what a sysadmin at a bank can have, take money and cover his/her tracks. Unfortunately for this guy he was in no such position.
- apapli 10y agoThey definitely would have noticed, but anyone who cared at the bank was a beneficiary - more loans equals higher commissions. I think the problem here is that the bank employees saw no reason to intervene, even though they should have, as clearly the guy needed help (responsible lending practices here in Oz ignored). I expect that is why his conviction was quashed.
- raesene6 10y agoI didn't see any indication in the article that the bank knew, and as there is no way this loan would pass their audit checks, I really doubt anyone got commission for it. My guess would be a mistake in a system and a line of credit got attached to the wrong account. Should they have better checks in place, sure, but there's nothing in the article to suggest they knowingly lent him the cash.
- apapli 10y agoPossibly. I still believe this issue is best looked at through a bank culture lens rather than a technical one. Although I'll agree with you that the solution will require changes most likely to both.
- mathgeek 10y ago> That goes to show the power of what a sysadmin at a bank can have, take money and cover his/her tracks. The regulation and audit requirements of the banking system mean that you can't cover your tracks forever. The accountants and auditors will catch up eventually.
- mempko 10y agoA loan is an asset on a bank's books. I think it's obvious why they don't care until, well, you know.