REALLY DIFFICULT SITUATION

Bitstring , from the wonderful person catkin said

The unwitting donor &/or the bank both have perfect right to recover the money, for some very long period (several years at least). Since your daughter already asked the bank where it's from the 'I didn't realize it wasn't mine' defence won't wash.

I'd tell the bank. If they're slow to act, put it somewhere you can at least get some interest. Charge them for the letter advising them they of their error. Ask for a finders fee. Just DON'T spend the money and hope nobody will ever notice. they will.

Let her spend it, then if whoever it is finds out they'll have no choice but to accept repayment in affordable installments. You could also claim that the mistake caused her to spend more than she would've done if the mistake hadn't happened :-)

That is foolish advice, spending the money is theft, no more no less. there have been copious threads in uk.legal to this effect - crossposted to ukl.

And moving it into an interest-bearing account is also theft. The only thing that isn't theft is doing absolutely nothing with it - leaving it where it is. In this case that doesn't seem to be an option so the OP should insist the bank find the proper home for this money otherwise it is likely to end in tears.

"Matthew Church" wrote

I seem to remember one of the many threads in the uk.legal newsgroups, saying that the recipient can be expected to pay back reasonable interest on the amounts being credited to them in error.

In that case, and if the money is being credited to an account paying little or no interest, the unwitting (innocent) recipient will be clobbered with an interest bill higher than the extra interest which they actually gained - without even being (legally) able to mitigate this by moving the money temporarily to a higher-interest paying account? Sounds totally unfair to me.

Some good solid advice here. There is now a specific charge along the lines of wrongfully retaining a credit (where's my legal adviser when I need her?). If it isn't yours give it back. Period.

Tim composed the following;:

One would have thought that if monies are being paid into a non-interest paying account, and the recipient is not therefore receiving any interest or benefit from the money, then a court would normally be reasonable and not award any interest, as none was accrued from the mistake.

If the bank have identified who the money is from, can they give her the sort code & account number of this person's account?

If so it would be possible to set up an internet banking payment (for example) for her to pay the money back to the account where it came from. At least then she couldn't be accused of trying to keep the money, and it would give whoever is making the payments a fairly obvious clue that their payments are not going where they're supposed to.

Nick

Given the amounts involved, it's unlikely to get to the point where the interest will rise to a point where it's permissible (much less economically justifiable) to go to County Court to recover them. So I'd not be too worried about interest; there's nowt the other party can do about it. It's not "theft" *not* to put the money in an interest-bearing account.

Jon

I disagree. It's only theft where there is an intention to permanently deprive. Moving it to a "better place" is not necessarily evidence of such an intention. After all, the bank cannot lawfully help themselves back to money wrongfully deposited unless they notice the error more or less immediately. Once a day or so has elapsed, they require the recipient's co-operation (which may need to be obtained through the courts).

The amounts are irrelevant. This is a question of principle. :-)

Agreed. I think it's more a question of if the recipient diverted the funds to a decent-interest bearing account, then "reasonable interest" to be paid back to the true owner would be seen in a different light compared to leaving it languishing where it earns no interest to speak of.

The recipient has no duty to manage the funds of which he finds himself an unwilling custodian, any more than he has the right to enrich himself therefrom. But a good compromise would be that the interest be shared. Effective custodianship deserves remuneration. Fifty fifty sounds good.

In message , GSV Three Minds in a Can writes

Quite right, but just to be clear, neither the bank or the remitter can 'recover' the dosh by just debiting the recipients account without the recipients authority.

Also, neither the recipients bank or the remitting bank have any right to recover the dosh through the courts unless they were negligent. It is highly unlikely that the recipients bank is at fault (assuming it was a BACS payment from another bank/branch) and also the remitting bank would only be liable if it incorrectly implemented the remitters instructions.

So, it comes down to the remitter themselves to instigate recovery.

In message , Matthew Church writes

NO it isnt. She would need to have the intent to permanently deprive the remitter, which the poster made clear is not the case because it was suggested she pay it back in instalments.

In message , Matthew Church writes

No it isnt. She is ring fencing it until the remitter or correct beneficiary is discovered. IN effect she is holding it in trust for the intended recipient.

Last year I found £30 in the street. I took it to the Police Station who wrote the details in a book and told me to keep the dosh and if anybody reported they had lost £30 then they would put them in touch. Are you saying that if I put that £30 into a separate interest bearing bank account I would be guilty of theft? The only difference in my case and the OPs case is that I reported the find to the Police, whereas the beneficiary of the mis-posted credit has reported to the Bank. We both reported our find to the most appropriate authority.

I would be wary about doing this, and instead leave it up to the bank to make corrections.

Yes I suppose it could lead to an unfortunate situation where the account holder refunds the money themselves, then the bank subsequently reverses the original transactions too !

IANAL

Good thought, bad idea. The possible scenario here is that the remitter wouldn't notice the incoming funds, but would at some point notice the incorrect payments. They could then take steps to recover the payments, leaving the OP to chase around showing them that they've already paid the amount back. At the very least it's more trouble than it has to be, and it could become very awkward.

The suggestion of obtaining the account details is a good one though. That way, the OP can write to the remitter c/o their bank to advise them of their mistake, and the whole thing can (in theory) be sorted out with minimum fuss.

That occurred to me after I posted, it would be quite possible for this to happen, and probably sod's law would ensure that it did.....

It would be unfair, which is why it is utter nonsense. You wouldn't be expected to pay back more than was earned.

But transferring the monies to another account does leave you open to being arrested for theft and having to explain yourself, which may not be believed. It would look very bad.