www.gloucestershirelive.co.uk/man-says-daughter-been-reported-7782650
I suspect that the kids deliberately sang the songs as they knew the person hearing them was a Jehovah's Witness.
But police involvement - seriously!?
|
|
...I can think of a few Christmas songs that are criminal....
|
At least the police seem to have got the woke message.
Singing xmas carols is offensive and clearly takes priority of more minor crimes amongst which one could include firearms offences, the odd street knifing, drunk driving, online fraud etc.
It may just be another media column inch fiction, but if true the complainant should be charged with wasting police time.
|
How very Daily Mail.
The police have had a complaint which presumably they have recorded. That and the singing of (maybe)12 days of Christmas seems to be all we know.
If there is a pattern of harassment involved there might be a case to answer, I doubt if the singing alone could be an offence. No doubt the police know how to deal with it either way.
It's regrettable of course that the police have to spent time mediating on things like FB insults etc. but I think we can assume they will prioritise murder, firearms and knife crime. Fraud I'm not so sure, have they ever cared much about that?
|
>>Fraud I'm not so sure, have they ever cared much about that?
>>
They just don't care about fraud unless it's headline news (the State getting ripped off).
Fraud had basically been subcontracted to the banks to deal with - i.e. you get ripped off and the banks will refund you. It makes people careless.
A previous employer definitely employed retired City Of London Police officers to handle serious fraud cases and their Head of Fraud is an ex-senior Officer. I am told my current employer does the same but I haven't met them.
It's a real shame because fraud is basically a tax on us all and in a recent(ish) training course it was estimated that the cost could save quite a few percent off tax (almost £200 billions - remember Kwasi Kwarteng said a 1% tax cut would cost £6 billion).
I see businesses defraud the bank. We are not allowed to inform the police. We have to report the case to our Financial Crime office who report the fraud to the authorities. I cannot recall one case over the many years that I have worked in this sector that was actually dealt with by the police and we are talking £10's of millions. (And I can confirm this is the case for my colleagues as well.)
I was involved with a client that reported a really huge fraud to the authorities. The fraud was reported by the directors of the business that noticed it. The business had nothing to do with the fraud - they just noticed their customers ripping off the Govt.- but the authorities arrested the directors and put them through a hugely costly trial with was thrown out by the judge. An equivalent would be Tesco reporting a shoplifter and the store manager being arrested, charged and tried!
Working in the business centre with a retail branch I talk to the retail staff who report that even when they call the police re "Banking Protocol" the police do not always turn up.
Banking Protocol is where a customer is identified by the bank staff as being ripped off - like Granny being charged £50k for replacing some guttering. The bank staff have been told to call the police on 999 and quote "Banking Protocol" and officers will be despatched. This has been agreed with the Govt. the Police and the banks.
Sometimes the bank staff are berated for calling 999! Other times they are told that no-one knows what "Banking Protocol" is.
They are seriously not interested in a £50k theft and leave it to the bank to sort.
I suppose when MPs rip us off through their expenses and get jobs with their companies that they do favours for, then they are not too interested in seeing fraud being dealt with seriously.
|
|
My wife works for a major high st bank. Her job is unscrambling fraudulent transactions. Some of it would make your skin crawl.
|
As well as the effect of fraud on the victims there is the ever increasing volume of security checks we all now have to effect to carry out our normal day to day business.
Yesterday I need to pay a largish sum of money to a finance company to pay off a loan. The amount was over the bank's on-line limit so I had to call them. After the usual checks, passwords DOB account number and mother's name etc I was told they need to asks me a few questions as to why I needed to pay this amount.
There followed over five minutes of grilling and lectures on the dangers of online fraud and whether I really wanted to make the payments and whether I understood what I was doing I thought I had finally convinced her that I knew exactly what I was doing but then was transferred to the woman's manager and was subject to yet another set of questions and a dire warning of the irreversability of the transaction
After nearly fifteen minutes on the phone they finally put the transaction through.
Last edited by: CGNorwich on Sat 5 Nov 22 at 20:15
|
I have no problem with my bank taking care to ensure that payments are properly authorised, even though it seems intrusive at times.
As banks etc are expected to provide compensation in many cases, other than profound stupidity on the part of the account holder, they are motivated to take some care.
If fraud cases were simply be passed to the police for investigation, and any compensation reliant on a successful court case, they would likely take little trouble over fraud prevention.
|
I accept that the banks need to be cautious. I just find it annoying how the vast majority of honest people are inconvenienced in their lives by th criminal activities of a few which is exacerbated by the credulous stupidity and greed of others.
Nothing to be done about it. We are surrounded by thieves and fools.
|
They just don't care about fraud unless it's headline news (the State getting ripped off).
>
Probably because the public aren't too bothered. Companies stealing off each other, meh. It's not something most see, have a direct impact on them or understand much about.
|
>> They just don't care about fraud unless it's headline news (the State getting ripped
>> off).
>> >
>>
>> Probably because the public aren't too bothered. Companies stealing off each other, meh. It's not
>> something most see, have a direct impact on them or understand much about.
>>
Perhaps if they knew how much they would save in taxes, lower insurance premiums, better interest rates, higher dividends, better health service etc.
Was speaking to Miss Z about this, earlier this evening when she came around for dinner. She is now a registrar and a few weeks back was asked to sign off some timesheets for doctors provided by an agency.
She knew the doctor hadn't turned up for half of the hours on the timesheet because she had to cover them. She didn't sign it but found out someone else did later so she referred it to the trust's audit team.
|
Perhaps if they knew how much they would save in taxes, lower insurance premiums, better
>> interest rates, higher dividends, better health service etc.
>>
A very difficult sell, most would think the companies would keep it as profit and the government/public services wouldn't see a penny of it.
Last edited by: sooty123 on Sun 6 Nov 22 at 09:14
|
Christmas Songs are a hate crime? - tyrednemotional
