Would you pay back £2000 paid into your account by mistake?

loz · 12-09-2009, 2:12 PM

I know there have been similar threads in the past about bank mistakes, but this one is interesting in that a person accidently paid someone by mistake, but the recipient has never repaid it

BBC NEWS | Business | When click of a mouse cost £2,000

Quote:

She had been meaning to transfer a sum of £2,000 into her savings account.

But, after clicking the wrong box, she accidentally sent the cash to someone she had paid years ago, and whose details had been saved on her account.

But six months on she is still to receive a refund...

The bank concerned, the Alliance and Leicester, says it cannot force the person who received the money to return it.

They tried repeatedly to contact the customer concerned, but "regrettably" that customer has not responded.

A spokesperson told the BBC: "It wasn't our mistake, so we are unable to take any further action".

Furthermore, they would not even tell Claire the name of the customer, because of the Data Protection Act.

That means she is unable to take the case to the small claims court.

The Financial Ombudsman is also unable to help, because her complaint is not against the bank itself.

The police told the BBC it might be possible for them to investigate, but they could not guarantee the Crown Prosecution Service would agree to prosecute.

Surely she, and the bank, and presumably the police all know who the recipient is.

As she had made a payment to the person or company before surely she already knows who they are.

So, I would have thought it straightforward to approach them and ask for the return.

Of course, they can refuse, but then I would think you have grounds for the small claims court.

However, in this case it seems like no one particularly wants to help her - or at least not get involved in something which isn't their fault and no 'crime' as such has been committed.

But if it was you who were the recipient, wouldn't you have given it back?

**Steven** · 12-09-2009, 2:21 PM

In answer to your thread title, certain professions make it a prerequisite that you show the utmost integrity in your private as well as your professional life

paulyoung666 · 12-09-2009, 2:58 PM

could this not be classed as an 'unsolicited gift' , just wondering

Dony · 12-09-2009, 3:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

In answer to your thread title, certain professions make it a prerequisite that you show the utmost integrity in your private as well as your professional life

like a clergyman for example.

(o.k......maybe that's not a good example)

Dony · 12-09-2009, 3:02 PM

In normal circumstances I would give it back, but if an ex-employer who had ripped me off before I left them made the same mistake, I'd keep it.

mooperman · 12-09-2009, 3:15 PM

does it not work in the same way as, lets say the person had dropped 2 grand on the street and whoever found it refused to give it back?

nheather · 12-09-2009, 4:00 PM

Interestingly, in cases where banks have accidentally paid too much money into accounts then they have no trouble getting it back.

Likewise if an employer over-pays one its employees - no trouble getting it back.

Likewise where the government have overpaid benefits, they have been able to get some of it back.

So why do the banks take a different approach for it non-commercial customers?

I agree that it is not right to just reverse the transaction on the payee's say so, but it must be pretty simple to bring both parties into arbitration.

Cheers,

Nigel

**Steven** · 12-09-2009, 4:06 PM

Your examples are all illustrations of how the criminal law operates, whereas this case is different as it does not so neatly fit. Without knowing more of the facts and pending a preliminary police investigation, it is hard to so quickly categorise it in the same way

mooperman · 12-09-2009, 4:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nheather

Interestingly, in cases where banks have accidentally paid too much money into accounts then they have no trouble getting it back.

Likewise if an employer over-pays one its employees - no trouble getting it back.

Likewise where the government have overpaid benefits, they have been able to get some of it back.

So why do the banks take a different approach for it non-commercial customers?

I agree that it is not right to just reverse the transaction on the payee's say so, but it must be pretty simple to bring both parties into arbitration.

Cheers,

Nigel

EXACTLY my thinking...... Still, as LFC_SL pointed out, we dont know the facts of the case, only the womans side of the story.

RPupkin · 12-09-2009, 4:49 PM

It would be mighty tempting, but being able to to see it's from a personal account (I assume you would be able to) my conscious would get the better of me and I would hand it back. Although a little tip for being so ruddy nice would be more than welcomed.

Rapid 17 · 12-09-2009, 4:50 PM

I would pay it back.

Geoff.

shahedz · 12-09-2009, 5:46 PM

simple, I would hand it back.

Rorifett · 12-09-2009, 5:49 PM

I'd like to say I'd hand it back but depending on my circumstances at the time...

I mean, I wouldn't ever spend it on something frivolous but if I had the wolves past the front door and in my hallway at the time I might be inclined to spend it at the time and think about giving it back later. Don't think I could ever spend it conscience free and never think about returning it.

As for handing cash in when found in the street, my sister found £2k one time and handed it in and was rewarded with 10% straight away and was told if it wasn't claimed in a time period (6 months I think) then she would get the rest.

ChrisNic · 12-09-2009, 5:49 PM

If that 2k made the difference between loosing my house or not, im not sure paying it back would be so easy....

shahedz · 12-09-2009, 5:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisNic

If that 2k made the difference between loosing my house or not, im not sure paying it back would be so easy....

