RupieDupie
Guru
- Jun 30, 2017
- 4,228
- 3,499
- AFL Club
- GWS
Surely if a bank can legally / contractually hold a person to an obligation for 30 years whereby the person, perhaps, has to use most of their fortnightly salary to pay back double the amount of a house value for a house that was worth seven times less 17 years ago, should not be given a one trillion dollar fine for enabling a bit of money laundering and funding of terrorism.
Any competent lawyer should be able to rightly argue how even more despicable and rotten they are allowed to act openly and legally to the Australian public. This is nothing compared to their day-to-day business operation.
Any thoughts?
Has the bank actually done anything wrong, either absolutely or relative to their normal business practice?
http://www.news.com.au/finance/busi...s/news-story/1edbe0b7c34148d64279d5a6dfdace18
Any competent lawyer should be able to rightly argue how even more despicable and rotten they are allowed to act openly and legally to the Australian public. This is nothing compared to their day-to-day business operation.
Any thoughts?
Has the bank actually done anything wrong, either absolutely or relative to their normal business practice?
http://www.news.com.au/finance/busi...s/news-story/1edbe0b7c34148d64279d5a6dfdace18
Last edited: