If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(SFGate)   Wells Fargo fires long-time employee for conviction of false money transactions. Conviction was for using a cardboard cutout of a dime at a laundromat. In 1963   (sfgate.com) divider line 105
    More: Asinine, laundromat  
•       •       •

7058 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Aug 2012 at 9:50 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-08-30 09:55:22 AM
Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.
 
2012-08-30 09:56:42 AM
That's government regulation for you: utterly ineffective. And if you think this is bad, just think what the unintended consequences are going to be when Elizabeth Warren gets her way and the government starts screwing up financial transactions as well. The only solution is to abolish all those petty and arbitrary rules and let the banking business take care of itself.
 
2012-08-30 09:56:42 AM
Federal law requires that all employees undergo a background check that prevents someone with theft, fraud, and other financial crimes from working at a bank. They must redo that background check yearly. Sounds like this got put into the system this year.

Its a dime. It's still a theft. It's still the law. She had to go.
 
2012-08-30 09:56:53 AM

plcow: Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.


Yeah, he's old.

/QED
 
2012-08-30 09:58:39 AM

Copper Spork: That's government regulation for you: utterly ineffective. And if you think this is bad, just think what the unintended consequences are going to be when Elizabeth Warren gets her way and the government starts screwing up financial transactions as well. The only solution is to abolish all those petty and arbitrary rules and let the banking business take care of itself.


Next time, work Fartbongo in there somehow.

2/10
 
2012-08-30 09:58:51 AM
At least they don't have to pay retirement now. Saves some on fees... oh, wait.
 
2012-08-30 09:59:43 AM
Whoa? You mean there's consequences to my actions? Who knew?
 
2012-08-30 10:00:17 AM

Randomly: Federal law requires that all employees undergo a background check that prevents someone with theft, fraud, and other financial crimes from working at a bank. They must redo that background check yearly. Sounds like this got put into the system this year.

Its a dime. It's still a theft. It's still the law. She had to go.


You really are a douche ya know that?
 
2012-08-30 10:00:33 AM
Wells Fargo "let me go" last year. Greatest 6 months off from work ever. Working a job selling via a chat room now. Wells Fargo is also losing ALL it's customers here in the Fargo ND area because they are charging checking accounts now. Welcome to your slow death Wells.
 
2012-08-30 10:00:43 AM

Copper Spork: That's government regulation for you: utterly ineffective. And if you think this is bad, just think what the unintended consequences are going to be when Elizabeth Warren gets her way and the government starts screwing up financial transactions as well. The only solution is to abolish all those petty and arbitrary rules and let the banking business take care of itself.


3/10.....too obvious


They should go ahead and fire everyone. In a few years, with this kind of stuff, no one will be qualified for anything.
 
2012-08-30 10:01:39 AM
FTA: "The expectations that have been placed on us and all financial institutions have never been higher," said Wells Fargo spokeswoman Angela Kaipust.

...so we'll trot out, to great publicity, all the bottom tier employees who are suffering at the hands of this restrictive oversight.
 
2012-08-30 10:02:13 AM

plcow: Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.


He's old and they were looking for an excuse to fire him but without him claiming discrimination.
 
2012-08-30 10:02:22 AM

SpacePunk: At least they don't have to pay retirement now. Saves some on fees... oh, wait.


==========

Yup. Google "Wells Fargo Fraud" and see what comes back. WF is probably the dirtiest bank after Bank of America. It's one huge monster racketeering operation.
 
2012-08-30 10:03:06 AM

Randomly: Federal law requires that all employees undergo a background check that prevents someone with theft, fraud, and other financial crimes from working at a bank. They must redo that background check yearly. Sounds like this got put into the system this year.

Its a dime. It's still a theft. It's still the law. She had to go.


No. He didn't have to go. And technically its not a law - its a regulation which can be changed at will by the FDIC.

/ineffective regulation is ineffective 
//spent a half dozen years working for Wells Fargo
 
2012-08-30 10:03:22 AM
In other news, the man spent two days in jail for putting a cardboard dime in a washing machine.
 
