Received my salary twice?

eskbanker

IanManc wrote: »

Rather than asking for people to prove a negative, do you know of any legal entitlement for someone to take money which they know does not belong to them and pay it into their own savings account, knowing that it is not theirs?

Clue: there isn't any such legal entitlement.

The money doesn't belong to the OP. She has the same legal entitlement to move it into her savings account as she has to spend it, i.e. none.

You're the one asserting that OP has acted illegally, so I'm just asking if you have any basis on which to make that comment?

It's not you that's being asked to prove a negative but in common sense terms it's clear that OP obviously knows it's not her own money and is more than prepared to return it, so I can't see why temporarily keeping it safe from her day-to-day spending money should be construed as theft, but happy to be corrected if there is something specific that would implicate her somehow?

Silvertabby

“ Rather than asking for people to prove a negative, do you know of any legal entitlement for someone to take money which they know does not belong to them and pay it into their own savings account, knowing that it is not theirs?

Clue: there isn't any such legal entitlement.

The money doesn't belong to the OP. She has the same legal entitlement to move it into her savings account as she has to spend it, i.e. none.
Originally posted by IanManc ”

OP has asked both bank and employer would they take money back..both have declined.

Really not much else they can do other than keep it safe for when someone decides they want it back...sounds a sensible thing to do. Posted by Samsung

Nearly 20 years ago Mr S received a £500 tax refund (paid via salary) that I knew he wasn't entitled to. He rang the taxman but was fobbed off with ' we're right'.

We put the money into his ISA. HMRC still haven't asked for it back.

eskbanker

IanManc wrote: »

to move the money to her own savings account is something she is entitled to do

Thank you, I knew you'd come round to my way of thinking!

IanManc wrote: »

You say " it's clear that OP obviously knows it's not her own money" so how can it possibly be sensible, justifiable or otherwise right for her to pay money that she knows isn't hers into her savings? It simply isn't.

I can't speak for OP so was speculating as to her motives but in her situation I'd do the same, purely to earn a bit of interest while looking after the money for its rightful owner.

IanManc wrote: »

Doing the sort of thing that the OP has done in taking the money and paying it into her own savings is exactly the sort of course of conduct that gets honest, innocent people accused of dishonesty, because the money isn't hers, it isn't her savings, and she had no right to put it in her savings account.

I'm not sure it's appropriate to characterise this with words like 'taking' and 'paying', as these have unnecessarily negative connotations for this scenario. OP has transferred the money to a savings account linked to the current account (i.e. with the same institution) so it's not as if she's stashed it in some secret Swiss account!

IanManc wrote: »

I've been a solicitor for 29 years, practising in criminal law and specialising in fraud.

....in which case I bow to your superior knowledge of this area (that's not meant sarcastically btw!) but still find it disappointing that you're unable or unwilling to cite specific sources to substantiate your assertions.

MoneySavingNovice

IanManc wrote: »

....What she is entitled to is to have the money removed from her main account and returned to the person who owns it........

The banks will not reverse a transaction. The process is for the bank to contact the recipient and request return of the money. Once permission is given to then bank, the bank will then commence a process to return the money to its origin.

Regarding that discussion on theft, the 1968 Theft Act says "A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the other of it".It goes on to say "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."

I would argue that the OP has taken reasonable steps to return the money by a) Contacting her bank and b) Contacting her employer - as the most likely source of these funds.

If the OP is asked to return the money by the bank and fails to do so then there is a possibility that she would be guilty of theft.

BJV

Chapuys wrote: »

Technically, once you realise there has been a payment into your account in error you must contact the bank/payor or could be charged with 'Retaining wrongful credit' under the Theft Act 1968 by not informing them.

A person is guilty of this offence if
1) a wrongful credit has been made to an account kept by him or in respect of which he has any right or interest;
2) he knows or believes that the credit is wrongful; and he dishonestly fails to take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances to secure that the credit is cancelled.

The Op has taken every step to make sure that this would not apply.

She has moved the money to safeguard it ( does not say she can not ) and has already informed the bank and her employer.

OP leave it where it is and wait. Someone will realize the mistake and ask you for it. I honestly do not think that the bank or your employer will give two monkeys that you moved the money to keep it safe. They will just want it back. As long as you can give it back when they request it ???? what is the problem.

Superscrooge

LaurenC wrote: »

I usually get paid on 25th of every month. This month, I was paid on 23rd June due to 25th falling on a Sunday. However, I was also paid again yesterday (Monday 26th) for the same/usual amount.

