I know a guy who had 4 grand put into his account in error and he withdrew it before they realised. His "punishment" from the bank was to call it a loan. They did it interest-free over 5 years. They were pretty embarassed I think.
In message , Steve Frazer writes
Why?
Because, although it isn't proof of a dishonest intent to permanently deprive, it could be evidence of it. If the bank makes a complaint then you would have to be arrested and interviewed. Better to leave it their and insist they return it to the rightful owner ASAP.
In message , Steve Frazer writes
Hardly, and even then only if you hide your tracks and deny it.
The bank has nothing to do with it.
Whcih translates as "let her steal it". good advice!
In message , Mike Hibbert writes
NO, it cant be theft as described, because she has the intention to repay it.
Moving the money is evidence you might not want to return it to it;s lawful owner.
If anyone who has an interest in the money makes a complaint. If the bank comes round to the error and the money is no longer in that account then they can complain.
I've read a few threads similiar to this and I think this is the first time noone has blarted out "give it to charity". If you're good with money I personally would just leave the money where it is and pretend it isn't there, moving it into high interest accounts is just going to cause hastle.
I wonder if this thread is related to this one, that would be funny
Bitstring , from the wonderful person halfanorange said
Which piece of 'I don't think she can hold out [against] the temptation' did you fail to read or comprehend? 8>.
I'd still put it in a (separate) high interest instant access account (e.g. something like Ing). Worst case the bank gets the interest too. Best case they only ask for the capital back. Actually my 'auto sweeper' would do that with unexpected/excess current a/c funds anyway, although it wouldn't put it in a separate earmarked a/c.
Off on a tangent, but would the situation be the same if someone mistakenly put an envelope full of money through my letterbox, intended for my neighbour, and I spent it?
In message , Steve Frazer writes
I think we will have to agree to differ on that one.
The bank doesnt have an interest in it.
As already said. The bank has no interest.
I said 'might'.
If the person's money goes missing and it's their fault then they are the one's who will end up paying. You don't know whose mistake it is.
In message , Steve Frazer writes
I know you did.
'Might not want to return it' is insufficient proof of an intention to permanently provide. That is why I disagree with you.
Your use of the word 'they' and 'their' is confusing. If those words all refer to 'the person' then, as I say, the bank has no interest.
With regard to whose mistake it is, I think it is established in this thread that the mistake is with the remitter, not the bank.
So we agree that's it's insuffucient proof of dishonest intent.
Nobody probably cares still but here's the legal stuff:
Section 24A - Theft Act 1968. Dishonestly retaining a wrongful credit
A person is guilty of an offence if- (a) a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by him or in respect of which he has any right or interest; (b) he knows or believes that the credit is wrongful; and (c) he dishonestly fails to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled.
Maximum sentence 10 years.
In short, do everything you can to get the money cancelled or she could be in trouble.
Peanut.
"Peanut" wrote
Horrendous!
Fair enough, deal with them if they spend it - but an offence to *ignore* an unwarranted credit? How come?
Why should the innocent victim (receiver) take time out of their busy lives just because some idiot has made a mistake??
[Can they charge for their time spent "tak[ing] such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled"?]
The offence does require 'dishonesty' so their *ignoring* of the credit would have to judged against the honsety standards of reasonable people. A phone call to your bank telling them the credit was wrong and asking them to return the money would negate criminal liabilty.
Erm, I suppose you could ask but if they refused you would have to litigate to get payment. I think it would be a fairly quick and easy phone call in most cases so I can't imagine many people would bother considering civil action even in the small claims court, who may consider that 'de minimis' rule applied. (de minimis non curat lex - the law is not concerned with trifling matters).
Peanut.
"Peanut" wrote
Does your bank allow calls directly to your branch? A lot nowadays don't give out branches telephone numbers...
For the purpose at hand there is no need for the person you speak to to be physically at your branch.
This is just the sort of problem a call centre should be able to deal with. Note "should". Whether they actually will be able to is anyone's guess since this isn't exactly likely to crop up often enough for them to be used to it.
Personally in a case of this type, I would not trust a phone call - especially one to a call centre.
The only safe way would be a "recorded signed for" letter addressed to the branch manager.
Alan Pritchard
NOTE my new email address: snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com
BeanSmart website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.