Legalities of money incorrectly transferred
Discussion
Went out for breakfast with a friend this morning who is a pub landlord. He rarely checks one of his his personal bank accounts as he only has a handful of DD's coming out and he has a DD going in from another account to cover these.
Anyway he was checking his statement the other day and it turns out just over £400 has been paid in with a reference of tax rebate with the name of a building firm.
He has googled there name and is planning on phoning them to let them know but we were talking about the legalities of this.
He has no plans on doing so but would his rights be if he was to say nothing and spend it?
Just to clarify he will be informing the company who made the payment with the view to return it.
Anyway he was checking his statement the other day and it turns out just over £400 has been paid in with a reference of tax rebate with the name of a building firm.
He has googled there name and is planning on phoning them to let them know but we were talking about the legalities of this.
He has no plans on doing so but would his rights be if he was to say nothing and spend it?
Just to clarify he will be informing the company who made the payment with the view to return it.
PurpleMoonlight said:
No he cannot just spend it.
To deliberately deprive the correct owner is theft.
This isn't quite a clear cut answer.To deliberately deprive the correct owner is theft.
We have incorrectly paid over £200 to the wrong account (typo when entering info). Bank said tough s**t as we paid the money they would not reclaim it.
Jasandjules said:
This isn't quite a clear cut answer.
We have incorrectly paid over £200 to the wrong account (typo when entering info). Bank said tough s**t as we paid the money they would not reclaim it.
The recipient of the money stole it if they kept what they knew was not theirs.We have incorrectly paid over £200 to the wrong account (typo when entering info). Bank said tough s**t as we paid the money they would not reclaim it.
The fact that the bank refused to assist you recover it is a different issue.
PurpleMoonlight said:
Jasandjules said:
This isn't quite a clear cut answer.
We have incorrectly paid over £200 to the wrong account (typo when entering info). Bank said tough s**t as we paid the money they would not reclaim it.
The recipient of the money stole it if they kept what they knew was not theirs.We have incorrectly paid over £200 to the wrong account (typo when entering info). Bank said tough s**t as we paid the money they would not reclaim it.
The fact that the bank refused to assist you recover it is a different issue.
If you spend money that you know is not yours, you have stolen it.
Long story, but I had to look at this in depth some years ago...!
sugerbear said:
Weak regulation allows this kind of thing to happen, the name of the recipient should be included on payments for the receiving bank to check.
I am amazed the banks have been allowed to Palm of these kind of problems for so long.
It's automated, there's nobody sat there checking the account name. If it was checked you'd get so many rejections it would be silly - for example paying into an account names J Smith using the name John Smith, right or wrong?I am amazed the banks have been allowed to Palm of these kind of problems for so long.
Like I said he will be contatcting the company in mention we were just curious as to where law around it.
The reason I thought it may be tough luck is when I was younger I started a new job and went from weekly to monthly pay and on my first pay day there was no money in my account.
When I spoke to my employer it turned out I wrote the wrong sort code down when giving them my bank details. The sort code given was for a barclays branch and I banked with someone else. When I went in to a local barclays branch and explained the situation they told me if my account number existed in the branch of that sort code then it would be up to recipient to pay me back as a gesture of goodwill.
Luckily it bounced and I got paid a few days later but this situation made me think otherwise.
The reason I thought it may be tough luck is when I was younger I started a new job and went from weekly to monthly pay and on my first pay day there was no money in my account.
When I spoke to my employer it turned out I wrote the wrong sort code down when giving them my bank details. The sort code given was for a barclays branch and I banked with someone else. When I went in to a local barclays branch and explained the situation they told me if my account number existed in the branch of that sort code then it would be up to recipient to pay me back as a gesture of goodwill.
Luckily it bounced and I got paid a few days later but this situation made me think otherwise.
You have to pay it back as it is not yours.
A friend of mine worked in a fairly lowly management position for a big company. He had the same name as the MD or someone. The firm screwed up with a new payroll system and paid my mate a huge chunk of cash, something like 15k.
Two things happened. His bank called him for one of those "would you like a better bank account?" chats and the boss discovered he was a lot of money down that month.
The transactions were revered.
It's a bit like theft by finding. If you find a wad of cash hanging out of an ATM because the previous user forgot to take it, it isn't yours.
A friend of mine worked in a fairly lowly management position for a big company. He had the same name as the MD or someone. The firm screwed up with a new payroll system and paid my mate a huge chunk of cash, something like 15k.
Two things happened. His bank called him for one of those "would you like a better bank account?" chats and the boss discovered he was a lot of money down that month.
The transactions were revered.
It's a bit like theft by finding. If you find a wad of cash hanging out of an ATM because the previous user forgot to take it, it isn't yours.
Some years ago a tenant vacated a rental property of mine, leaving the place in a poor state of disrepair. The ex tenant however, after leaving the property, continued to pay by DD every month, an amount of monies equal to their past rental payment. After about the fourth monthly payment, either the ex tenant or the bank realised the over payments, stopping further payments and requesting refund of the monies.
I received several letters from the ex tenant's bank, both quoting case law and threatening litigation if the monies were not refunded. I refused to refund the monies, stating that the monies covered the costs for making good the disrepair conditions of the rental property, heard nothing further from the bank.
I received several letters from the ex tenant's bank, both quoting case law and threatening litigation if the monies were not refunded. I refused to refund the monies, stating that the monies covered the costs for making good the disrepair conditions of the rental property, heard nothing further from the bank.
Wings said:
Some years ago a tenant vacated a rental property of mine, leaving the place in a poor state of disrepair. The ex tenant however, after leaving the property, continued to pay by DD every month, an amount of monies equal to their past rental payment. After about the fourth monthly payment, either the ex tenant or the bank realised the over payments, stopping further payments and requesting refund of the monies.
I received several letters from the ex tenant's bank, both quoting case law and threatening litigation if the monies were not refunded. I refused to refund the monies, stating that the monies covered the costs for making good the disrepair conditions of the rental property, heard nothing further from the bank.
That's involving someone who had a DD set up to pay you though so your tale is not really relevant as technically you could have had a legal claim to the money.I received several letters from the ex tenant's bank, both quoting case law and threatening litigation if the monies were not refunded. I refused to refund the monies, stating that the monies covered the costs for making good the disrepair conditions of the rental property, heard nothing further from the bank.
Had it been DD payments made from someone you had no dealings with whatsoever, then it might be relevant as you would have had no legal rights to the money whatsoever.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff