After a fraud, Regulators go after a bank

New York Times Oct. 3, 2013

National

It is very hard for banks to always notice Ponzi schemes happing within their bank, affecting many of their customers with no consequence. According to the Patriot Act there should be more regulation of the banks to protect consumers from the top CEOs running all over them with these schemes but thats not always the case.

This affects many of the working class families we could be working with because that is exactly who these schemes target, people who are living paycheck to paycheck who could benefit from making money in a "smart investment" and don't know any better.

This story peaked my interest because I used to watch those Dateline shows in which these big CEOs and business men would get caught in fraud or turning over these Ponzi schemes. My dad would always say, "see, they always get caught". But how many actually do get caught? According to the article, if regulators dont go after the banks then they are home free and they've gotten away with it. It goes on to say that some trustees who have declared bankruptcy and sued the bank generally run into the judge saying that only the government, and not the actual victims, can bring a suit against a bank or another individual who aided and abetted a fraud. That doesn't seem fair to me at all! That means that innocent victims, who maybe didnt know better, wouldn't have a chance to see justice served. I think it is also the responsibility of the bank to look out for possible Ponzi schemes and fraud within themselves as well as the governments responsibility to regulate and stay on top of these large banks. These schemes are out to harm the little people and there needs to be someone to protect them and help them from being taken advantage of!