Two RBS bankers have walked away from a £3 million property scam without having to complete prison time because the judge thought that they had already suffered as they were embarrassed by the event.
Raymond Pask, 54, and his employee Andrew Ratnage, 50, built a string of fraudulent businesses in the names of Pask’s relatives so they could apply for mortgages to purchase and restore homes and then sell them for a profit.
The mortgage papers were presented to the bankers’ employers so they could pass it without attracting attention to themselves. And the bankers, who both received an abundance of £100,000 a year, succeeded to ascertain loans totalling £3 million over a five-year span from 2005.
With the loans, they succeeded in buying three properties in London, one in Essex and another in Kent and it has taken following 2010 for the matter to come to court, by which time the bankers have managed to repay the loans to RBS, which Judge Rebecca Poulet QC announced, along with the embarrassment they have shown, is punishment enough.
Judge Rebecca Poulet QC believed that it was not their purpose to induce loss to the bank and believed they intended at all times for the money to be reimbursed and that it was advantageous that the bank had not suffered.
Judge Rebecca Poulet QC had no apprehension that the two RBS bankers had endured enough by the time the matter came to court. Pask had to deal with a broken marriage and has presently had his pension pot decreased to £120,000 and he maintains he is now financially ruined.
In the meantime, Ratnage has suffered from bad health including diabetes.
However, they were in effect mercenary and they were acting in a breach of trust. It was complex and sustained and to a degree included others, the nominees of the companies and the people must be discomforted by learning of the circumstances of their unlawful behaviour.
However, it did not involve loss to their employers and the actual risk was at least limited. However, they have displayed humiliation and distress at what they have done.
Ratnage got a 20-month penalty suspended for two years and 300 hours community service, while Pask was given an 18-month suspended sentence and 250 hours of community service.
So, now fraud is now tolerated because a powerful judge deems it so and now they’re kind of free to do as they want when they want and now the justice system is futile.
Our justice system is inadequate and really needs to be updated because brazen judges appear to give preferential treatment where they see fit and that presents a real dilemma when sentencing.
However, their position is pretty apparent, because when a person behaves badly they should be penalised for that said offence, no matter what the circumstances and that should be conveyed when sentencing and being embarrassed should not protect you from jail time.
Huge trickster loans and nobody went to prison. So, if somebody was to steal from a bank and then came back several years later to return the money, is that okay? There must have been a Masonic handshake or something or the judge was simply a nincompoop.
Yet there are people out there that are imprisoned for benefit fraud and everybody’s like, yes they got what they deserved, clearly, they were not embarrassed enough.
Of course, deception is deception and should be scowled upon, but not when there is one law for them and one law for others.
Plus, if the bankers were financially ruined shouldn’t the law for the common people have applied seeing as there’s one law for the rich people and another law for the poor people.