Member Of Bishopric Committing Fraud!

[sacred1]

I know that you are supposed to support your leaders, and never try to find fault with them, but the 1st councilor in our ward is committing fraud. I know this for a fact, he told my dad this a few weeks ago. But I'm not sure if this should be taken to the bishop, or if it should be reported at all.

The problem is compounded because a relative of mine doesn't feel like she can receive a temple recommend because one of the questions that is asked is if she supports the bishopric, and she doesn't thinkshe can answer 'yes' because of the actions of this councilor.

So what are my options? I'm not sure what someone is supposed to do. I don't want to rat people out, but what he's doing isn't right.

[sixpacktr]

Your dad told you? If that is the case, it is hearsay. Why doesn't your father go to the Bishop, if it is that bad? If he is going around bragging about it to people, then I'm sure that the Bishop knows, unless, of course, he is a double secret undercover Ninja-type Danite!!

Got my line in the water, trolling for anything that will rise...

[Gwen]

is the fraud in the chruch or his personal life? not that it matters i guess. not supporting doesn't mean you will automaticly be chastized or lose a temple recomend. i recently could not sustain a member of stake leadership in branch conference. i just knew i was going to be "in trouble" but i could not sustain this man (due to actions in his personal life). i did have a meeting with the stake pres after sacrament meeting due to my raising my hand to opose. i explained who and why. the stake pres supported me, said it would be looked into and action taken as soon as possible. now i leave it in their hands. i still have my recomend.

if there is something that is wrong that's not rating someone out. i have this problem with my kids. i have taught them to tell me when a sibling is doing something they shouldn't. they get to school and are told they can't tell on anyone cause that makes them a tattle tale. (however you spell that) i've been trying to now distinguish the difference for them.

if you take a toy from your younger brother and he hits you in frustration and you tell on them but not yourself you are tattling. if it was an accident you are tattling. if no one was hurt but you want them to get into trouble you are tattling. if you only tell half the story so they get in trouble but not you that is tattling.

if your younger brother scales the kitchen cabnets and gets a knife to cut himself an apple, that's not tattling. if they are just attacking or hurting you without provocation that's not tattling. if someone at school is stealing from anothers desk that's not tattling. if someone is selling drugs in the school yard that's not tattling. if someone is touching you inappropriately that's not tattling.

i would much rather my kids come to me with to many things and have to chastize them for their actions than have them keep important information from me.

back to the chruch issue. sounds like you should take it to the bishop or even the stake pres. keep in mind however he does probably get false accusations all the time, so bring evidence if you have it. he probably won't go off half cocked and go after someone with no evidence. but he does need to know. pray about it, choose your words carefully, then leave it in his hands. don't lose your salvation over someone elses.

an example of something i'm sure stake pres and bishops get a lot of (and thus the need to have evidence and patcience with your leaders).

my husband's ex tries at least once a yr (usually more) to have his temple recomend removed for not paying child support. this woman never comes to church, and has in court documents expressed a hatred toward the chruch. yet she shows up, no eveidence and demands my husband's temple recomend be removed for not paying child support. our branch pres is always called to "investigate" this claim. my husband is then interviewed, where we have offered, but not been asked to do it, to bring court receipts and the childsupport order in so as to prove that he has paid in full as ordered. in frustration we asked him about this, it gets tireing to be brought in like this all the time, on the complaint of someone that hates the church. he asked us not to let it upset us, it was a formality of responding to a complaint, and that before any said complaint would ever be acted upon she would have to bring in more than her whinning to back it up.

[Iggy]

I know that you are supposed to support your leaders, and never try to find fault with them, but the 1st councilor in our ward is committing fraud. I know this for a fact, he told my dad this a few weeks ago. But I'm not sure if this should be taken to the bishop, or if it should be reported at all.

The problem is compounded because a relative of mine doesn't feel like she can receive a temple recommend because one of the questions that is asked is if she supports the bishopric, and she doesn't thinkshe can answer 'yes' because of the actions of this councilor.

So what are my options? I'm not sure what someone is supposed to do. I don't want to rat people out, but what he's doing isn't right.

If what he is doing is against the law, then your father should turn him in to the law. Don't go by what you hear, you need to know it for yourself. Have you personally witnessed him perpertrating this fraud? Not just what your father tells you, are you an actual witness? Then if so, turn it over to law enforcement and then follow what the spirit tells you to do.

Be sure that it is the spirit and not spite.

[prisonchaplain]

This is wrong on so many levels.

1. If dad is aware that anyone is commiting crime, it should be reported--to the police.

2. If dad is aware that anyone is violating the rules for the church office they hold, then HE should follow normal procedures for reporting such offenses.

3. Dad should not be gossiping to son.

4. Son should not be repeating the gossip.

Any questions?

[sixpacktr]

This is wrong on so many levels.

1. If dad is aware that anyone is commiting crime, it should be reported--to the police.

2. If dad is aware that anyone is violating the rules for the church office they hold, then HE should follow normal procedures for reporting such offenses.

