tuscl

Bank sues prostitute to get scam money back

A prostitute lavished with money and gifts by the man who stole nearly $18 million from ASB Bank is being sued by the bank in an effort to get some of the money back.

Stephen Versalko was jailed for six years in March for stealing $17.8m from the bank over nine years while he worked there as an investment officer.

Before he was caught he gave one prostitute $10,000 for a clothes-shopping spree before they went on a business trip where they stayed at a luxury hotel in Dubai. It was one of the smallest sums in the total of $2.55 million he paid her, the Weekend Herald reported today.

The bank was suing the woman, 41, to recover some of the $17.8 million Versalko stole.

The newspaper said Versalko spent most of the money on multimillion dollar homes and a lavish lifestyle which included at least $3.4m he paid to two prostitutes and gifts worth $800,000.

Properties Versalko bought in Remuera and the Coromandel had been sold and $4m was held in a trust account.

The newspaper said court documents showed the bank was claiming $2.55m from one of the women, who has name suppression, and connected companies.

The bank was not pursuing the other prostitute, who received $791,182 from Versalko.

In court documents the bank said it was "unconscionable" for Versalko to have made the fraudulent payments and "unconscionable" for the woman and companies she transferred funds into to have kept the money.

The bank's statement of claim said Versalko made two payments to a company run by the woman -- $1m in December 2008 and $964,287 in April 2009, from accounts of customers he defrauded

He made a further 19 payments to her between April 2008 and August 2009 of between $3500 and $100,000 shortly before the fraud was discovered.

The bank was also taking action against two companies the woman was a director of and a property development company that received $520,000 from one of the companies she owned.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/nat…

3 comments

  • KitTastic
    14 years ago
    My question: Did she know the money was stolen? That's what they'll have to prove, is that she knew the money was stolen and thus was an accessory to the crime. If she has a good lawyer, they won't be getting any money from her.
  • georgmicrodong
    14 years ago
    That's not necessarily true. While knowledge of the money's origins would have to be proven in order for her to be convicted of a crime, the fact that she didn't know it was stolen doesn't entitle her to keep the money. The same is tru for almost *any* stolen property; once its value as evidence is gone, it's generally returned to its rightful owner. And rightfully so.
  • vincemichaels
    14 years ago
    She should offer to work it out in trade.
You must be a member to leave a comment.Join Now
Got something to say?
Start your own discussion