In a broad strokes definition, fraud is referred to as a deliberate misrepresentation by which another person has to suffer damages, usually these damages are monetary losses. By most of the people the act of lying is consider to be fraudulent, but in a legal sense lying is only one small element of actual fraud.
May be a salesman may lie about his name, eye color, place of birth and family, but if he has not said any lie about the product he sells, then he will not be found guilty of fraud. A deliberate misrepresentation of the product’s condition must be there and there must be an occurrence of monetary damages.
Involvement of Complicated financial transactions in Fraud Cases
Complicated financial transactions are involved in many fraud cases that is conducted by ‘white collar criminals’, business professionals with specialized knowledge and criminal intent. By an unscrupulous investment broker an opportunity to purchase shares in precious metal repositories may be presented to clients, for example. Such a credibility is given to him by his status as a professional investor, which can lead to a justified believability among potential clients.
When does a Fraud Victim can sue a Broker?
Those investors by whom it is believed that the opportunity is legitimate contribute substantial amounts of cash and in return they also receive authentic-looking bonds.
To prove fraud is not an easy task
It is not easy to prove fraud in a court of law. Laws concerning fraud may vary from state to state, but in general there are many conditions that must be met. One of the most important things that has to be proved is a deliberate misrepresentation of the facts.
Was this fact known by the seller beforehand that the product was defective or the investment was worthless? Sometimes a product might be sold by some employees of a large company or they may offer a service without personal knowledge of a deception.
The account representative by whom a fraudulent insurance policy has been sold on behalf of an unscrupulous employer may not have known at the time of the sale that the policy was bogus. If the accuser want to prove fraud, then he must demonstrate that the accused had prior knowledge and the facts has been voluntarily misrepresented by him.
Another important element that has to be proved in a fraud case is justifiable or actual reliance on the expertise of the accused. If a stranger approached you and asked you for ten thousand dollars to invest in a vending machine business, then you would most likely walk away. But if a well-dressed man by whom an investment seminar has been held and he has mentioned his success in the vending machine world, you might rely on his expertise and perceived success for making the decision to invest in his proposal.
After that a few months have elapsed and the person has not contacted you or hasn’t delivered any vending machines, then you might reasonably assume that fraud has occurred. In court of law, you are required to testify that your investment decision was partially based on a reliance on his expertise and experience.
The element of fraud which tends to prevent successful prosecution is the obligation to investigate. It is the responsibility of a potential investors or customers that they should fully investigate a proposal before any money exchanges hands.
What if the fraud case is not reported to Court on time?
If an investors failed to take appropriate measures at the time of the proposal then it can seriously weaken a fraud case in court later. It can be claimed by the accused that the alleged victim had every opportunity to discover the potential for fraud and he had failed to investigate the matter thoroughly.
Fraud victims should consult a legal professional
If you have realized that you are a victim of fraud, then you should consult a legal professional and collect all tangible evidence of damages. You have to keep in your mind that fraud is not easily proven in a court of law, although the court of public opinion may be squarely on your side.
