Sydney Woman Arrested for Spending Money from Bank Error

cuteseal on 05/05/2016 - 16:47
Last edited 05/05/2016 - 16:53

I've seen a few posts on here where people have had amounts appear in their bank accounts and have wondered whether they should keep it or give it back. Looks like it's definitely looked upon as fraud…

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-05/woman-arrested-at-sydn…

Apparently a Sydney woman either found 4.6 million in her bank account, or was able to overdraw her account by 4.6 million back in 2012 and has been arrested for fraud after trying to leave the country.

According to the police prosecutor, the money was accessed through an overdraft facility, mistakenly attached to a Westpac savings account.

In addition to a charge of obtaining financial advantage by deception, she was also charged with knowingly dealing with proceeds of crime.

Bottom line, from the article:

Sydney City Police Detective Inspector Sean Heaney said if members of the public find money in their accounts that should not be there, or they have an ability to overdraw on an account that they should not have, they should not spend the money.

He said exploiting an error made by the bank amounted to stealing.

"The money doesn't belong to you, you know that, don't go spending it, it's going to cause you some trouble with the police.

Financial

Comments

    • nobro25 on 09/05/2016 - 02:41

      How is my comment a personal attack? I was saying the same thing as you about Westpac, but giving a live example of the incompetency of the staff!

  • patinadiary on 07/05/2016 - 00:39

    You'd be amazed what these big banks might consider 'material' enough to chase. I often have seen reasonable big amounts being transferred to our company's bank accounts incorrectly and not a soul would contact us as no one at the bank would want to admit their mistake. In this case i reckon the bank would have realised their mistake and instead of trying to locate her, released her details to the media, who in turn glamorized it enough to find her whereabouts.

  • lionh3art on 07/05/2016 - 07:50

    You can says what you want but it will always be innocent until proven guilty. With access to such a huge amount of money I wouldn't blame her for spending that much in such a short period of time. How? We are human and sadly greed is always there.

  • stemcell on 07/05/2016 - 09:33

    She's just a common thief who needs deporting as soon as the law is finished with her.

    • airzone on 07/05/2016 - 10:22
      +2

      Deporting to where she probably has the remaining cash holed up.. ~3m in Malaysia will go a long way - but maybe not to someone who can spend $1m on designer handbags.

  • No ONE on 07/05/2016 - 11:30

    Pay it with bankruptcy.

  • Reveen on 07/05/2016 - 12:40
    +11

    An unlimited overdraft facility product? I'm disappointed no one posted this deal on here. OzBargain lift your game.

    • danyool on 07/05/2016 - 22:56

      Insufficient quantity to allow posting as a deal. Still, might open a Westpac account and try my luck!

  • worlds_most_wanted on 07/05/2016 - 14:23
    +1

    Sending designer handbags back home is a much safer way to funnel money back without raising questions by authorities.
    It is also hard to follow up on the paper trail, especially if incorrect details are entered on customs forms.
    High end LV and Hermes bags don't depreciate so much like other brands. Those $20,000 Hermes Berkin bags have a waiting list, you can get retail value on them if they are brand new. She wasn't spending her own money, so why not be careless with what you buy.
    Its easier to have you house confiscated when caught, she knew what she was doing.

    There was a previous case with a debit card with unlimited withdraws here in NSW. The guy took millions from the ATM machines within a 2 year period. He bought a house, car, jet ski etc and spent his days gambling.

    How did he get caught?

    He emptied an ATM machine at a local pub when playing the pokies (I think $10,000). The worker behind the bar found it suspicious that the ATM was out of funds, so she notified the authorities. You know the rest. Oh, and no jail time. Judge sided with him, saying it was only natural for a citizen to take that path when offered with an unlimited amount of cash.

    • meku on 09/05/2016 - 13:01
      +1

      Your story sounds remarkably like the Dan Saunders case, except he was jailed for 12 months and ordered to pay back $250,000.

      • Serapis on 09/05/2016 - 13:56

        That is Dan Saunder's story lol, he was merely off on bail for a while from my understanding, pending his conviction and sentencing. Turnaround from arrest to incarceration is lengthy, can take up to a few years.

        • worlds_most_wanted on 13/05/2016 - 11:57

          The story I was referring too is not that Dan Saunders story.

          The card the guy was using was a newly issued card (he was from NSW), and there was something wrong with the card when issued.
          The card had no identity attached to it, hence why he got away withdrawing unlimited amounts for a 2 years & couldn't be tracked.
          The only reason he got caught was because he emptied about 10k that was in the atm at the pub he was playing pokies at. The police were called in and nabbed him red handed.
          Prior to that, the bank had no idea there was a faulty card out there. His greed (more like stupidity) got him pinched in the end.

  • teehee on 07/05/2016 - 16:41

    The article I had read said that she likely would not be convicted as it was a bank error and she was allowed to overwithdraw more than normal.

    But it would mean she would have to pay back the bank as it's a loan

  • imahapyboy on 07/05/2016 - 17:12
    -1

    she is a idiot, who gonna give you free money? no way!

    • worlds_most_wanted on 07/05/2016 - 18:26

      Why is she an idiot?
      She most likely has 2-3mil put aside among family members.
      That's free money seeing she won't be paying it back. Bankruptcy won't matter either as she is already set up for life.

  • Advv on 07/05/2016 - 17:51
    +1

    Not sure if she'll get busted on this one…

    It was a line of credit (apparently) and not a cash deposit. She should owe Westpac $4.6m however she can just declare bankruptcy. If it was a cash deposit, then yes she will be charged for not reporting it to the Police however its a line of credit so I'm not sure what they will do. Also, it does not seem like she fraudulently applied for the line of credit. She just utilised the debt facility given to her by Westpac.

    Questions I have are:
    - Is it illegal to take on debt you don't intend to pay back (even if the bank credit checks you and gives you that debt)
    - How do they prove beyond reasonable doubt that she didn't intend to pay the loan back? What if the amount had been a much more manageable number e.g. $50k?

    I remember reading that she may have got the unlimited line of credit when she was under 18. Not sure if this will play a part too considering she may have been a minor when she first used the overdraft.

    • garetz on 08/05/2016 - 15:19

      Isnt it more illegal that a bank provides such an overdraft without the client actually applying for the overdraft facility. Isnt it the banks responsibility to make sure you are capable of paying back that said loan/overdraft. Im sure when it comes to legality, its against the bank not the customer, in fact you could even say the customer is a victim of westpacs mismanagement.

      • Advv on 08/05/2016 - 16:48
        +1

        Interesting argument… Probably unlikely she'll get criminally charged.

  • GalaxyNexus on 07/05/2016 - 20:10

    I guess we can say it's like she found one giant fully loaded wallet on the street. Theft by finding?

    • abh_gup on 08/05/2016 - 23:32

      Not theft, but a quaint question of moral ethics.

  • compound on 07/05/2016 - 21:05

    If she goes to gaol then we'd all be footing the bill.

  • SydStrand on 07/05/2016 - 22:20
    +8

    If only she bought 46,000 $100 Big W egift cards at 7.5% off, bought thousands of TVs, and refunded them for Woolworths credit.

    • jenkemjunkie on 08/05/2016 - 10:58
      +4

      and then be refused a refund by a manager because she's asian.

    • blehgg on 09/05/2016 - 08:27

      this is like the new broden story

  • Baghern on 07/05/2016 - 22:45

    Have the explained why its taken so long to take action?

  • OzTightArse on 08/05/2016 - 01:24
    +1

    The joke is if the bank took your money (like commonwealth bank) you'd never see it back.

  • peterpeterpumpkin on 08/05/2016 - 10:10

    Handbags…whether for profit or vanity that part is embarrassing.

    Reminds me of those celebrities that buy famous works of art and eventually declare bankruptcy - despite still making 100s of thousands a year. Or gamblers that hope to win big just so they can keep on gambling. Humanity sees value in the most valueless of things.

    Unfortunately even massive amounts of money can't cure boredom.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/05/2016 - 15:07

    I have an ice cream, and you can't have one, cause you're in gaol…

    I doubt the morally corrupt girl will see the insides of a Prison tbh.

  • JepunK on 08/05/2016 - 17:36

    how many eneloops is that, you probably can buy enough to power a whole suburb….

    She should've bought eneloops…ENELOOPS

  • Christy Bambi on 08/05/2016 - 18:26

    The part of the story your missing is she didnt spend the money, she moved 3.3 million dollars of australian consumers money overseas and has hidden it in overseas accounts. Now if she leaves the country, westpac will pass the cost onto their customers. And the sad truth is the Australian government has no power to get her to return the money, she can serve the small jail sentence and get away with over 3 million dollars of westpac customers money. Of course she should be detained indefinitely till the money is recovered, but westpac is the responsible party that should incur all the cost of recovering the money instead of taxpayers who pay for the courts to operate.

    • Serapis on 09/05/2016 - 14:15

      And you should be thankful of this system, that the government cant just take your money straight from your accounts and courts here are hesitant to mandate that you (or those you trust like your financial institution) have to surrender your private info to government over any reason.

      Sure some bad people will use this as a loophole but what's more important here? Money or allowing those in power to undermine your inherent freedoms?

      Pretty sure they still can go after the money after she is found guilty but it becomes a question of whether it's worth it (time + money and engaging forensic accountants).

  • getho on 08/05/2016 - 18:27
    +1

    wwhy have the banks got a problem with this? She would've spent money on things, sellers would bank that money: it would've trickled down to them eventually ;)

  • gravel on 08/05/2016 - 19:27
    +1

    It is a criminal offence to keep something of value that you know is not yours. It is commonly known as " stealing by finding ". If you find a diamond ring and sell it and it is tracked back to you, you will be charged with theft unless you have left it with the police for six months and it is not claimed. The same is true of money that appears in your account that you know is not meant for you. This case is a little different as the money came to her by way of an overdraft facility and for this reason the Magistrate was inclined to think it might be a civil offence and not criminal. If it is found to be civil the bank can waive good by to the money or at least most of it.

