If a Jehovah's Witness informs elders of serious criminal fraud committed against them by another witness?

but the elders refuse to take any action even ignoring the victim who is disabled and suffering greatly, then a complaint is made to the society who in turn, ignores the fraudulent activity by the Witness committing the fraud, is this grounds for legal action against the fraudulent Witness, the congregation for allowing it to go on ignored having never had a meeting with the, and the Watchtower Society who chose to ignore the fraud and victimization -- even though they know the victim is disabled and alone?

Research I have found on fraud within the organization and in Watchtower 1954/10-1 it states this:

13"While we Christians today do not live under the same priestly arrangement as did ancient Israel, nevertheless we are under obligation to be honest and upright and to settle all debts and pledges properly. We do not defraud brothers, but should make things right with the brothers and ask Jehovah’s forgiveness for any wrong that has been committed. Brothers will deal justly with one another in all business and keep lies, dishonesty and fraud out of their midst.

14 Occasionally reports come to the Society from individual brothers or from congregations showing that some dishonest, immoral persons have slipped into the congregation. (Jude 4) It is clear how to deal with immoral ones, but what about people who go around preying on their brothers, or who appear to be brothers merely for the purpose of taking money, who are as the psalmist says: “The wicked borroweth, and payeth not again”? (37:21) What can be done about them? If a brother in his love and kindness allows another who appears to be a brother to have some of his money or material things for a time and then the borrowing individual, after the time agreed upon has elapsed, refuses to pay back, the brother who made the loan can go to the one who took the money or materials and ask him to make full return. It is proper to go to your brother when you have anything against him and speak to him. (Matthew 18:15-17)

If he will not make proper settlement, then the brother involved can speak to the congregation servant and arrange to have a hearing before the committee, with the offender present. At a time like this one will find it to his advantage to have a signed written agreement and it will not be a case of the word of one person against another. If guilt is established, the committee may set a limited but reasonable time for the offender to settle his debts or right the wrongs done.

15 If the offender refuses to make a just and proper settlement, then is it proper for the brother who made the loan to take the debtor brother into court and sue him? The Scriptures advise us that we should bring such matters before the mature brothers in the congregation and not take a brother before the courts. (1 Corinthians 6:1-10)

But he may be disfellowshiped from the congregation if he is an extortioner. He should be avoided from then on. Being disfellowshiped by the congregation is the greatest punishment that can come upon such a person at the hands of men, for when mature brothers act according to the advice of the Scriptures they are in fact acting for Jehovah and the judgment is from his Word. Whether or not a defrauded person wishes to take a disfellowshiped person into a court is for him to decide. The disfellowshiped person is no longer a brother and the congregation has exhausted its powers in the case, so the only recourse would be to the law courts of the land. But it is a good thing to consider the costs involved in time and money. Legal suits are expensive and sometimes the result is that the lawyers get everything through their fees. It is also necessary to think of any reproach that might come upon the work through such public action.

That is why a brother may not take his brother into court; there is reproach upon the organization. Paul’s argument is that it is better to be defrauded than to bring reproach upon the congregation. But with a disfellowshiped person the position is different, although the people in general may not realize that the one sued has been disfellowshiped. If legal action is taken, restitution of what was taken should be the goal, and not revenge. Anyone who would go that far to have a debt paid should have the agreement in writing from the start. Or if the wronged brother chooses to drop the matter it can be left in the hands of Jehovah, who searches the hearts of all men and knows their motives and who rewards those who do right with life. (Romans 12:17-19; 1 Corinthians 5:11-13; Hebrews 10:26-31)

--------------------

The victim was never given a meeting with the elders and the fraudulent Witness though she asked many times for such a meeting; she was ignored and the fraud allowed to run ragged over the disabled victim. Now the victim feels she has no other choice but to sue the fraudulent witness or else the victim will be homeless, and to include as defendants the elders and congregation, and the W