Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Let's Talk About Our Feelings!!! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jlallen who wrote (61923)	11/3/1999 10:16:00 AM
From: Bill	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 108807

If she pays it back she shouldn't have to go to jail. JMO.

To: jlallen who wrote (61923)	11/3/1999 10:21:00 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

It is difficult to argue "good faith" when she did not behave with due diligence in contacting the actual pension agent. On the other hand, many people might consider it the agency's responsibility, and rationalize things by construing it as a windfall "mistake in one's favor". I think that actual jail time may be too harsh, but a long stretch of community service might fill the bill......But I am weak on the details.....

To: jlallen who wrote (61923)	11/3/1999 10:45:00 AM
From: Zoltan!	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 108807

That was fraud. She had to know the amounts were not right and that the bank was not the appropriate one for her to ask. Restitution and incarceration is appropriate, as a deterrent if nothing else.