Prosecutions for Bank Fraud Fall Sharply

[ProSense]

NYT: Prosecutions for Bank Fraud Fall Sharply

<...>



This category can refer to crimes committed both within and against banks. Defendants include bank executives who mislead regulators, mortgage brokers who falsify loan documents, and consumers who write bad checks. (Here are some recent cases of bank fraud prosecutions.)

<...>

One problem with this chart is that it doesn't explain much. Look at 2001 to 2003 under Bush. How many bank executives were being prosecuted? I seriously doubt any mortgage brokers were going to jail for fraud.

They need to breakout the categories defined to show how many of these prosecutions were "bank executives who mislead regulators" and "mortgage brokers who falsify loan documents." For all anyone knows, the spike in previous years could have been the result of prosecuting consumers for fraud.

[sarcasmo]

1. What ever the bankers steal from the people the fine is usually around 10%

Say the bankers steal a billion the fine would be a 100 million. Bankers rarely do time for their fraud they usually just pay a fine.

[banned from Kos]

2. stats show the FBI prosecuted far more mortgage fraud in the 2000s

Of course that was fraud AGAINST the banks by applicants.

[ProSense]

3. A couple of other likely explanations from the drop:

Glass-Steagall was repealed in 1999 and the Enron loophole was enacted in 2000.

This also bolsters the notion that most of the resulting prosecutions were on the consumer side.

[Laelth]

4. I'd bet most of those prosecutions are of consumers writing bad checks.

If I am right, the number has fallen dramatically because it's so much harder now for poor people to get a checking account.

-Laelth