Inheritance paid to the wrong person. Now demanding money back! Help!!!

melanzana

nannytone wrote: »

just a thought ...
she must have been in contact with the solicitor prior to the payment as they would have needed the bank details.

Agree fully with this.

A clerical error would have meant the money going nowhere!

missapril75

evenasus wrote: »

I doubt very much that would be accepted as an excuse.
She will have to pay the money back.

I don't think it's so much an excuse, more of a legal principle long accepted.

A few years ago, my employer overpaid my wages. When the OP came to light they wanted it back, by which time I no longer had it.

Furthermore they had reduced the amount overpaid by not paying me some monies I was due.

All advice I received, including from my union was the best I could hope for was a low repayment rate.

I wrote saying I had taken reasonable steps to check the money was due to me and questioned how I could be expected to do more when they had trained salary admin staff doing this work, aided by computers.

Not only did they accept the good faith argument and write off the overpayment, they paid up the money held back.

You really can't definitively say things like "She will have to pay the money back" with so few facts available.

NYM wrote: »

How can they prove they made such a call ?
How did they find out the details of the Solicitors that made the payment?

Too many loose ends here ....

That's another issue. I imagine a letter would have been issued that would identify who to contact.

Of course it might also identify a deceased stranger completely unknown to the recipient.

NYM

That's another issue. I imagine a letter would have been issued that would identify who to contact.

Because of Data protection laws, the Solicitors would not have been able to get the details of the recipient nor would the recipient have been able to get the details of the Solicitors.

It is possible the recipient would have been advised about the misapplied funds through their Bank contacting them once the Solicitors bank had been asked to investigate the transfer. Even then, no third party details would be disclosed.

The only logical explanation I can think of would be that the Solicitors mistakenly advised the OP's friend that she was due to inherit and then made payment to her after she gave them her account details.

*edit* :think: nope, that can't have been the way it happened, because the money arrived in her account first and then she apparently queried it.

missapril75

NYM wrote: »

The only logical explanation I can think of would be that the Solicitors mistakenly advised the OP's friend that she was due to inherit and then made payment to her after she gave them her account details.

*edit* :think: nope, that can't have been the way it happened, because the money arrived in her account first and then she apparently queried it.

That (first bit) was what I was getting at. Remembering that this is coming second hand I'm wondering if the letter did come first but the friend didn't think much of it when answered. Just expecting a modest amount.

Rather than the money itself coming out of the blue leading to the first contact, I'm thinking it was the sum that was the surprise and it was that which prompted the enquiry.

So when it was mentioned to the OP, maybe it came across as receipt of the money led to the query when it was really the size of the deposit that led to (further) contact.

DUTR

Dragon83 wrote: »

This is probably in the wrong section of the forum, but I'm unsure where to post it. I have a friend who is married with a baby, last year she had around £6000 put in her bank account by some solicitors in Scotland. When she queried it, she was told it was inheritance and it was definitely hers. They were expecting a baby and both on low income, so she spent it. A few months ago she started receiving letters saying there had infact been a mistake, and she has to pay the money back or she'll be taken to court. She did see a solicitor who advised her to either file bankruptcy, which she cannot do as she would have to provide evidence of her outgoings and the bills go out of her partner's account. They told her if it goes to court she will only have to pay back £10 a month, however, as the court is in Scotland, she feels she can't afford to go and has now resigned herself to trying to pay it back. They are a low income family with a young child and she can't sleep through the stress and worry of it all. It seems very unfair to me that they gave her this money, and she even queried it and they now have to struggle because of somebody else's mistake. Does anyone know where she stands legally? For instance if she just ignores it and doesn't show up to court, are they likely to rule in her absence for £10 a month, or will she be stuck with court fees? Do bailiff's have any power with is or not as she didn't actually borrow anything? I hate how stressed out they are over this as it isn't really their fault. Any advice welcome. Thank you.

Before you get all excited, even though the sums are different, there is a story not so long back and the recipient ended up with a file against her.

News

Dragon83

Thank you, that's helpful. As I said I really only have the bare bones of the story, therefore, I'm going to have to sit down with her and go through the finer details and read through all of the letters she's been sent so far. From what I've been told, after she queried it and had it confirmed, they really did think 'well, it must just be our lucky day'. They have been desperately trying to sell things, to raise some money to aid in paying it back and aren't dishonest people. They are however, both perhaps a bit young and naive. The lady in question is only 21 and doesn't know the first thing about her legal rights. I feel the solicitor's have failed in their duty of care, both to her and their client and should be responsible for some of the burden here.

jackyann

Very good of you to be helping her.
I do, sadly, think she has been naive. The idea of suddenly getting a windfall inheritance from someone she didn't know is the stuff of Victorian novels and chat magazines. She appears not to have realised that it is unlikely in real life
I do also wonder who she queried it with and what their exact words were. It sounds as if she doesn't have any confirmation in writing.
Good luck with this, and please let us know the outcome.

Dragon83

I certainly will. I will more than likely have more information and therefore questions in a day or two. It's worth mentioning that they definitely did not spend the money on designer handbags and the like. They spent it on a much needed used car, home improvements and all of the things they needed for the arrival of their baby. I agree they have been very naive in this, hopefully I can help them find a solution that will somewhat satisfy all involved.

densol_2

jackyann wrote: »

Very good of you to be helping her.
I do, sadly, think she has been naive. The idea of suddenly getting a windfall inheritance from someone she didn't know is the stuff of Victorian novels and chat magazines. She appears not to have realised that it is unlikely in real life
I do also wonder who she queried it with and what their exact words were. It sounds as if she doesn't have any confirmation in writing.
Good luck with this, and please let us know the outcome.

Not true - I got a call last week - yet another one of my dear departed dad's relatives have died intestate and we are due some money. We received a few thousand in 2011 as well - via TV people Heir hunters and now due a few thousand again

Two issues here -

Retaining unlawful credit - Defo not - she checked and was told money hers ( criminal burden of proof - can't see this being prosecuted at all )

Liable to repay - yes as mistake but term dictated by a court unless payment schedule can be agreed

Voyager2002

One minor detail: if the matter were to go to court, your friend could apply for the case to be transferred to her local court, rather than needing to go all the way to Scotland.