The Gazette 1972

Mr. T. J. Fitzpatrick (Cavan): I should like to ask one question hut if the Minister objects I will leave it. Is it not a fact that nothing definite was arranged on, I think, the 9th, that the officers did not agree, that no communiation whatever was received by them until the place was barricaded on the 12th? Mr. O'Malley: Th at is n,ot so. The Secretary of my Department, who has made a careful note of the three- hour meeting which took place on the 12th November 1971 pointed out that these changes would have to be made not later than the 22nd and that he was extremely anxious to discuss the mechanics of the change-over and so on, that if the officials concerned refused to dis- cuss the mechanics of the change-over we would he put in the very regrettable position because of the public interest involved and the dire necessity of having a judge started bvt he 22nd, that the change-over must take place then. In fact, of course, the judge eventually was not able to be appointed until the 6th December. The reason for that was that the contractor could not get in until 22nd November and he took ten days to do the necessary work. on the counter within a matter of days. The hanks continued to take the same precautions as in the past, comparing signatures on cheques with those on the specimen cards. But with thousands of cheques being handled daily, it was possible for one or two to he overlooked. With personalised cheques, which have the custo- mer's name printed on them, there was also a temp- tation just to look at the printed name and say, "He is all right; he has got the money." Normal precautions The spokesman stressed that the normal precautions were taken when opening an account. References were required from the prospective customer and the referees themselves were checked "to make sure one crook is not recommending another". Other hanks emphasised that the majority of custo- mers were known to the counter clerks hut because of the volume of business a small number of forgeries might slip through.

Department and what was done by officials. I want to make it clear that I am responsible for everything that is done by every official of my Department. I have looked into this matter fully. I am fully aware of everything that happened, I approve of everything that happened and 1 take full responsibility. The first discussion with the two officials concerned, at which two Assistant Secretaries and a Principal Offi- cer were involved, took place on 1st November 1971. 1 here was a written communication sent from my apartment on 2nd November 1971 informing the officials concerned that these changes would have to take place not later than 22nd November, which is, in fact, the date on which they took place. On 12th November 1971 because of the disinclination of the officials to discuss the matter fully witli the two Assis- tant Secretaries and the Principal Officer, the Secretary of the Department, at my specific request, went to see the two officials. He, in fact, spent three hours discussing the matter with them explaining every aspect of the position to them. The change over took place on the date thev were told three weeks earlier. He sentenced Mrs. Gloria Rosano, of Kenworthy Rd., Honierton, to a total of six months' jail, suspended for three years. She had pleaded guilty to forging and cashing five cheques from a personalised cheque hook °wned hv her lodger. After examining the cheques, the magistrate said the Sl gnatures bore no comparison with that of the account holder. "Do you mean to say the hank paid out on these cheques?" He was told hv a police witness there had heen other similar cases in other hanks. Studying signatures The National Westminster spokesman said counter s (aff now had to familiarise themselves with customers' Sl gnatures by looking at the specimen cards. In pre- c °niputer days, staff worked on the ledgers before going the counter and became familiar with everv signa- ture. With computer accounting, a valuable source of staff Gaining had gone. In some cases, new staff had to go ^he rule that only British subjects can he solicitors in j^itain would he abolished under a Private Members' which was given an unopposed second reading in House of Lords on March 2nd. The Solicitors (Amendment) Bill, sponsored by Lord 'anglry (Independent), a former president of the Law Society, deals with other matters affecting solicitors. It ^titles all practising solicitors to administer oaths and * a ke affidavits, and allows a solicitor retained to con- duct contentious business to withdraw if the client le fuses a request for payment of a reasonable sum on '^ c '>unt of costs.

Computers in Banks "Ease Forgeries" The use of computers in hanks has made it more diffi- cult to detect forgeries, a National Westminster Bank spokesman said yesterday. He was commenting on the r ('marks by Mr. Neil McElligott, the Old Street magis- trate. Mr. McEligott said "any undesirable" could ap- parentlv have a banking account these days. He added that "some hanks seem to take no precautions".

An added precaution was the issue of hank cards to customers in good standing. Any person presenting a cheque could he asked to produce a card. Losses through forgeries were borne hv the hanks and not by the customer. Daily Telegraph (4th January 1972) Foreigners can become Solicitors in England

Lord Stow Hall (Labour) said the Bill gave the Law Society extremely drastic powers to deal with the very occasional delinquent solicitor. "These powers seem extremely severe, and I think the public will he grateful to the profession for being ready to take upon itself thee powers to protect members of the public." Lord Hailsham, the Lord Chancellor, said the meas- ures in the Bill had his active support. "I would like to say that this Bill is very badly needed. A disservice would he done to the administration of law in this countrv if for any reason it was held up."

119