Because the bank did NOT supervise the financial consultant closely enough, the banks was also made to pay, while the two men who'd stolen the cash were also, made to pay for SEVENTY percent of the losses, because they're the ones who'd, stolen the cash, and the bank is responsible for thirty percent, because this SHIT happened under the company's "nose"…off of the Front Page Sections, translated…
The former financial consultant of Taishin International Bank, Chou misappropriated six VIP clients' total of $350 million N.T. in savings, other than using the amount to make up for the losses in his own investment ventures, he'd also used the money to feed to his high-end living lifestyle of name brand cars, mansion life, going to the pub, to hire the girls, the bank filed a civil claims against Chou and his younger sister, the friend, Huang who'd offered up the clients' account; the Taipei District Court found, that Taishin Bank is responsible for thirty-percent of the total loss, mandated that Chou and others who were involved that they have to pay a total of $165 million N.T. to the bank, and over $1.21 million U.S., the total sums of over $200 million N.T.s.
On the criminal front, the second trial changed the sentence to twelve years four months, the first retrial gained him eleven years six months, the Highest Court tossed back the appeals, the case is finalized.
On the civil front, the Taishin Bank claimed that Chou scammed or misappropriated the clients' savings, through the accounts provided by Huang and Chou, to set the investigators off track, the hide the amount that was gained illegally. The company already paid the clients a total of $260 million N.T.s and $1.73 million U.S, and that Chou and Huang should pay collaterally a total of $260.83 million N.T.s.
The Taipei District Court believes, that the bank did NOT set up a completely security system, that it'd not supervised the employees closely enough, that they are responsible, partially for the employee's misbehaviors, and found them responsible for thirty percent of the total losses.
This is because of the lacking in supervision, that was why the bank was also, made to pay for the bad behaviors of the financial consultant, because it's the company's screws being loose, that's why everything had become, crooked, and this is, kind of, justified, but, I do NOT believe that the company should get punished for the individual misbehaviors of a solitary employee.
No comments:
Post a Comment