2012-08-30 10:03:44 AM
Finally you're doing something about all those crooked bankers. Bravo America.
 
2012-08-30 10:03:55 AM
You know what they say,

Don't use the dime if you can't do the time.
 
2012-08-30 10:04:59 AM

Satanic_Hamster: plcow: Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.

He's old and they were looking for an excuse to fire him but without him claiming discrimination.


this....FTFA: "The tougher standards are meant to clear out executives and mid-level bank employees guilty of transactional crimes - such as identity theft and money laundering - but are being applied across the board because of possible fines for noncompliance."

In other words, it would seem that they are using the law as an excuse to get rid of people.
 
2012-08-30 10:05:29 AM

Randomly: Federal law requires that all employees undergo a background check that prevents someone with theft, fraud, and other financial crimes from working at a bank. They must redo that background check yearly. Sounds like this got put into the system this year.

Its a dime. It's still a theft. It's still the law. She had to go.


Absolutist positions like this make me cringe. Blindly following the rules is not a measure of societal justice and morality. There's a reason Javert was the bad guy.
 
2012-08-30 10:05:35 AM
Clearly, some people in the thread need a little coffee to lighten up.

Also, aren't these new regulations put in place to protect the global economy from real criminals that steal billions of dollars and don't see a day of jail time?

No, this man is obviously a hardened criminal who deserves ALL the scorn.
 
2012-08-30 10:05:36 AM

Fissile: Yup. Google "Wells Fargo Fraud" and see what comes back. WF is probably the dirtiest bank after Bank of America. It's one huge monster racketeering operation.


Which is complete bullshiat. Wells Fargo is a very conservatively run bank. Its the reason it didn't need to be bailed out like all the others (they were forced to take TARP) during the last crisis. Wells Fargo doesn't fall into the top twenty of poorly managed or 'dirty' banks.
 
2012-08-30 10:05:57 AM

TIKIMAN87: Randomly: Federal law requires that all employees undergo a background check that prevents someone with theft, fraud, and other financial crimes from working at a bank. They must redo that background check yearly. Sounds like this got put into the system this year.

Its a dime. It's still a theft. It's still the law. She had to go.

You really are a douche ya know that?


In the given context, I gotta disagree. Wells Fargo has rules to follow and they don't specify any type of exceptions to the rules. Hence you have to act within the law, or you'll have Uncle Sam touching your naughty bits out behind the gym again.

It's unfortunate, but it's the law :-/
 
2012-08-30 10:06:36 AM
What do you expect from the bank that absorbed Wachovia.
 
2012-08-30 10:06:41 AM
mrchips.net + www.gumball.com = endless sweet/tart supply (ca. 1975)
 
2012-08-30 10:07:04 AM
So was this him back then?

/slightly obscure..?


blogs.democratandchronicle.com
 
2012-08-30 10:07:11 AM
They didn't make the rules. It's a dumb rule, but they didn't make it.
I'd like to see people start asking themselves if they're criticizing the right people before going off about how evil company X is.
I'm not saying some corporations don't do bad things, but sometimes there's more to the story.

Blame the right people.
 
2012-08-30 10:07:34 AM
Damn you, Eggers!
 
2012-08-30 10:08:27 AM
Whoa ... stupid new 'add comment' button. Lemme rescale

mrchips.net + www.gumball.com = endless sweet/tart supply (ca. 1975) 

^back when candy was a penny
 
2012-08-30 10:08:47 AM

Siberwulf: you have to act within the law, or you'll have Uncle Sam touching your naughty bits out behind the gym again


Umm... We're here for you if you need to talk, Siberwulf.
 
2012-08-30 10:08:57 AM
This guy was NOT fired for a petty crime he committed 50 years ago. He was fired for something else (probably to "retire" him without pay).

This article is really a sloppy corporate blowjob by the Chronicle to try to convince us ordinary folks that the banks have learned something from their past "mistakes." They'd like us to believe that the banks are totally serious now about follow the rules and regulations (well, ever since they were caught farking things up so badly).
 