3. Dad should not be gossiping to son.

4. Son should not be repeating the gossip.

Any questions?

PC,

Raht own, raht own, raht own...

[BenRaines]

What is someones interpretation of fraud? So I am clear in understanding this. The member of the bishopric came to your dad and said "Hey I am in the business of committing fraud". Or "I just committed fraud, but don't tell anyone".

Sorry to sound so hard but not sure I understand how this comes about.

Ben Raines

[Gabelma]

I know that you are supposed to support your leaders, and never try to find fault with them, but the 1st councilor in our ward is committing fraud. I know this for a fact, he told my dad this a few weeks ago. But I'm not sure if this should be taken to the bishop, or if it should be reported at all.

The problem is compounded because a relative of mine doesn't feel like she can receive a temple recommend because one of the questions that is asked is if she supports the bishopric, and she doesn't thinkshe can answer 'yes' because of the actions of this councilor.

So what are my options? I'm not sure what someone is supposed to do. I don't want to rat people out, but what he's doing isn't right.

Personally I would go and talk to your Bishop or Stake President, tell them the situation, then you can move on and forgive and forget. They are there to counsel you in this situation even without evidence but Iwould approach them with you are looking for advice rather than you are accusing someone. Lay out exactly what you do know.

Charley

[BenRaines]

Is it what he heard or what his dad said that he heard someone say? Not sure that is any evidence just an undocumented accusation to me and I am not a lawyer.

Ben Raines

[sixpacktr]

Those that have served as Bishop or in a Bishopric:

this type of stuff happens a lot, as you know. Someone, either thru genuine concern or being a busybody, comes to the Bishop with something that they heard 3rd or 4th hand. Then they want the Bishop to act on it. Based on what? Maybe the Bishop already knew, or if he didn't, what can he do? It is hearsay. First questions asked: did you see it? Did they tell you? etc., etc.

Don't bother the Bishop or SP with hearsay. They are busy enough as it is, hear enough of the dark side of people's lives as it is, they don't need overcooked gossip to contend with as well.

[BenRaines]

I couldn't agree more sixpacktr

Ben Raines

[Gabelma]

I know that you are supposed to support your leaders, and never try to find fault with them, but the 1st councilor in our ward is committing fraud. I know this for a fact, he told my dad this a few weeks ago. But I'm not sure if this should be taken to the bishop, or if it should be reported at all.

The problem is compounded because a relative of mine doesn't feel like she can receive a temple recommend because one of the questions that is asked is if she supports the bishopric, and she doesn't thinkshe can answer 'yes' because of the actions of this councilor.

So what are my options? I'm not sure what someone is supposed to do. I don't want to rat people out, but what he's doing isn't right.

Is it affecting your faith? How old are you? Have you prayed about it? I really think your relative should talk to the Bishop as it is affecting her recommend. Yes it may be a pain in the neck for him todeal with but better to deal with it now than go inactive over it - I know my Father in Law, and previous Bishops would have at least counselled you to leave it with them and move on. Maybe ask him for a blessing todeal with it. My experience watching what happened in my branch is its best to take the gossip to the Bishop and noone else. Situations like this can kill a unit if allowed to continue, ourswent from a thriving ward to a tiny trouble strewn branch overa period of 20 years - it all started with rumour of affairs in the Bishophric (they were true) all it took was a Stake President who didn't necessarily listen but took note of the spirit in our branch and waswilling to counsel everyone, you know what its now the best unit in the church our primary has gone from one child to around 15 on a good day in under a year. Well over a hundred people have gone inactive as a result of this, itsamazing howmany are now coming back or preparing todo so now.

-Charley

[the_jason]

If you want our opinion you have to give us a bit more information regarding the nature of the fraud. Also, having your dad tell you does not classify it as "fact". I'm not saying your dad would lie, but sometimes information gets misunderstood or portrayed improperly. You should not judge a person based on what someone else thinks of them.

[Palerider]

hey....go tell your Bishop.....then you better have your ducks in a row cause when you make an acussation you have to have proof......

[Dror]

I know that you are supposed to support your leaders, and never try to find fault with them, but the 1st councilor in our ward is committing fraud. I know this for a fact, he told my dad this a few weeks ago. But I'm not sure if this should be taken to the bishop, or if it should be reported at all.

The problem is compounded because a relative of mine doesn't feel like she can receive a temple recommend because one of the questions that is asked is if she supports the bishopric, and she doesn't thinkshe can answer 'yes' because of the actions of this councilor.

So what are my options? I'm not sure what someone is supposed to do. I don't want to rat people out, but what he's doing isn't right.

First of all, double-check with your dad. Find out how he knows about the fraud and if his reasons for thinking the guy is committing fraud are reasonable. If so, talk to your bishop. Let the bishop conduct his own investigation, and let it go at that.

