Has any politician criticised the people who stole money from Bank of Ireland?

Gordon Gekko said:
to make unauthorised withdrawals (i.e. steal) from Bank of Ireland.
Click to expand...
'Authorisation' has a very specific technical and contractual meaning in electronic payment systems. These withdrawals were 100% authorised by BoI.

Just as if I use my card and PIN to pay in a shop, I am 100% authorising that transaction, even if the merchant turns out to be dodgey, or I change my mind, or I had a 'systems failure' calculating my budget.
 
Last edited:
Brendan Burgess said:
close their Revolut account if the transaction was out of line with the account holders usual transactions.
Click to expand...
It's no wonder people are still keeping money under mattresses with this sort of sentiment from consumer advocates.

Some wholly innocent people would undoubtedly be caught in this net. It sets a dangerous precedent for what other thought crimes could be grounds for account closure in future. Dependable access to banking has to be a fundamental right, even for the stupid and reckless.
 
I'm very easy on this (why complicate it?) - The error was not caused by the public. The ATMS "made the money available"* and some of the public availed of it. If I was running a corner shop and left money on the shop counter while I ran to the toilet I wouldn't expect it to be there when I returned a few minutes later never mind several hours.

Why should a politician criticise those who availed of what was the fault of the bank?
How many politicians criticised the banks when the punter was subject to unnecessary bridging loans, continuous raising of interest rates etc?

The banks robbed us for long enough and continue to do so why should we condemn people who took advantage of a glitch in the workings of the bank? Read my lips - This is a problem for the bank alone.

Certainly, I have no sympathy with the bank (the banks robbed me for long enough and I'm prepared to sit down with them to discuss redress, but of course this will never happen) and I don't want politicians crying for me either.

* Everyday Bank Jargon.
 
MugsGame said:
Some wholly innocent people would undoubtedly be caught in this net.
Click to expand...

Set the criteria as follows:
Someone who only ever tops up their Revolut account by €100 or €200 at a time
topped up their Revolut card by €1,000 or more
between the hours of 5 pm and 11 pm last Tuesday

Freeze the account and ask them to explain the transaction. Unfreeze it if they have a valid explanation.

I doubt that there would be any collateral damage and it would identify people who would be likely to exploit any IT glitches Revolut might have in the future.

Brendan
 
Leper said:
The banks robbed us for long enough and continue to do so why should we condemn people who took advantage of a glitch in the workings of the bank? Read my lips - This is a problem for the bank alone.
Click to expand...

Thus far, no bank has ever "robbed me". Every cent that I have lodged in any bank throughout my working life has been returned to me - sometimes with interest added. But I do sympathise with you for your bad experiences, which, I suspect, may have been due to poor judgement.
 
There are multiple viewpoints on this topic, so, to clarify my own:

I am not calling for "justice", and I do not believe that anyone involved did anything that was against the law. My objection is to the attitude that it is acceptable to try to exploit the bank's mistake. What I would have liked is for people who have influence over public opinion, such as the media and politicians, to have expressed the view that such an attitude is wrong.

Some people have said that if they left money on the shop counter they shouldn't expect it to be there when they came back, or if they loaned money to people they should be certain that some won't give it back, and that it was thus the fault of the bank for trusting people and not defaulting to not allowing any money to be withdrawn when the balance couldn't be checked. This attitude saddens me. It is not wrong to expect people to behave honestly.

I also do not believe that bad behaviour by banks is relevant. Two wrongs do not make a right.
 
Yes, calling people criminals who took money they didn't have out of an ATM in the belief that they would not have to return it is like calling people who engage in rioting rioters or calling people who drive cars motorists or calling people who go climbing climbers.

Using descriptive nouns to accurately describe people who engage in specific activities... disgraceful.
 
Last edited:
Lads and Lassies, the bank screwed up, put money on a plate for people to take. The people took it and the bank says it has the records of all the transactions and will pursue the problem

Bottom Line:- The bank screwed up. It's their responsibility to have the money returned.

Let's not get caught up in semantics and agree to differ and maybe some day we'll all meet up and have a laugh.
 
It is absolutely their responsibility. This discussion is about the failure of any politician to call out the people who attempted to take advantage of that error and steal from the bank.
Leper said:
Let's not get caught up in semantics and agree to differ and maybe some day we'll all meet up and have a laugh.
Click to expand...
I agree completely; we can strongly disagree on topics and not take it personally. You and I have done so many times and I have to say I'm quite fond of you!
 
We live in a messed-up world where it’s an issue to use a derogatory term to describe people who hear about a banking glitch via sites like Reddit and immediately head-off to ATMs to steal money and clash with Gardai.

I take it back. They’re ‘lovely people’ and they had no idea that what they were doing was wrong.
 
Brendan Burgess said:
So, if you sit down at a table in a bar and find someone's wallet on the ground, you will just pocket it? After all they screwed up. Let them find you.

I am amazed at this.

Brendan
Click to expand...

Brendan you're misquoting me and I can inform you I have found a wallet in a bar with a substantial amount of money in it and eventhough the owner had left the premises I contacted him within minutes and gave him back his wallet with all its contents. His personal details were also within the wallet. That's the kind of person I am.

In the case of the bank, it has details of those who withdrew the money and they can contact the punters.
 
Don't see how I misquoted you.

But anyway.

If someone screws up and leaves a wallet behind, you will return it. I am glad to hear that.

Now you go to an ATM and withdraw €100 but the machine spits out €500. Do you proactively go into a branch and give back the €400 extra?

Brendan
 
Brendan Burgess said:
Now you go to an ATM and withdraw €100 but the machine spits out €500. Do you proactively go into a branch and give back the €400 extra?
Click to expand...
A few years ago, I went to an ATM inside a busy petrol station shop a few years ago, withdrew €200, got distracted, left the money sitting in the machine outlet and went away. Someone else came along behind me and took the money unbeknownst to me.

After I contacted the shop, the staff identified the thief using CCTV and the shop owner personally confronted them and threatened to both report them to the Gardai and to bar them permanently from his shop unless the money was returned forthwith, which it was.

Theft is a serious crime.
 
Someone activating the unauthorized overdraft clause of their banking contract is not the same as stealing a wallet
 
Can you really call it looting when everybody would have known there’d be a record of the transactions?

Those taking advantage were chancing their arm in the hope the banks either wouldn’t notice or would be compelled to take hit for their own negligence.

Maybe they just thought it was worth a punt.
 
Yes, it certainly wasn't looting as there wasn't any destruction or property. It was attempted theft by chancers with no personal ethical standards or integrity.
 
Both of these cannot be simultaneously true.
 
McGaggs said:
Someone activating the unauthorized overdraft clause of their banking contract is not the same as stealing a wallet
Click to expand...
Those who thought that they wouldn't have to pay it back were attempting to steal. Those who knew that the bank would come looking for the money were activating an unauthorised overdraft. Both are wrong and unethical and indicative of a lack of integrity.
 
Last edited:
Folks

This is an important topic.

The thread takes up a lot of the moderators' time.

Please stay on topic.

Please moderate your language.

Feel absolutely free to disagree with anyone else, but don't abuse them.

Three people have now accused the moderators of removing posts which we don't agree with. This is obviously untrue as the thread is full of posts which I disagree with.

Posts are only removed when they are not in keeping with the Posting Guidelines - mainly for being off topic or for attacking other posters.

Brendan
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register