Expenses Scandal Highlights Uncomfortable Parallels

Earlier I drafted up a mock client statement for this ridiculous post-insolvency initiative taking place here at the bank. It looks pretty good to me, but a particularly anal MD just replied back to take issue with my naming the example client 'Dodgy Hedgefund Ltd' (located at 1 Hedgefund Alley, Kensington, London).

Christ, if you can't have a sense of humour in this job then it's time to visit a clinic for some colonic irrigation, miserable old bastard.

On the subject of this initiative, to illustrate how absurd the work is - and current estimates are that it is set to cost over $30 million of the bank's resources to implement, and all the major banks are doing the same - the FT reported over the weekend that the Chancellor is preparing to change laws in this area. "Suggestions that the US operated more effectively than the UK are misconceived," a government official said.

In that case why is the US not rushing to change its bankruptcy laws as well? The problem with the government is that they seem incapable of admitting mistakes, even when they are obvious to all. It is rather like their attitude to MP's expenses, although it would be utterly hypocritical of me to criticise them, given what I have claimed over the years.  

A favourite has to be my generously volunteering to pilot a working from home scheme at a previous bank back in 2002. At the time colleagues smirked at my youthful enthusiasm, but I soon had the last laugh. Without any adequate controls, I went ahead and set-up a full 'home office'.  

That meant decking out my second bedroom (designated as my 'office') with an expensive, new PC of course. I also took the opportunity to furnish the room with a new bed, table, wardrobe and - my personal favourite - a 42" flat screen TV, which I categorised as an 'office presentation device'.  

In fact, there were even further parallels with politicians and their second home allowances now, remembering back. I became particularly ingenious at looking at ways of stretching the 'home office expenses' pot. My logic at the time was much like MP's I suspect, and demonstrates human nature: I treated as unacceptable anything that was refused, otherwise it was open game.  

My team quickly went from ridicule, to amusement, to envy, to applying to join the pilot scheme.

I finally reached the zenith when for 6mths (until they ended the scheme), I charged 40% of my rent as 'office rent'. The logic was infallible: apparently I only lived in a 2 bedroom place because I needed an 'office'. My pad at the time consisted of 2 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms and a main room. So 2 of the 5 rooms were 'office', since the en-suite toilet was also clearly an office expense and a necessity.

I know, all the morals of a politican. I was young.. underpaid.. naive.. how is it that they say it? I made several 'errors of judgement' that lead to 'clerical errors' and 'financial oversight'.  

To you, my internet audience of morality, I throw myself on the alter of judgement.. I have sinned!  Fortunately I couldn't care less about public opinion, so only promise not to pay any of it back.