THE 1996 Annual Report of the Ombudsman for Credit Institutions contained a number of sample cases.

. One case involved an Irishman living in the US who received a letter one morning from a bank in Dublin, suggesting that the substantial amount contained in his savings account could be better employed elsewhere.

The man, who had been unaware of the existence of any such account, instituted steps to have the money transferred to him in the US. However, the bank then told him that no such account existed.

The ombudsman, following his investigation, decided that most likely someone had lodged money with the bank in the man's name, probably in the hope of avoiding the revenue commissioners.

Through an administrative error the bank had sent a letter to the Irishman in the US, even though most likely it had been told not to do so by whoever had lodged the money.

The ombudsman decided that the bank had put the Irishman in jeopardy by writing the letter, as it could have, for example, got him into trouble with the US revenue. The complainant was awarded $5,000 (£3,125) in full and final settlement.

. Another case concerned a bank customer who wanted to lodge 525,000 (£15,625) in his account and later transfer it to an account in Britain. The customer, who was from a racial minority, took exception to questions concerning the source of the money and the reason for the transaction, and a request that he produce his passport. During a heated exchange the customer accused the bank official of being a racist.

The ombudsman, during his investigation, reviewed the bank's advice to staff on their statutory requirements concerning the money laundering provisions. He also gave consideration to the fact that he had received a number of such complaints from people who were native Irish. He found that the bank was justified in asking questions and that there was no racial discrimination involved.

. A third case involved a couple who had purchased a fixed term loan but had not been advised of the penalty they would face for terminating it. When the complainants later advised the bank they wished to redeem the loan, the bank informed them they would have to pay a £2,000 penalty if they did so. The ombudsman, following an investigation, ruled that the mortgage could be redeemed without payment of any penalty.