Page 42 - A Banker Down the Rabbit Hole

years of service as permitted under rules. Now the Guard was asked "How
you were known to the customer and for how long?" He made a startling
disclosure saying, "The customer had befriended him a week before
opening the account and used to share cigarette and tea with him almost
daily. He also had told about himself being so and so. He asked me to
witness his signature on the account opening form that I did. I did not
know that it was his introduction with such consequences."

The police alleged that the story was not reliable and the guard and the
officer had colluded with the fraudster and must have shared the booty.
Both of them were arrested and taken in to judicial custody. The rest is
everyone's guess about method of police interrogation in India. The
culprit could not be traced as neither of them knew him or his address.
The guard and the officer shared the loss by taking personal loans and
compensated the true owner of the cheque. The harassment and torture
by the police was additional agony they went through. The bank took
cognizance of this act of negligence of the officer and the guard and
punished them after departmental enquiry.

In fact, the officer had made a mistake of not asking the guard as to in
what connection he knew the prospect and how long he had been known
to him. The answers by the security guard would have prevented the
fraud for sure.

Insights from the episode

1. Every procedure in the bank is set up with a particular objective that
protects the organization and thereby the staff following that
procedure.

2. Sometimes, the officers have to deviate from the procedure in special
cases but that needs to be done after assessing the extent of
deviation and ultimate risk of that deviation for the bank.

— z —

A Banker down the Rabbit Hole | 39