Second, we are expected to sustain our Church leaders in their callings, not in illegal or immoral activities. Your friend who wants a temple recommend may want to bring the issue of fraud up with the bishop either in advance, or during the recommend interview. If she has a good reason not to support a Church leader, he should listen.

Finally, don't let the naysayers get to you--in my opinion, one of the reasons we have a sustaining vote in the Church is in order to root out bad leaders, to give the members an opportunity to speak out. You don't have to prove the guy is guilty, just have good reason to think so. If you have first-hand witnesses of the fraudulent behavior, or other decent evidence, present that to your bishop. Then let the bishop take it from there--it's not your job (or your burden) to do the Church disciplinary stuff. Like the others said, don't spread the rumors--the guy may be innocent (and even if he's guilty, it's not up to you to prosecute him--just bring it to the attention of the higher-ups)--but do ask serious questions of the source of your information, and if necessary, take it to the bishop.

Dror

[Iggy]

This is wrong on so many levels.

1. If dad is aware that anyone is commiting crime, it should be reported--to the police.

2. If dad is aware that anyone is violating the rules for the church office they hold, then HE should follow normal procedures for reporting such offenses.

3. Dad should not be gossiping to son.

4. Son should not be repeating the gossip.

Any questions?

You are so right PC-

Fact: TheSacredOne posted this topic on the 8th. He joined the 3rd of Aug. He has made 2 posts and his last time here was the 8th.

Me thinks he wasn't serious, could quite possibly be a troll.

Speculation: Doubt if he is ever coming back.

[Annabelli]

Fraud: Receiving something of value by the means of deception.

Deception: Misleading someone to believe things that are not true.

[sacred1]

<div class='quotemain'>

This is wrong on so many levels.

1. If dad is aware that anyone is commiting crime, it should be reported--to the police.

2. If dad is aware that anyone is violating the rules for the church office they hold, then HE should follow normal procedures for reporting such offenses.

3. Dad should not be gossiping to son.

4. Son should not be repeating the gossip.

Any questions?

You are so right PC-

Fact: TheSacredOne posted this topic on the 8th. He joined the 3rd of Aug. He has made 2 posts and his last time here was the 8th.

Me thinks he wasn't serious, could quite possibly be a troll.

Speculation: Doubt if he is ever coming back.

Your speculation would be incorrect. And I am dead serioius. It's offensive that you would say otherwise.

And this is not hearsay. He told my dad, but I was there when he said it. Someone said that I needed more details, so this is a basic rundown of what happened. He had a decent job, then was laid off. So he went to the unemployment office so he could draw unemployment. realizing that that wasn't enough money, he decided to get another job somewhere else. But according to law, if he started working, he would lose his unemployment, they don't let you draw it if you are making money. So he signed his dad's name to the umemployment forms, so when they check up on him (his dad) they'll see that he isn't working since he's been retired. And then when the dad receives the money he gives it to the son.

The way he acted, it was like he thought it was okay, he said it in a very matter-of-fact way, like he was talking about how his week went. So even though he didn't use the word 'fraud' he admitted to the act.

My dad hasn't reported it because quite frankly, he doesn't really care. It's none of his business.

ANd just on a side note, I could do without all the rude comments. I come here seeking an answer to a serious problem, and I'm treated like the one who's breaking the rules.

[sixpacktr]

By all means, go to the Bishop, if you feel you should. But the story sounds a little fishy.

If he (the counselor) signed his father's name to the form, and his father is retired, then he would still get caught. Why? Because his dad is drawing SS, I presume? So he isn't working, nor would he be on file with the company. The company is the one that foots the unemployment insurance bill, and you have to have form from the company stating that you have been terminated. It has your name on it, no one else's. They also check with the company to make sure that you worked there and are eligible to draw unemployment (ask me how I know). So he'd have a hard time doing this, unless he is truly devious and faked the whole thing.

So sorry if there was some conjecture as to the truth of what you wrote. Either the counselor is a dolt, and will be caught soon enough, or you're making this up...

[Iggy]

By all means, go to the Bishop, if you feel you should. But the story sounds a little fishy.

If he (the counselor) signed his father's name to the form, and his father is retired, then he would still get caught. Why? Because his dad is drawing SS, I presume? So he isn't working, nor would he be on file with the company. The company is the one that foots the unemployment insurance bill, and you have to have form from the company stating that you have been terminated. It has your name on it, no one else's. They also check with the company to make sure that you worked there and are eligible to draw unemployment (ask me how I know). So he'd have a hard time doing this, unless he is truly devious and faked the whole thing.

So sorry if there was some conjecture as to the truth of what you wrote. Either the counselor is a dolt, and will be caught soon enough, or you're making this up...

What he said. You can also report him to the unemployment division. He has signed an agreement when he signed up for unemployment benefits that states he will not falsely report to them. He is falsely reporting.

Also his SSA# is different than his Dads- and he will get caught. So will his Dad - for aiding and abetting.

[Guest WhoShotJS]

bump