Apology for not supplying all the details. He apparently falsify a clients signature on a credit facility letter. Hi's remuneration is directly linked to the number of facilities he gets through the system. In my opinion the repurcussions of this sort of crime is far worse to the bank in terms of its reputation & the possibility if things goes pear shaped that the client can later deny he applied for the facility & the subsequent loss to the bank. . From what I understand he argued in his defence that he was instructed by the client to falsify his wifes signature (this client was apparently going through divorce proceedings at the time) which makes the matter even worse. My question is what is the difference if the client would've instructed him to steal physical cash? would the bank still have been that lenient ? I doubt it.