    • illumination on 09/05/2016 - 15:01
      +1

      can waive good by to the money

      Nice pun. I like it ;)

  • nikkirose on 08/05/2016 - 21:19
    +1

    If it was an overdraft, then that is a form of loan, so she should have to pay it back or go bankrupt.

    • abh_gup on 08/05/2016 - 23:28

      Exactly.

      Anyway, I just love the way this Jury gives verdict(s) based on opinions and partial facts.

      • nikkirose on 09/05/2016 - 05:58
        +1

        I would be interested in the precedent if she did go to jail, imagine all the dodgy bankers and business we could jail with that case as a reference.

  • [Deactivated] on 08/05/2016 - 23:31

    I question if anyone on here actually owns bank shares.

    If any John/Jane Doe working in retail handed a customer a one hundred dollar note by mistake they would be caught out within a day and most likely fired. Yet some idiot/s at a bank can stuff up an account and know nothing about it. Are shareholders really holding the bank's management to account or is it a simple case of we rather blame others for our own incompetence?

    Statutory limits should apply to banks to rectify account errors. If unfixed by a certain time period the beneficiary should be able to do as they please and the bank should have no legal right to recover their loss/es.

  • SSJX on 09/05/2016 - 00:17

    This case is pretty similar to the $10M Westpac overdraft when the couple only applied for $10k

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/crime/2428243/Couple-missing…

    • wildstone on 09/05/2016 - 09:47

      What was the outcome of that case?

      • Serapis on 09/05/2016 - 14:08
        +1

        http://m.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=…

        Woman found guilty of 30 offences, guy was about 7 major ones.

        I believe the woman got sentenced to pay back a chunk + 9 months house arrest as she voluntarily returned to NZ (no flight risk), she was remorseful plus she had a child of school age.

        Guy was imprisoned however.

        • 82Degrees on 27/06/2016 - 06:20

          I just stumbled on this story but wow wtf. Seriously.

          Did the banks use their connections to give this guy a kangaroo court?

          How is this even theft in first place? The situation is that the stupid bank themselves gave this guy a bigger loan by mistake. Last I looked defaulting on a loan is not a crime.

          If it is a crime then all the banks involved in the gfc should be charged thousands of times over. A few million is absolute chump change by comparison.

        • CyberMurning on 27/06/2016 - 07:29

          @82Degrees: it's a girl. Malaysian girl. Not guy.
          Probably not theft but the punishment should be like 75% of stealing as she didn't report for years. And interest for sure. And yes jail time I don't like the idea of declaring Bankruptcy and then free. Anyone can do that. It's not fair.

        • 82Degrees on 09/08/2017 - 18:24

          No its not fair when only ordinary people get jailed when they don't pay back loans, where as banks can get bailed out by governments for doing the same and 100x worse.

          Same applies to businesses. There's tons of dead beat businesses that refuse to pay their bills, yet you don't see any of the courts jailing their owners. This is utter hypocrisy.

  • paloverde88 on 09/05/2016 - 20:35
    +1

    The way I see it how is it that the banks are licensed to make mistakes with no consequences whatsoever?
    The customer did not contribute to the sudden increase in the overdraft. This was a pure bank mistake. As such as far as I know any big organisations that make mistakes have to pay. Where is ASIC in this? The toothless dragon, bring out all your legislation and charge the bank all the way to the right side of the law. There is such a thing as human temptation. When you tempt any living thing, even a dog will fall for a temptation.
    In any and all of these cases like the one in NZ banks get off scott free. I wonder if that would be so under American law. Moral of the story: Banks can make multi million dollar mistakes, they can shift the blame and then come out looking like Gandhi. Of course the customer who succumb to temptation is the Lucifer. Don't you know bank customers have to be perfect, in every aspect including character and morals. In this case the customer was imperfect, off she goes to the courts.

  • NickosFoivos on 09/05/2016 - 23:06
    -5

    The legal system of this country has been going worse and worse. Since this money is in your account, you should be able to use it accordingly. What's been happening? Are we living in a nazi country and we don't know it?

    If I found this money in my account, I would leave the country next day.

    • Flowerbomb on 10/05/2016 - 01:13
      +1

      It wasn't deposited into her account, it was an overdraft.

      • NickosFoivos on 10/05/2016 - 15:49
        -3

        I have heard the part of the story that the money were mistakenly deposited in her account.

    • SydStrand on 10/05/2016 - 22:09
      +1

      /godwin

  • [Deactivated] on 22/05/2016 - 14:42

    Apparently the person's family will be repaying the debt.

    At least that's the impression I got from the latest news articles.

  • neil on 01/12/2017 - 12:00

    Update on the story. All charges have been dropped.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join