Bank error caused by another account holder

Ivrytwr3

Actually there is no legal redress for her to pay it back. If the other person has confirmed the payment to your friends account it is up to your friends integrity to pay it back. See here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8251679.stm

dzug1

Ivrytwr3 wrote: »

Actually there is no legal redress for her to pay it back. If the other person has confirmed the payment to your friends account it is up to your friends integrity to pay it back. See here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8251679.stm

The article is wrong - or rather incomplete.

There is legal redress - it's just that it's too cumbersome and expensive to apply for smallish sums.

It needs a court order (fairly high fee) on the bank to release the name of the customer, and then going to the small claims court.

Troubled_Joe

Ivrytwr3 wrote: »

Actually there is no legal redress for her to pay it back. If the other person has confirmed the payment to your friends account it is up to your friends integrity to pay it back. See here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8251679.stm

It's a payment under a mistake of fact and is wholly recoverable.

Ivrytwr3

I disagree. Only the other week i made the same mistake myself, fortunately i had made a payment to a "holding" account.

I confirmed a payment of £84 via internet banking to Halifax, only i did not enter the sort code or account number (DOH!!!).

I contacted my bank who, in a nice letter a week later!, informed me that as i had confirmed the payment i would have to contact the receipient myself; they were powerless to assist.

I contacted Hal;ifax who immediately refunded the money. However, if the money had gone to an individual, there was no way they would have released that persons details to me as stated by HSBC and Halifax themsleves.

savagej

BM, you are wrong about charging a fee. If you make a mistake and dont have enough money to pay a DD or SO, or anything else you will get charged for your error. If someone else makes an error there is nothing to stop you deducting a fee for the problems this has caused you, as long as it is not unfair in relation to your time and effort in sorting it out. There is nothing the bank can do about it or the person who paid in the money.

Troubled_Joe

I'm not saying it's an easy process to find someone (although arguably you could rely on section 35(2) of the Data Protection Act). I'm saying that a court would order repayment of the money.

Lokolo

BarclaysManager wrote: »

This is terrible advice.

The bank has not necessarily made an error, and this lady has no right to levy a fee (against the bank or this gentleman) regardless. You can't just decide to bill someone.

This is ultimately another case of someone being frivolous with their money and having such a loose hand as to not realize they had £500 too much in their account.

Remember, this is her bank. They could just debit her the £500, or the £25 if she tried that.

Remember, there is the slight legal issue here. There's enough precedent on this to show a judgment WILL get her details from the bank, and a court WILL order her to re-pay the £500 to him.

She needs to work on alternative solutions, i.e. borrowing it from a family member, etc.

Why not?

Car insurance companies do it. I want to change my address. Here, have a £35 admin charge, plus a charge to your account as you are moving to a crapper area.

Also, I took the £25 idea off someone else who said it on a thread last week

And as I recall, the bank can't just take the £500 off because its not their money to take? Its the genetlemans, so the genetleman has to take it, not the bank. And for the man (I got bored of saying genetleman :rotfl:) to take it surely he must go to court first?

So the bank can't decide anything at this point. They can't take the £500. They can't say no to the £25 charge.

jamesd

Skanked, she should send the following to the bank:

---

1. Kindly refer to Issue 33 of Ombudsman News to read the views of the FOS on this matter, specifically the rejected complaint in case study 33/1 where even though the complaint was rejected, the ombudsman ruled that "because the firm had been responsible for the mistake, we said it should allow him to pay it back in interest-free instalments". That and the associated material at http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/33/credits-33.htm illustrate what is expected in this matter.

2. I have already made an offer to pay the money in reasonable instalments, even though I honestly believed the money was mine to spend and could argue that my position has changed and that repayment is not required.

3. While I have sympathy for your concerns and those of the other customer, these reasonable payments of £100 per month until £500 has been paid are the best result they can reasonably hope to obtain from me in this case. If they are unhappy, I suggest that you make them aware of the rulings of the FOS on this matter so that they are aware that you have done all that can reasonably done to resolve the matter for them.

4. Alternatively, should they wish to bear the cost, and should the bank wish to offer the facility, I offer to immediately repay the sum of £500 less the total cost of credit if the bank wishes to lend me the funds to make this earlier payment and make repayments of £100 a month for five months. That is: I'll borrow it, but the party who made the mistake must bear the total cost of this method of getting the money more quickly.

Please let me know which of the options they wish to pursue. If there's no further contact or acceptance of either offer, please take this as my instruction to set up a standing order of £100 per month from my account on the _insert day_ of the month by standing order for five months to pay them this money. Using one of your accounts to conceal their personal information is an acceptable alternative if so desired.

---

They won't like it but it's entirely obvious from this that she will take the matter to the FOS if they do not handle this reasonably. Don't threaten it, or even hint at it beyond using it as an example, since she should appear helpful and reasonable subject to the constraints of her means.

The cost to them of the FOS complaint will more than cover the cost of a 0% loan and they might choose to offer that as a way to satisfy the other person and get them back the full £500. Don't suggest this to them. Let them come up with the idea if they want to.

Troubled_Joe

Lokolo wrote: »

Why not?

Car insurance companies do it. I want to change my address. Here, have a £35 admin charge, plus a charge to your account as you are moving to a crapper area.

Because there's no contractual relationship to allow you to, unlike an insurance firm whose terms and conditions we all agree to.

Nice idea though.

dzug1

savagej wrote: »

BM, you are wrong about charging a fee. If you make a mistake and dont have enough money to pay a DD or SO, or anything else you will get charged for your error. If someone else makes an error there is nothing to stop you deducting a fee for the problems this has caused you, as long as it is not unfair in relation to your time and effort in sorting it out. There is nothing the bank can do about it or the person who paid in the money.

That fee is charged under the T&C of the company you have dealings with. It comes under contract law.

You do not have a contract with the person who may be about to steal the money from you by refusing to pay it back. You have no basis to charge a fee.