2012-08-30 10:09:10 AM

Death_Poot:
In other words, it would seem that they are using the law as an excuse to get rid of people.


On the other hand, considering that they could stand to lose a LOT more if they don't comply with new regulations, they may not have much of a choice.
 
2012-08-30 10:09:47 AM

Copper Spork: That's government regulation for you: utterly ineffective. And if you think this is bad, just think what the unintended consequences are going to be when Elizabeth Warren gets her way and the government starts screwing up financial transactions as well. The only solution is to abolish all those petty and arbitrary rules and let the banking business take care of itself.


4.5/10

Next time, you need to call her 'Professor Warren' and reference Fartbongo
 
2012-08-30 10:09:49 AM

TheDirtyNacho: In other news, the man spent two days in jail for putting a cardboard dime in a washing machine.


In 1963.

It's not like this was the 1800's when a dime was worth more.

And now I've got the "oh the Wells Fargo wagon is-a comin' down the street" song from The Music Man stuck in my head.
 
2012-08-30 10:10:06 AM

plcow: Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.


Basically, it appears that the government has been threatening to fine banks for hiring employees with certain offenses on their record, so the banks are financially obligated to their shareholders to fire the offending employees. Sorta business ethics 101 there. If the government was threatening to investigate any employees with records and fine where appropriate they'd have more leeway, as it is I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing.
 
2012-08-30 10:11:56 AM

Insatiable Jesus: Copper Spork: That's government regulation for you: utterly ineffective. And if you think this is bad, just think what the unintended consequences are going to be when Elizabeth Warren gets her way and the government starts screwing up financial transactions as well. The only solution is to abolish all those petty and arbitrary rules and let the banking business take care of itself.

Next time, work Fartbongo in there somehow.

2/10


Actually, letting them take care of themselves would have been great a few years ago. Farkers didn't deserve a bailout for the shiat they've done. Let em burn.
 
2012-08-30 10:12:20 AM

tonguedepressor: So was this him back then?

/slightly obscure..?

[blogs.democratandchronicle.com image 356x360]


Nothing on Fark is obscure. Especially to a barbershopper like myself who happens to love Meredith Wilson's "The Music Man."
 
2012-08-30 10:13:15 AM

WhippingBoy: Whoa? You mean there's consequences to my actions? Who knew?


Only if you're poor. If he'd been rich, Daddy would have had the charges dropped. Rich people don't get to deal with the consequences of their actions, because they get to skate on the kind of charges that get poor people locked up. So scumbags like Madoff are 'clean as a whistle' for years in spite of being the true villains.

There should be a statute of limitations in place for shiat like this, as well as a min/max for amount.
 
2012-08-30 10:13:38 AM
img707.imageshack.us

Sympathizes...
 
2012-08-30 10:13:53 AM

SpacePunk: At least they don't have to pay retirement now. Saves some on fees... oh, wait.


Sons of biatches. CSB time...

I noticed I was being charged $13/month for my "free" Wells Fargo checking account. I called their service line and asked about it. They said I was saving $2 because I use paperless statements and they said they would wave the fee if I opened a home mortgage with them. Keep in mind I already had a checking account, savings account, credit card, and car loan through them. I mentioned all of this as well as saying I was a customer for over 15 years (Back when it was Norwest Bank) and asked if the fee could be waived. They absolutely refused to do it without a home mortgage.

When I went into a local branch to close my accounts out the person there tried saying if I switched to a different kind of checking account the fee would be waived if I spent X amount of dollars a month with my check card. I told her, "So basically I have to spend money so you don't charge me money, and probably have to come into the bank every year or two to shuffle my accounts around? No thanks."

As a side note, the teller at the credit union I opened an account with looked at me like an alien when I asked when the money I deposited would post. "Uhhh... immediately, sir." This was unheard of for me.

Good riddance, greedy assholes.
 
2012-08-30 10:14:49 AM
Using a carboard dime to try and wash clothes? He should be happy he wasn't charged with money laundering.
 
2012-08-30 10:14:49 AM

farkinoffdsm: They didn't make the rules. It's a dumb rule, but they didn't make it.
I'd like to see people start asking themselves if they're criticizing the right people before going off about how evil company X is.
I'm not saying some corporations don't do bad things, but sometimes there's more to the story.

Blame the right people.


You don't know what that laundromat did to that guy in 1963.
 
2012-08-30 10:15:08 AM

farkinoffdsm: They didn't make the rules. It's a dumb rule, but they didn't make it.
I'd like to see people start asking themselves if they're criticizing the right people before going off about how evil company X is.
I'm not saying some corporations don't do bad things, but sometimes there's more to the story.

Blame the right people.


There's no arbitration? I don't buy that at all. You always get to make your case.
 
2012-08-30 10:16:15 AM

ThoughtSpy: Using a carboard dime to try and wash clothes? He should be happy he wasn't charged with money laundering.


came for the money laundering joke. leaving satisfied.
 
2012-08-30 10:16:56 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: There should be a statute of limitations in place for shiat like this, as well as a min/max for amount.


100% THIS. Calling someone on the carpet for something minor like this 50 years ago seems kinda excessive, especially using a cardboard dime at 18
 
2012-08-30 10:17:18 AM
More government please. As the article said Wells Fargo has no choioce in this matter. Remember it is governnemnt that gives us this one size fits all zero tolerance nonsense,

The same government that requires a person to be fired for a 10 cent crime that happened 50 years ago is the one that prosecutes teenagers as sex offenders for mooning a passing vehicle or sending each other naked pictures of themselves.

So give these same people more control of our health care?
 
2012-08-30 10:18:50 AM

gingerjet: Fissile: Yup. Google "Wells Fargo Fraud" and see what comes back. WF is probably the dirtiest bank after Bank of America. It's one huge monster racketeering operation.

Which is complete bullshiat. Wells Fargo is a very conservatively run bank. Its the reason it didn't need to be bailed out like all the others (they were forced to take TARP) during the last crisis. Wells Fargo doesn't fall into the top twenty of poorly managed or 'dirty' banks.


===========

No, they didn't take any taxpayer money......like the billions they were given by the Feds to "acquire" Wachovia.
 
2012-08-30 10:20:47 AM
Was he charged with laundering money?

Finally they're getting serious about going after these corrupt bankers!
 
2012-08-30 10:20:49 AM

Jim_Callahan: plcow: Sounds like there might be something more to this story, and their reason for firing him.

Basically, it appears that the government has been threatening to fine banks for hiring employees with certain offenses on their record, so the banks are financially obligated to their shareholders to fire the offending employees. Sorta business ethics 101 there. If the government was threatening to investigate any employees with records and fine where appropriate they'd have more leeway, as it is I can't say I wouldn't do the same thing.


Alternatively, banks are insulted that nobody wants to suffer the cataclysmic results of their shenanigans and are consequently engaged in a series of reprisals to "teach the rabble their place."
 
2012-08-30 10:20:58 AM

ExperianScaresCthulhu: farkinoffdsm: They didn't make the rules. It's a dumb rule, but they didn't make it.
I'd like to see people start asking themselves if they're criticizing the right people before going off about how evil company X is.
I'm not saying some corporations don't do bad things, but sometimes there's more to the story.

Blame the right people.

There's no arbitration? I don't buy that at all. You always get to make your case.


In the real world that isnt the way it works. When you are following the rules set forth by the government thats the way it is.

You committed a crime involving money, you get borked if you work for a bank.

This guy is actually lucky he had a job for so long before the bank found out. Its not like anyone gets a pension anymore anyway.
 
2012-08-30 10:21:28 AM
From the Des Moines Register article that AP shamelessly plagiarized:

"New rules have eliminated exceptions for expunged crimes ..."

That is really over the top. A court decided that a guy deserved a fresh start, but the FDIC gets to overrule that decision. It's like sex-offender status applied to drunken public urination.

I'm most pissed that this won't do a damned thing to get the worst criminals out of the financial industry, of course.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report