Using a forged document – ​​how should the victim act to avoid damages?

What is a fake document?

A forged document is a document that has been created by a person who is not authorized to create it and usually grants the forger rights that he does not deserve. The use of a forged document is intended to deceive a third party who is usually unaware of the forgery.

Using a forged document may cause the victim significant harm, and this is obvious, as one does not bother to forge a document unless the forged document may lead to great benefit for the forger. The greater the benefit to the forger, the more effort the forger will put into the forgery, and will try to produce a forged document that is as close to the original as possible (sometimes the forgery is so good that even an expert may have difficulty immediately distinguishing between the original and the forgery).

Common examples of documents that are prone to forgery: Checks, bills (and coins), agreements – contracts, and even Judgments, wills, passports, school certificates, Banking documents (For example, for the purpose of performing Transferring funds from a bank account Without permission or for the purpose of execution Credit card fraud), Affidavits, and more.

Sometimes, instead of forging the entire document, all the forgers do is Signature forgeryThis is a much simpler act of forgery compared to forging an entire document, and in most cases this act of forgery is sufficient to deceive third parties, and in this way the forger also achieves his goal.

Legal provisions that deal with the use of a forged document

There are several legal provisions within the framework Penal Law (and other laws) that deal with the use of a forged document, and the penalties that can be imposed on forgers. Pay attention – Only the Israel Police and the Prosecutor’s Office can decide whether to file an indictment against the forger. If the victim wants to receive financial compensation from the forger who caused damage due to the use of a forged document, the victim must file Civil lawsuit or Financial claim To the Magistrate's Court or the District Court (depending on the amount of damage). In very rare cases, it may also be considered Class action lawsuit (For example, in a situation where a representative of a cellular company forged hundreds or thousands of agreements with the company's customers).

Use of a Forged Document – ​​Penal Law

The most relevant legal provision to the issue of using a forged document is Article 420 of the Penal Code, which states:

420. Whoever presents or issues a forged document or uses it in any other way, knowing that it is forged, is liable to the same punishment as one who forges the document.

To understand the meaning of Section 420, one must also be familiar with Section 418 of the Penal Code, which states:

418. Whoever forges a document is liable to one year's imprisonment; whoever forges a document with the intent to obtain something through it is liable to three years' imprisonment; and if the offense was committed under aggravated circumstances, he is liable to five years' imprisonment.

כמו כן, חשוב לדעת כיצד מוגדר "מסמך" ו"זיוף". אלה מוגדרים בסעיף 414 לחוק העונשין אשר קובע כך:

414. "document" – תעודה שבכתב, וכל אמצעי אחר, בין בכתב ובין בצורה אחרת, העשוי לשמש ראיה;

"זיוף" – אחת מאלה:

(1) Making a document purport to be something it is not, and it is likely to be misleading;

(2) Altering a document – ​​including adding or omitting an item – with intent to deceive, or without lawful authority and in a manner that appears to be as if the alteration were made with lawful authority;

(3) Signing a document in the name of a person without lawful authority, or in a fictitious name, in a manner that may appear as if the document was signed by a person;

It is also very useful to familiarize yourself with sections 419 and 421, which state as follows:

419. Whoever forges a document containing information about a person or corporation with intent to defraud, shall be liable to imprisonment for three years; it is immaterial, for this purpose, whether the person or corporation existed or not, or whether the corporation was about to be founded but was not founded.

421. A public servant who forges a document that he is responsible for making or keeping, or has access to by virtue of his position, is liable to imprisonment for three years with or without a fine; if he does so with the intention of receiving something, he is liable to imprisonment for five years with or without a fine; if he receives something by means of a forged document as aforesaid, he is liable to imprisonment for seven years with or without a fine.

How should the victim act after discovering that a forged document has been used?

A victim who discovers that a forged document has been used must act immediately on two levels. The first level is with the Israel Police – the victim must file immediately Complaint to the Israel Police (a complaint can also be filed online). The victim must provide the Israel Police with all relevant information known to him regarding the forged document (present the forged document to the police, specify when exactly he became aware that a forged document was used, specify who in his opinion is responsible for creating the forged document, and any other information that the police investigator may request).

The second level is the civil level – the victim must immediately contact the relevant body where the forged document was used and notify immediately that the document is not authentic. Delay in this matter may lead to that body being unwilling or unable to assist the victim.

for example: If a forged check is used and the customer does not notify the bank within the first three days of the check being deposited for payment, the bank may not assist the victim and will actually transfer the funds to the forger's account. In such a case, the victim will have to file a lawsuit in court in order to obtain a judgment ordering the victim's money back.

In addition to filing a claim, you should also consider filing an application for Temporary relief In the form of injunction Until the lawsuit is decided. An injunction is an order directed at a person or entity that states that they must refrain from performing a certain action.

for example: A person impersonates another person and attempts to obtain loans from Bank Hapoalim in his name. The victim may file a request for an injunction prohibiting Bank Hapoalim from granting loans until the lawsuit itself is resolved.

Let's assume this is a case where the impostor actually succeeded in obtaining one loan and tried to obtain another loan from the bank. In such a case, within the framework of Claim to be submitted to the court, you should also consider requesting Declaratory judgment Which will determine that the first loan was not taken out by the victim but by the impostor.

