The fraud in Calgary is way scarier. A BMO audit and custodial officer
(Anita Koo) is alleged to have bilked a Calgarian out of 13.5 million and
the BMO denies liability.
Koo continually convinced the investor his funds were in US dollar term
deposits. She left the bank and used bank stationary and receipts to
convince the man his $$$ was safe. She did this for a year after leaving her
job. Mr. Casanova discovered the fraud when he wanted some cash but Anita
wouldn't hear of it and insisted the money stay invested. The Casanova
family contacts the bank and find out she is not employed there. Now Koo and
hubby have suddenly disappeared.
It seems to me the bank is clearly liable unless depositors are supposed to
be informed of the current status of each employee in each branch they do
business.
I won't do business with BMO in future because of their position in this
case.
The BMO's inability to detect these frauds early shows gross breach of trust
and poor internal control in my opinion.
> The fraud in Calgary is way scarier. A BMO audit and custodial officer
> (Anita Koo) is alleged to have bilked a Calgarian out of 13.5 million and
> the BMO denies liability.
> Koo continually convinced the investor his funds were in US dollar term
> deposits. She left the bank and used bank stationary and receipts to
> convince the man his $$$ was safe. She did this for a year after leaving her
> job. Mr. Casanova discovered the fraud when he wanted some cash but Anita
> wouldn't hear of it and insisted the money stay invested. The Casanova
> family contacts the bank and find out she is not employed there. Now Koo and
> hubby have suddenly disappeared.
>
Do you have any news site links to this fraud case?
http://www.canada.com/calgary/story.asp?id={37878065-2AA8-4827-AA6F-20F428E7EA7F}
"Yeeeeeee!!!!" <be_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:lb4nnu0ndah4falpr...@4ax.com...
> AND EVEN AFTER THE INVESTIGATION IS DONE, THERE IS NO ASSURANCE THAT
> THE BANK WILL OFFER COMPENSATION. SINCE THIS IS AN INTERNAL MATTER AND
> OUTSIDE THE CRIMINAL CODE (EVEN THE POLICE CANNOT GET INVOLVED UNTIL
> PERMISSION IS GIVEN BY THE BANK) ALL DETAILS WILL BE SEALED IN A
> CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEE FILE, MAKING THE PURSUIT OF DAMAGES THAT MUCH
> MORE DIFFICULT. A SUIT CAN BE LAUNCHED, BUT ONLY AFTER THE ACCOUNT
> HOLDER HAS HIRED A LAWYER AND ENGAGED SUFFICIENT RESOURCES OF A LARGE
> LAW FIRM TO BEGIN THAT CASE. THE BANK WILL STONEWALL FOREVER, BECAUSE
> IT WOULD BE A PR MESS IF THE PUBLIC FOUND OUT HOW MUCH THEFT OF THIS
> TYPE GOES ON INSIDE BANKS.
>
> >For the second time the Bank of Montreal
> >demonstrates how easy it is to profit from crime. In both cases there was
no
> >control whatsoever on the actions of their own employees. They were
openly living
> >wildly beyond their means. I don't believe for a second that nobody at
the BMO
> >knew. I am sure that part of that money went to buy the silence of those
who
> >knew. Will BMO clients pay a new user fee called LOSER FEE?
>
> TIME TO BURN DOWN THE BANKS AND ANYONE WHO LIKES THEM.
In article <3D7B90AC...@ecn.ab.ca>, L.R. <ve...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
> In reply to the original message (for some reason it's not shown on my
> screen):
>
> It is scary. The reaction of RCMP is incredible: in today's Edmonton Journal
> it
> says, "Calgary RCMP have a file on the matter but are awaiting instruction
> from
> the bank before launching a criminal investigation." The bank, however, "will
> wait
> until its own investigation is complete before deciding (!) whether to pursue
> criminal charges. This is unbelievable. For the second time the Bank of
> Montreal
> demonstrates how easy it is to profit from crime. In both cases there was no
> control whatsoever on the actions of their own employees. They were openly
> living
> wildly beyond their means. I don't believe for a second that nobody at the BMO
> knew. I am sure that part of that money went to buy the silence of those who
> knew. Will BMO clients pay a new user fee called LOSER FEE?
>
> L.R.
>
>