Account was used to defraud woman of nearly €12,000

Five month suspended sentence for 21-year-old

A YOUNG MAN who set up a Revolut bank account, and then allowed it to be used by unknown persons, was given a five-month suspended sentence after Monaghan District Court heard that the account was subsequently used to defraud almost €12,000 from a woman’s bank account.

Ndidi Ehiokwere (21) of Knockroe Glen, Monaghan town pleaded guilty to charges that, within the State on July 17, 2023 (when aged 19), he allowed €9,850 to be credited to a Revolut account, and that on the same date he allowed a further €2,000 to be credited to the same account, while being reckless in each case as to whether the monies were the proceeds of criminal conduct, contrary provisions of the Criminal Justice (Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing) Act, 2010.

Sergeant Lisa McEntee said a woman had reported to gardaí that she received a link seeking her details for a payment, and had been led to believe that this was from the eFlow tolls company

She followed this link, and it was later established by AIB Bank there had been two fraudulent transactions on her account, coming to €11,850 in total.

A subsequent investigation showed the Revolut account in question was set up by Mr Ehiokwere using his own passport and photographs, Sgt McEntee stated. He later admitted to gardaí that he opened the account, but also claimed he had no control over the running of it.

The sergeant confirmed to Judge Raymond Finnegan that, in these cases, the original injured party’s bank usually becomes the new injured party, as it is left at a loss after refunding the customer.

Catherine Taaffe, solicitor, argued that her client was a bit “on the naïve side”, in that he didn’t financially benefit from this in any way but simply allowed his bank details to be used. It wasn’t that he actually took over €11,000 from someone and “got away with it”. His account was used, and that was all. He wasn’t a participant in the act itself.

But Judge Finnegan told Ms Taaffe she must think the court itself to be very naïve, if she thought it would accept that the defendant allowed a random stranger to use his bank account without any form of benefit at all for himself.

Ms Taaffe said she did not believe her client to be the first young lad she had seen in exactly the same scenario. He was 21 and had no previous convictions, she emphasised.

The judge, however, countered that a very large sum was involved, and that it was obviously a big criminal organisation that Mr Ehiokwere had been facilitating. He accepted the lawyer’s assertion that her client was at the “lower end”, but said it nevertheless “takes foot soldiers to look after the chiefs”.

Ms Taaffe accepted this, but stressed that the defendant “didn’t have the mindset” that would go along with what had happened. She reiterated her contention that he had been “purely naïve” in terms of his involvement. Also, he had admitted his guilt and hadn’t wasted the court’s time.

After further exchanges with the solicitor on the question of whether the defendant personally benefited, Judge Finnegan said the court had no doubt that Mr Ehiokwere would have been given some reward, even if that were likely to have been a small amount.

Ms Taaffe asked if a compensatory sum could be considered, as this young man was a factory worker who would be in a position to come up with something, but the judge said there was no reality to his making good a loss of €11,850.

On that basis he imposed a five-month prison sentence, but suspended it for two years, on condition that there be no more offending over that time.

The judge also advised Ehiokwere not to be coming into court and “trying to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes”, as doing so was “only making it worse for yourself”.