Misrepresentation to access funds

concerned43

BooJewels said:

concerned43 said:

BooJewels said:

Ah I see @concerned43 - that's not going to help you then, sorry.  As was mentioned quite early on, I think your issue is with the bank - if they have published policies on their practices for given scenarios, then they really should follow those practices.  I think you'd need to make a formal complaint, allow it 8 weeks to be resolved and if not, you can then take it to the Financial Ombudsman.  But you might be able to ring the FOS initially to take guidance - whilst it's a good few years ago now, I did that over a bank complaint and they guided me on how to frame my complaint and I did indeed get the outcome I was after, without needing to go back to them.  But that's not going to be a speedy resolution for you.

I did make a formal complaint. To be fair they have been totally transparent with me. My brother signed a release form stating that he was acting on behalf of the family. The virgin money teller did not do their job properly and ignored or did not read the instructions on the system that the funds have not to be paid out and await further instructions from estate solicitor. So they have admitted fault. The issue is that the money has been paid out and so far have not been able to get it back. I am facing the time and cost of a court action due to the bank's incompetence. 

If the bank made an error and admit to it, they need to do something to put it right - telling you to seek legal advice or recourse elsewhere is not the solution.  If you've already started a complaint, it might be worth speaking to the Ombudsman to see what potential recourse you might have with the bank - there is a banking code of practice they have to work to - think this is it: https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/BCOBS.pdf  when I had my problem with a bank, the Ombudsman pointed me to the specific clause in the code to form my argument.

These matters are usually set up to put you back into the position you were in before the problem occurred, so as you now have a funeral debt that you're being chased for, they've put you into a difficult personal position which may have implications to you longer term too.

It is a nightmare. I do have an update. The bank has written to me and have upheld my complaint and offered £250 compensation. They also state that if I cannot get the money back from my brother they will put in a request to recall the funds which can take up to 30 days. My solicitor is now writing again to my brother as he has not responded to the first letter. I've informed my solicitor and will wait to get his response, but all of this is costing the estate money. 

BooJewels

Thanks for the update.  Sounds like progress of sorts, but perhaps doesn't quite go far enough.

Is your brother just stealing the money for himself, or does he feel he should be the one administering it and is trying to take over your role?  I'm sure if he's just helping himself to it, then the bank are unlikely to have much luck, as he'd surely just move it elsewhere - and certainly within the timescales involved - they might have had a chance if they'd acted straight away.

I wish you luck - it never ceases to amaze me how bereavements make people behave so strangely - it certainly brings out the very worst in some parties.

concerned43

BooJewels said:

Thanks for the update.  Sounds like progress of sorts, but perhaps doesn't quite go far enough.

Is your brother just stealing the money for himself, or does he feel he should be the one administering it and is trying to take over your role?  I'm sure if he's just helping himself to it, then the bank are unlikely to have much luck, as he'd surely just move it elsewhere - and certainly within the timescales involved - they might have had a chance if they'd acted straight away.

I wish you luck - it never ceases to amaze me how bereavements make people behave so strangely - it certainly brings out the very worst in some parties.

I told my siblings that I would be handling the finances as per my mother's wishes (all documented) it was obvious to me that they were unhappy with that. They ransacked my mother's house the day after I informed them of my intention. Thereafter they accused me of fraud, it got so bad that I had to get my lawyer to write to them with a no contact order and stated categorically that no fraud had taken place. Then I received a letter from another sibling stating that they were now going to take charge of the estate and that I won't be receiving any money. I had already signed a contract with the funeral director and therefore had to ensure that I was protected in relation to that debt by seeking executor over the estate. Their motive is one of greed and entitlement, which is staggering as they did nothing for my mother and all caring fell to me.
I imagine all the money has been distributed between them and it will take court action to retrieve it. I am hoping that the cost of this will fall on them rather than the estate as I do want to see all bills paid and hopefully nothing left for them. 

elsien

I think you need to consider asking the bank what  they will do if they try to recall the funds but the money has been moved and isn’t there to recall any more?That shouldn’t  let them off the hook given it’s their mistake, but it’s an angle they might try. 

concerned43

elsien said:

I think you need to consider asking the bank what  they will do if they try to recall the funds but the money has been moved and isn’t there to recall any more?That shouldn’t  let them off the hook given it’s their mistake, but it’s an angle they might try. 

There's no way I'm accepting their offer. I want the money back to pay the funeral with no cost to myself or the estate in getting that money. 

concerned43

elsien said:

I think you need to consider asking the bank what  they will do if they try to recall the funds but the money has been moved and isn’t there to recall any more?That shouldn’t  let them off the hook given it’s their mistake, but it’s an angle they might try. 

On your suggestion I did call the bank and ask them what would happen if they couldn't retrieve the funds. They told me someone would call me back - they didn't
Two days later I got the same letter in the post as the first but this time with a leaflet on the financial ombudsman. So stalemate. Brother has ignored 2nd letter from solicitor so now having to sue in court. 

Malthusian

concerned43 said:

Two days later I got the same letter in the post as the first but this time with a leaflet on the financial ombudsman. So stalemate. 

Nope. Stalemate is when the player on turn has no legal moves. Your next move is to go to the Ombudsman, setting out that the bank has lost the accountholder's money and is refusing to reimburse them.
The bank still owes the estate the balance of the account; that liability is not discharged by paying it to random people who turn up and ask for it. Same as if they had fallen for an identity fraud or a cloned credit card. The fund recall process and pursuing the brother is the bank's problem and nothing to do with you.

concerned43

Malthusian said:

concerned43 said:

Two days later I got the same letter in the post as the first but this time with a leaflet on the financial ombudsman. So stalemate. 

Nope. Stalemate is when the player on turn has no legal moves. Your next move is to go to the Ombudsman, setting out that the bank has lost the accountholder's money and is refusing to reimburse them.
The bank still owes the estate the balance of the account; that liability is not discharged by paying it to random people who turn up and ask for it. Same as if they had fallen for an identity fraud or a cloned credit card. The fund recall process and pursuing the brother is the bank's problem and nothing to do with you.

I have now submitted a complaint to the financial ombudsman.

p00hsticks

Malthusian said:

concerned43 said:

Two days later I got the same letter in the post as the first but this time with a leaflet on the financial ombudsman. So stalemate. 

The bank still owes the estate the balance of the account; that liability is not discharged by paying it to random people who turn up and ask for it. Same as if they had fallen for an identity fraud or a cloned credit card. 

Whilst I agree with the general gist of the post, I think it's stretching it a bit to compare a child of the deceased who presumably supplied the bank with acceptable evidence of that fact with a 'random person'.

I'm also not convinced that it's appropriate to liken this to a case of identity fraud or a cloned credit card. 

Malthusian

p00hsticks said: 

Whilst I agree with the general gist of the post, I think it's stretching it a bit to compare a child of the deceased who presumably supplied the bank with acceptable evidence of that fact with a 'random person'.

The OP is the estate's executor and the person with legal authority over the deceased's account. Anyone else = some random dude, regardless of DNA. Beneficiaries of a testate estate do not have any legal right to access estate funds, they have to let the executor do their job and wait for their share.
If banks want to pay out money to random people who claim they have a right to it then it's a free country, but they are responsible when it goes wrong, not the accountholder. 

I'm also not convinced that it's appropriate to liken this to a case of identity fraud or a cloned credit card. 

In one case the bank pays their accountholder's money to someone who isn't the accountholder. In the other case the bank pays their accountholder's money to someone who isn't the accountholder.

In neither case can the bank say "well, we already paid out your money so you'll just have to go find the person who took it, thank you, come again". (Unless the accountholder was negligent.)