some adice please regarding the police.

Gordon_Hose

Why not change bank accounts? Maybe he got a better deal with the new account... a 10% off Subway voucher?

Nick_C

My understanding is that if someone accidentally transfers money into your account and you refuse to pay it back, then that is a crime (theft).

The original thread suggested the money went into a dormant account that was overdrawn, so there was no money in that account to pay back. Nevertheless, if the debt (overdraft) was due to the bank, then the account holder would have benefited from the accidental payment as it reduced their debt.

The Police are reluctant to deal with crime these days. Our Managing Agent was stealing from us and several other blocks of flats. The Police don't want to get involved.

Azari

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

Why not change bank accounts?

It's not that you shouldn't change, it's the way the post was written that seemed to imply that changing your bank account and having a child was the natural and expected reaction to changing your job.

Maybe he got a better deal with the new account... a 10% off Subway voucher?

:rotfl:

Gordon_Hose

Azari wrote: »

It's not that you shouldn't change, it's the way the post was written that seemed to imply that changing your bank account and having a child was the natural and expected reaction to changing your job.

You mean it isn't? :eek:

George_Michael

Gordon_Hose wrote: »

But the money was paid into a closed account, the OP couldn't pay it back if they wanted to.

Not totally convinced this even happened.

The account hadn't been closed.
The op stated that they thought it had been closed but they were mistaken.

WTFH

Maybe today we'll get more of the story!
Facts so far:
1. They were paid £200 that they weren't due
2. It went into a bank account that they weren't using (was it unused or closed)?
3. They didn't know about the money.
4. Even though they didn't know about the money, they no longer have it.
5. They were told to set up an arrangement for payment.
6. They claim to have written a letter, but have no proof the letter was written or received.
7. They made no other attempt to contact the company who wanted their money.

Hold on a minute, back to point 4...
If they weren't aware of the money being paid in, because they didn't use the account any more, then why is the money not still in that account?
And then point 5 - if the police come round saying you're going to go to jail if you don't pay up, then surely that would encourage you to do more than just write a letter? I'd probably start off by phoning the company. I want to make sure the cops aren't going to call round again. I'm certainly not going to sit back and forget about it.


Too many bits of missing information, or just misinformation.

George_Michael

WTFH wrote: »

Hold on a minute, back to point 4...
If they weren't aware of the money being paid in, because they didn't use the account any more, then why is the money not still in that account?

The op stated that the account was left with a negative balance of 2p when they stopped using it and that because of this, the account was racking up overdraft charges. (Seems strange for 2p, but with banks nowadays, who knows).
Over the 1 year before the £200 was paid it, these accumulated charges may well have exceeded the £200 deposit.

Azari

WTFH wrote: »

If they weren't aware of the money being paid in, because they didn't use the account any more, then why is the money not still in that account?

The OP wants us to believe that a 2p overdraft somehow caused at least £200.02 of interest and charges as he says the money is gone.

I suppose it's not completely beyond the bounds of possibility but, combined with all the other whacky details ...

virgo149

Can I just make a small comment, as a retired police officer so having a small amount of knowledge on the subject.

On the balance of the 'facts' that were supplied in the original post and if this is is all there is too it, the police would in all probability consider this to be a civil matter in the first instance and would not get involved.

If he had been required to attend the police station for questioning regarding a matter, they would have either

a) arrested him on suspicion of committing a criminal offence there and then or

b) given him a firm appointment time to attend at the police station to answer questions in relation to an alleged offence (this is not unheard of and I have actually done it myself in the past for minor things that don't warrant all the paper work that goes with arresting someone).

I can guarantee that police officers do not put the frighteners on people by threatening them with arrest for a civil matter - their jobs are worth far too much for that.

So, if the OP is telling the truth, then they are missing some very crucial facts.

EDIT: Just re-read the initial post. I guess we will find out after the event on Friday what is going on as I presume from OP's other post they are planning to attend. You will either be arrested on attending or be interviewed under caution. This will mean you are not under arrest, you are entitled to legal advice and are free to leave at any time (but of course if you do this, you might then be arrested!). Please do update us but I still maintain either you have left some facts out or they have a surprise or two for you in store.........

WTFH

Just went back for a re-read...

tippy1toppy wrote: »

Around 1.5 years ago I was working on behalf of an agency, and did do for arround 6 months and everything was fine.

So, the job started 2 years ago and lasted 6 months? Is that right, or did it start 18 months ago and last 6 months? (I think it’s 2 years ago, based on your other posts)
Started work 01/10/11, finished 31/03/12 (at a guess)

tippy1toppy wrote: »

Rewind about 6 months,

Now are we talking 6 months ago, i.e. 1 year after you finished the job?
First police contact 31/03/13

tippy1toppy wrote: »

the company had paid me £200 sometime last year.

tippy1toppy wrote: »

They paid it into an account 6 months after I left the company.

Payment made around 01/10/12

tippy1toppy wrote: »

the police arrived 6 months after the company paid me.

That would tie in with the date above.

tippy1toppy wrote: »

i was paid it into a old bank account which i thought i closed, and ive not even taken the money and spent it!

So, you had a 2p overdraft in a bank account for a maximum of 6 months, and the charge for that was £200?

tippy1toppy wrote: »

I am not denying that it did go into one of my old bank accounts... but I was never contacted by the firm. Just 6 months later the police arrive at my door.

Is it possible that you were “never contacted by the firm” because the address they had for you was the old address and then when they went to your bank, the bank account was at the old address and they had no way of getting in contact with you?
When did you stop using the bank account?
When exactly did you move house?
How did you prove the account was inactive? (you say you have evidence)
If you had made a phone call to the company six months ago it would probably have sorted the whole thing out.