RegulationJan 28 2015

Barclays manager faces jail over fraud

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Barclays manager faces jail over fraud

A Barclays Bank business manager is facing jail for siphoning off nearly £15,000 from a customer’s account.

Kingston Crown Court heart that Vaijawanthi Aneet, 36, pulled offcommitted the fraud between May and November last year while working at branches in the City of London.

She stole £14,300 from customer William Giles while working at Barclays branches in Fenchurch Street and Holborn.

Aneet denied the fraud last year, but changed her plea at Kingston Crown Court.

Oliver Blunt QC, defending, said Aneet claimed she was forced to steal the money, but had now accepted her defence did not amount to duress.

Wearing a white blouse and smart grey jacket and skirt, Aneet spoke only to enter a guilty plea at the hearing.

Mr Blunt told the court: “£9,600 has been repaid and the balance has been paid into the account of those who instruct me, so there will be no loser.

“There was always an intention to pay it back.”

She committed the fraud between 15 May 15 and 8 November 82013.

Aneet was released on bail on the condition she does not contact the victim.

Judge Richard Marks QC will hold a hearing on February 13 to determine the reason for the fraud and to sentence Aneet.

He told her: “The fact I am adjourning the case is no indication how you will be dealt with – all options remain open to the court.”

Aneet, of Crawley, West Sussex, pleaded guilty to one count of fraud by abuse of position.

The Charge

Fraud by abuse of position – Fraud Act 2006

“Between 15/05/2013 and 08/11/2013, within the jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court, you committed fraud in that, while occupying a position, namely Business Manager, in which you were expected to safeguard, or not to act against, the financial interests of Barclays Bank plc, you dishonestly abused that position intending thereby to cause loss to Barclays Bank plc or to expose that person to a risk of loss.”

This is contrary to sections 1 and 4 of the Fraud Act 2006.