What if it meant it made the difference between losing the actual owner of the money or not. I can't believe people would consider keeping it.

Rorifett · 12-09-2009, 5:52 PM

If it meant that much they shouldn't be so stupid to lose it by 'clicking the wrong box'...

shahedz · 12-09-2009, 5:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rorifett

If it meant that much they shouldn't be so stupid to lose it by 'clicking the wrong box'...

It's a mistake. Hardly makes someone stupid for doing it. If that's how you would justify stealing so be it.

Rorifett · 12-09-2009, 5:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shahedz

It's a mistake. Hardly makes someone stupid for doing it. If that's how you would justify stealing so be it.

blah blah blah... I've never been so stupid to make a mistake with £200 when transferring my money anywhere so I'm sure I'd double-check the transaction before I confirmed it. As I'm sure most people would. If you can't read things on screen with any degree of accuracy maybe you should go into the branch direct and get someone there to do it?

Phil57 · 12-09-2009, 6:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rorifett

blah blah blah... I've never been so stupid to make a mistake with £200 when transferring my money anywhere so I'm sure I'd double-check the transaction before I confirmed it. As I'm sure most people would. If you can't read things on screen with any degree of accuracy maybe you should go into the branch direct and get someone there to do it?

Mr perfect I presume?

Rorifett · 12-09-2009, 6:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil57

Mr perfect I presume?

You knows it

*EDIT*

Just before everyone jumps on my case - I think it is quite clear to anyone that actually read my posts that I am not perfect and would, if circumstances were such, go against my morals and not do the 'perfect' action.

johnny-17 · 12-09-2009, 6:40 PM

I wouldn't be comfortable at all if I kept it.
Whilst I'm not rich, £2000 would not change my life and making a profit from someone else's mistake would't make me happy either.

I recently had the privilege of having a learner driver run into my car and afterwards, everyone I spoke to advised me to put in a claim even though I suffered no injury

Sign of the times and all that.....

JagoPlasma · 12-09-2009, 7:03 PM

i understand that the banks will have difficulty in getting the money back as they cant take money out without the owners consent, however the bank shold be able to send that person a bill for the full amount. saying that they can take money out of our account for their mistakes so aslong as she can prove the payment happened and didnt recieve any goods then they should progress it.

i hate this culture of screw over the good while the bad profit. maybe we should all just turn bad? it's obv what the gov want us to be like otherwise they wouldnt make it profitable and protect them

dan1979 · 12-09-2009, 7:45 PM

I don't really get this story. The recipient has been notified of the error so can't claim they didn't know. Surely it should then be a simple case of this lady pursuing legal action - the police can get the information from the bank if they want to and contact the thief.

CavalryMaster · 12-09-2009, 8:13 PM

WoW!.. Hope I was the one who recieved it.. lol

Phil57 · 12-09-2009, 8:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dan1979

I don't really get this story. The recipient has been notified of the error so can't claim they didn't know. Surely it should then be a simple case of this lady pursuing legal action - the police can get the information from the bank if they want to and contact the thief.

Although most likely the recipient does know of the additional £2000 in their bank account, there has been no mention in any of the posts or the BBC report that the recipient has been contacted, only that attempts have been made to contact and that the recipient has not responded.

Please do correct me if I am wrong.

Adam Shaw · 12-09-2009, 8:16 PM

I dont care what anyone else may answer. If it happened to me, its simple, its not my money, and I would pay it back.

There is no need to debate how life changing it might be, etc... If you want money, and have no morals or scruples, go and mug some old folk on pension day.

If you have the slightest understanding of right and wrong, you return this, and say no more about it.

CavalryMaster · 12-09-2009, 8:28 PM

Well said Adam.

nheather · 12-09-2009, 8:39 PM

Apart from being an unpleasent person you would have to be pretty thick not to pay it back.

The lady is having initial issues with the bank but eventually she will get them to listen or take it through the courts. The recipient will be issued with a court summons and if they cannot provide satisfactory evidence of why the money was received he\she will lose, have to pay back the money and court costs. This is also a good chance that his\her name will become public so that everyone can see what a lowlife he\she is.

Cheers,

Nigel

dan1979 · 12-09-2009, 9:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil57

there has been no mention in any of the posts or the BBC report that the recipient has been contacted, only that attempts have been made to contact and that the recipient has not responded.

To get to this level of coverage it's been going on for a very long time (this is certainly the case based on the tv coverage the bbc had on this morning). It would have taken all of two seconds to track down the account holder once the sending bank contacted the recipient bank.

Unless the account has fallen out of usage then the holder will have received correspondence alerting them to it. Even if they hadn't they would have had a statement by now sovhave a duty to report an error on their account. Unless they could reasonably not notice it (i.e. they get loads of similar transfers in) they're already in the wrong.

darkcloud2011 · 12-09-2009, 9:42 PM

This money should have been returned without fail.

Its on the news now that's how I found out.