Will amount cheated be recovered?

peppermint7

Supremacy Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2018
Messages
6,014
Reaction score
890
For cases like these, will amount cheated be recovered? Or consider loss?

SINGAPORE: Two former bank employees from Barclays and DBS as well as two former insurance agents from Manulife Financial Advisers have been issued prohibition orders for fraudulent and dishonest conduct, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said on Friday (May 8).

They have all been convicted for offences such as forgery, cheating, unauthorised use of Internet banking security token and concealment of benefits from criminal conduct.

"MAS has taken action to exclude all four individuals from the financial industry, as they have abused the trust of their customers or employers for personal gain," said Ms Loo Siew Yee, assistant managing director for policy, payments and financial crime at MAS.

"We will not hesitate to impose prohibition orders of significant duration where the misconduct is particularly serious," she said.

Former Barclays banker Kale Jagdish Purushottam - who is serving a 13-year jail term for his offences - was handed the longest prohibition order of 25 years for cheating his clients of about US$10 million (S$14.1 million).

Purushottam, a former representative of Barclays Bank in Singapore, had forged signatures and banking documents between May 2010 and January 2013 to deceive Barclays into transferring about US$10 million from three clients' accounts to a third party for his debt payments.

He then made more illegal fund transfers from and raised unauthorised loans in the accounts of nine other clients to cover up the shortfalls in the previous accounts, and also to pay his debts.

When he was questioned by his clients about the unauthorised transactions, Purushottam forged documents to convince them that the transactions had been entered an error and since been reversed.

He also engaged in several unauthorised stock and foreign exchange trades in an attempt to generate profit and reduce the loans and shortfalls in his clients' accounts.

These trades caused further losses of at least US$10 million to Barclays Bank.

Purushottam was convicted of forgery and cheating and of offences under the Computer Misuse Act, and sentenced last year to 13 years' jail.

TEN-YEAR PROHIBITION ORDER FOR FORMER DBS, STANCHART BANKER

Liaw Tick Kwan, a former representative of DBS Bank and Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) was handed a prohibition order of 10 years.

Liaw had applied for Internet banking facilities for his client, who then entrusted him with the security token and login details.

Without his client's permission, Liaw accessed the bank account between September 2013 and May 2014 to make several outward transfers. He also made unauthorised transfers to a second client's bank account and convinced said client to transfer the money to him.

He also deceived the first client into signing a blank cheque in March 2015, which he claimed was payment for a management fee.

Liaw made off with nearly S$200,000 as a result of his criminal conduct, which he used for his personal investments and expenses.

He was convicted for cheating, unauthorised use of his client's Internet banking security token as well as concealing the benefits of criminal conduct, and sentenced last year to 46 months' imprisonment.

Source
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/former-bank-employees-insurance-dbs-manulife-barclays-ban-12714856
 
Last edited:

TiedInsurer

Supremacy Member
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
5,327
For cases like these, will amount cheated be recovered? Or consider loss?

SINGAPORE: Two former bank employees from Barclays and DBS as well as two former insurance agents from Manulife Financial Advisers have been issued prohibition orders for fraudulent and dishonest conduct, the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS) said on Friday (May 8).

They have all been convicted for offences such as forgery, cheating, unauthorised use of Internet banking security token and concealment of benefits from criminal conduct.

"MAS has taken action to exclude all four individuals from the financial industry, as they have abused the trust of their customers or employers for personal gain," said Ms Loo Siew Yee, assistant managing director for policy, payments and financial crime at MAS.

"We will not hesitate to impose prohibition orders of significant duration where the misconduct is particularly serious," she said.

Former Barclays banker Kale Jagdish Purushottam - who is serving a 13-year jail term for his offences - was handed the longest prohibition order of 25 years for cheating his clients of about US$10 million (S$14.1 million).

Purushottam, a former representative of Barclays Bank in Singapore, had forged signatures and banking documents between May 2010 and January 2013 to deceive Barclays into transferring about US$10 million from three clients' accounts to a third party for his debt payments.

He then made more illegal fund transfers from and raised unauthorised loans in the accounts of nine other clients to cover up the shortfalls in the previous accounts, and also to pay his debts.

When he was questioned by his clients about the unauthorised transactions, Purushottam forged documents to convince them that the transactions had been entered an error and since been reversed.

He also engaged in several unauthorised stock and foreign exchange trades in an attempt to generate profit and reduce the loans and shortfalls in his clients' accounts.

These trades caused further losses of at least US$10 million to Barclays Bank.

Purushottam was convicted of forgery and cheating and of offences under the Computer Misuse Act, and sentenced last year to 13 years' jail.

TEN-YEAR PROHIBITION ORDER FOR FORMER DBS, STANCHART BANKER

Liaw Tick Kwan, a former representative of DBS Bank and Standard Chartered Bank (Singapore) was handed a prohibition order of 10 years.

Liaw had applied for Internet banking facilities for his client, who then entrusted him with the security token and login details.

Without his client's permission, Liaw accessed the bank account between September 2013 and May 2014 to make several outward transfers. He also made unauthorised transfers to a second client's bank account and convinced said client to transfer the money to him.

He also deceived the first client into signing a blank cheque in March 2015, which he claimed was payment for a management fee.

Liaw made off with nearly S$200,000 as a result of his criminal conduct, which he used for his personal investments and expenses.

He was convicted for cheating, unauthorised use of his client's Internet banking security token as well as concealing the benefits of criminal conduct, and sentenced last year to 46 months' imprisonment.

Source
https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/singapore/former-bank-employees-insurance-dbs-manulife-barclays-ban-12714856

For the Barclays guy, customers can hold Barclays responsible, as that's a Barclays employee who is cheating them. If Barclays is smart, they will make the customers while. If not, the customer will have to start a civil suit against Barclays, to obtain restitution. As long as the customers can prove that the monetary losses are not their fault, and that they have taken every reasonable step to not get cheated, they'd win.

For the second guy, his victims are **** out of luck. The banks won't be responsible. They'll have to sue the guy for damages, and hope he can afford to pay.
 

peppermint7

Supremacy Member
Joined
Feb 1, 2018
Messages
6,014
Reaction score
890
For the Barclays guy, customers can hold Barclays responsible, as that's a Barclays employee who is cheating them. If Barclays is smart, they will make the customers while. If not, the customer will have to start a civil suit against Barclays, to obtain restitution. As long as the customers can prove that the monetary losses are not their fault, and that they have taken every reasonable step to not get cheated, they'd win.

For the second guy, his victims are **** out of luck. The banks won't be responsible. They'll have to sue the guy for damages, and hope he can afford to pay.

So for the 2nd guy the cheater can just get jailed but get away with paying? Would he not be liable to pay for life until he puts back the sum? In this case after his jail term he becomes a free man again? While the old man suffers the loss? :(
 
Last edited:

wutawa

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jan 25, 2003
Messages
13,374
Reaction score
4,380
So NEVER give login details, security token, singpass, safe numbers, house keys, etc to someone else, without a written agreement. Otherwise u r authorising the person to do what he like and should not complain when things go sour.
 

TiedInsurer

Supremacy Member
Joined
May 12, 2014
Messages
6,731
Reaction score
5,327
So for the 2nd guy the cheater can just get jailed but get away with paying? Would he not be liable to pay for life until he puts back the sum? In this case after his jail term he becomes a free man again? While the old man suffers the loss? :(

He can't pay what he doesn't have. If the old man has a court order against that guy to pay restitution, then the court can order the guy's future wages to be garnished to pay the debt. Given the amount owed, and the fact that he now has a criminal record and is barred from wotking in his chosen career.... recovery is not optimistic
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ Forums. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts. Please refer to our Community Guidelines and Standards and Terms and Conditions for more information.
Top