I am under no illusion that I will get to keep the extra money, so I reported it to my payroll department who have now investigated and confirmed they did not pay me twice. I rang my bank and they have told me that it wasn't their error either.

What should I do? I don't want to go back to either party in case they just take the money and the other then comes asking for it at a later date. I have moved it out of my main account and into my online saver (linked to same account) so should I just leave it there until I hear something? Thanks in advance for the advice!

Your story reminded me of a similar over-payment experience I had which took nearly four months to sort out, so don't assume a fast conclusion!

Salaries were always paid on 16th of each month and pensions on 1st of each month.

The month after retirement I received my first pension payment as expected on 1st. But then I also received my full monthly pay on 16th. I phoned payroll to let them know I was retired and shouldn't still be receiving my salary. They promised to investigate and get back to me, which they never did.

The following month I again received my pension on the 1st and my full pre-retirement monthly salary on 16th. I phoned payroll again, who looked at my personal record and confirmed I was recorded as retired and receiving a pension and I was definitely not still being paid a salary. The person I spoke to even suggested I must be getting confused and looking at previous months on my bank statement!!

So my attitude then was 'Sod it' I've done all I can. I knew I would eventually have to refund the over-payments but in the meantime I transferred the cash to my Santander 123 account (paying 3% interest at the time).

Third month same thing happened. Pension received on 1st of month and salary received on 16th. But then the following week I received a letter stating they had identified the over-payments and demanding repayment, which I subsequently repaid.

So despite me trying to let them know. The wheels of progress still turned slowly and it took almost four months to resolve.

eskbanker

IanManc wrote: »

Why aren't you asking people who say that putting someone else's money into your savings is the "right thing" being asked for sources for their assertions?

Starting from the situation that OP had already moved the money it seems to me that those who were approving of this were doing so from the perspective of keeping it safely ring-fenced ready for later return, i.e. the 'right thing' as in something that sounds sensible and practical rather than necessarily the most legally correct, whereas you introduced the subject of legalities (understandably so given your later disclosure!) which bring more of a burden of proof.

Anyway, as you say this has probably run its course - perhaps OP will return to explain her motives for transferring the money but you do seem to accept that there is no apparent dishonesty, which is what makes any appropriation problematic, so the point does seem somewhat moot!

Sea_Shell

I'd wait and see if you get paid at the end of July!!!!!

Pigmyhippo

eskbanker wrote: »

Starting from the situation that OP had already moved the money it seems to me that those who were approving of this were doing so from the perspective of keeping it safely ring-fenced ready for later return, i.e. the 'right thing' as in something that sounds sensible and practical rather than necessarily the most legally correct, whereas you introduced the subject of legalities (understandably so given your later disclosure!) which bring more of a burden of proof.

Anyway, as you say this has probably run its course - perhaps OP will return to explain her motives for transferring the money but you do seem to accept that there is no apparent dishonesty, which is what makes any appropriation problematic, so the point does seem somewhat moot!

I'd love to see anyone prove that the money that was moved did not belong to the OP. I can just imagine the interview now;
Police 'So OP we assert that you received 2 payments of £1500 and knowing that one of the payments was incorrect transferred one of those payments to a savings account. Is that correct?'
OP 'Yes that is correct I transferred £1500 of my then £3000 balance to my savings account'
Police 'Erm, OK, well we say that the £1500 you transferred wasn't actually £1500 that you knew was yours, and was instead £1500 that you knew wasn't yours'
OP 'No, I transferred the £1500 that was mine and left the £1500 I knew wasn't mine in the original account.'
Police 'You're free to go'

agrinnall

Pigmyhippo wrote: »

I'd love to see anyone prove that the money that was moved did not belong to the OP. I can just imagine the interview now;
Police 'So OP we assert that you received 2 payments of £1500 and knowing that one of the payments was incorrect transferred one of those payments to a savings account. Is that correct?'
OP 'Yes that is correct I transferred £1500 of my then £3000 balance to my savings account'
Police 'Erm, OK, well we say that the £1500 you transferred wasn't actually £1500 that you knew was yours, and was instead £1500 that you knew wasn't yours'
OP 'No, I transferred the £1500 that was mine and left the £1500 I knew wasn't mine in the original account.'
Police 'You're free to go'

Columbo: "There's just one more thing. If you knew the £1500 in the original account didn't belong to you, why have you spent it?"

OP: "It's a fair cop guv, guilty as charged."