You are here

Justice News

Department of Justice
U.S. Attorney’s Office
Middle District of Pennsylvania

Monday, May 12, 2014

Bank Branch Manager Charged With Defrauding Customers

     The United States Attorney’s Office for the Middle District of Pennsylvania announced the filing of a Criminal Information in U.S. District Court on May 9, 2014, charging Tiffany Look, age 39, of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, with mail fraud.

     According to U.S. Attorney Peter Smith, over a period between 2007 and 2013, Look was a branch manager at two area financial institutions, Mid Penn Bank and Members First Federal Credit Union.  Look allegedly devised and carried out a scheme to obtain money from four customers of the institutions by taking out fraudulent loans in the customers’ names.  The total loss was allegedly approximately $140,000.

     The government also filed a plea agreement with Look in the case which is subject to approval by the Court.

     The financial institutions both cooperated with the investigation conducted by the United States Postal Inspectors and the Swatara Township and Hampden Township Police Departments.  The case is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Joseph J. Terz.

     If convicted, Look faces a term of imprisonment of up to twenty years and fines up to $250,000.

     Indictments and Criminal Informations are only allegations. All persons charged are presumed to be innocent unless and until found guilty in court.

     A sentence following a finding of guilty is imposed by the Judge after consideration of the applicable federal sentencing statutes and the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

     In this case, the maximum penalty under the federal statute is twenty years imprisonment, a term of supervised release following imprisonment, and a fine.  Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, the Judge is also required to consider and weigh a number of factors, including the nature, circumstances, and seriousness of the offense; the history and characteristics of the defendant; and the need to punish the defendant, protect the public, and provide for the defendant's educational, vocational and medical needs.  For these reasons, the statutory maximum penalty for the offense is not an accurate indicator of the potential sentence for a specific defendant.

Updated April 16, 2015