In what cases can a third party be held liable for using a forged document?

The cases in which a third party may be held liable for the use of a forged document are those cases in which the third party knew of the existence of the forged document and for some reason did not act to verify and verify that the document presented to him was indeed authentic.

for example: If a customer has notified the bank that his ID card has been stolen and that an attempt has already been made to use his ID card to take out a loan at another bank, and shortly thereafter the impostor arrives at the customer's bank with the intention of taking out a loan, and the bank does not contact the customer by telephone to verify that it is indeed him (for example, by calling the customer's phone number that is on file with the bank and asking questions that are known only to the real customer), in such a case the bank may be liable for the customer's damages.

סוגיה דומה נדונה בעבר בבית המשפט המחוזי במסגרת ת"א 2398-06 אלום גולד בע"מ נ' דור יצחק ואח' (פסק דין מיום 9.8.2015). באותו מקרה בוצעה fraud By an accountant who worked for the plaintiff, who forged documents, and using the forged documents managed to receive funds from the company's bank, and transferred the funds to a third-party bank account. In that case, the bank did not bother to perform any checks to verify whether a forged document was used or not (for example, comparing signatures or contacting the account holder to verify whether he was the one who carried out the transactions).

With respect to the bank, the court ruled, inter alia, as follows:

The duty of trust requires the bank to act professionally, honestly, and with the highest level of fairness. But more than that: At the heart of the duty of trust is the obligation to exercise the power at the bank's disposal, without abusing it. The bank must fulfill its role solely for the purpose for which the power was given to it, without extraneous considerations, and in the best interests of the customer. Because the customer's best interests are the decisive consideration, the bank must prioritize the customer's interests over any other interest, including the bank's own interests.

…

In our case, as stated, the plaintiff believes that the bank was negligent towards her when it refrained from taking any action to prevent the embezzlement. In this regard, the plaintiff raised two claims:

A. The bank did not compare the signatures on the operating instructions with the signature sample.

B. The bank acted contrary to internal procedure, which requires telephone verification with the customer.

…

With regard to the method of comparative examination, it should be clarified that although, within the framework of the judgment, it was determined that the action instructions were forged by Defendant 1 (either by forging the signatures, or by re-photocopying a signed action instruction, while changing the date and amount) - within the framework of the relationship between the plaintiff and the bank, The latter is not required to perform a handwriting expert-level examination. All that is required of the bank is to conduct a simple comparison, with a non-professional eye, between the signatures on the operating instructions and the signature sample.

…

We see that about half of the signatures on the operating instructions do not bear a reasonable resemblance to the signature sample. The prominent feature that appears in the signature sample (Mr. Bakshi's first name) is missing from the operating instructions that bear an abbreviated signature, and this creates, In my opinion, there is a striking difference that can be easily noticed; and which is expected to raise suspicion regarding the correctness of these provisions.

…

Over a period of more than five years – during which 45 bank transfers of significant amounts were made, based on fake transaction instructions – The bank did not bother, even once, to perform the comparative examination. Likewise, the bank did not bother, during the entire relevant period, to conduct a telephone verification with the sole authorized signatory on the company's account, Mr. Bakshi, in order to ascertain whether the operating instructions were carried out and signed by him.

A comparative check between signatures on requests for money transfers (in significant amounts) and a sample signature stored at the bank constitutes, in my opinion, a legitimate expectation of the customer.A signature sample is not provided to the bank by the customer for no purpose, but rather for its use, when necessary, including for the purpose of comparing it with other signatures purporting to be the customer's signature. In other words, a signature sample is not deposited with the bank in vain, and for the sole purpose of its safekeeping, Rather, it is intended to be a daily tool for verifying the authenticity of the signatures of authorized signatories on checks, or on requests for the transfer of funds by facsimile.

Admittedly, a comparison between a signature sample and signatures on facsimile operating instructions is not supposed to reveal findings in the expertise. However, as I stated above, the difference between the signature sample, in the case of Didan, and about half of the signatures on the operating instructions is evident even upon examination by a layperson. A simple comparison against the signature sample – as conducted above – would have been expected to arouse the bank's suspicion; and even lead to verification with the authorized signatory, regarding half of the signatures on the operating instructions, which bear an abbreviated signature.

בסיומו של ההליך בית המשפט חייב גם את הבנק לשלם פיצוי כספי לחברה שנפגעה ממעשה ההונאה. בנוסף הבנק חויב בהוצאות משפט בסך 50 אלף ש"ח.

In conclusion

Using a forged document may lead to significant damages to the victim. Immediately after the victim discovers that a forged document has been used, he or she should contact the Israel Police and file a complaint.

In addition, the victim must contact the relevant body or bodies to warn that an attempt has been made or a forged document is actually being used. After such notification, the victim may also file a claim against that body or bodies if the impostor uses a forged document and that body does not perform reasonable checks to verify whether the document is authentic or not (for example: comparing signatures).

In many cases, there will be no escape from filing a lawsuit against the person who used a forged document in order to be reimbursed for the damages he caused. In some cases, the lawsuit will also be filed against the entity that could have prevented the use of a forged document and harm to the victim, but failed to act properly.

Frequently Asked Questions Regarding Using a Forged Document