Clear Bank not complying with third party debt order

tightauldgit

Okell said:

tightauldgit said:

Jmoo said:

So I've managed to speak to their legal department. 

Apparently Tidal are the ones with the account, so you were right. But Clear Bank say because the TPDO is Bill Smith t/a Bill Smith Trading and the account is Bill Smith Trading and registered to his partner they won't release the funds as they say they have no record of Bill Smith. 

Not sure where to go from there... 

So he's a sole trader but he's opened a business account in his wife's name? I didn't think you could do that as a sole trader to be honest. I'm not sure how you would go about unravelling that but it sounds highly improper. 

Or rather his wife has opened an account in his trading name...

Could be, but that would not legally be the same business. Two sole traders can have the same trading name but it would still be two separate businesses. You would have though a bank would have done some checks to confirm applicant actually was trading as the business name. 

DullGreyGuy

Okell said:

tightauldgit said:

Jmoo said:

So I've managed to speak to their legal department. 

Apparently Tidal are the ones with the account, so you were right. But Clear Bank say because the TPDO is Bill Smith t/a Bill Smith Trading and the account is Bill Smith Trading and registered to his partner they won't release the funds as they say they have no record of Bill Smith. 

Not sure where to go from there... 

So he's a sole trader but he's opened a business account in his wife's name? I didn't think you could do that as a sole trader to be honest. I'm not sure how you would go about unravelling that but it sounds highly improper. 

Or rather his wife has opened an account in his trading name...

You cannot open account in a trading name, an account has to be held by a legal entity. A trading name can be registered on an account so that they can accept cheques etc in the trading name but the account will always be Joe Bloggs Plumbing Ltd or Joe Bloggs etc depending on the legal trading structure

Okell

tightauldgit said:

Okell said:

tightauldgit said:

Jmoo said:

So I've managed to speak to their legal department. 

Apparently Tidal are the ones with the account, so you were right. But Clear Bank say because the TPDO is Bill Smith t/a Bill Smith Trading and the account is Bill Smith Trading and registered to his partner they won't release the funds as they say they have no record of Bill Smith. 

Not sure where to go from there... 

So he's a sole trader but he's opened a business account in his wife's name? I didn't think you could do that as a sole trader to be honest. I'm not sure how you would go about unravelling that but it sounds highly improper. 

Or rather his wife has opened an account in his trading name...

Could be, but that would not legally be the same business. Two sole traders can have the same trading name but it would still be two separate businesses. You would have though a bank would have done some checks to confirm applicant actually was trading as the business name. 

I know.  I'm agreeing with you that it all sounds highly improper.

But if the bank has "no record" of Bill Smith, it sounds more like his "partner" (and I'm pretty certain it'll be his domestic partner and not a business partner) has opened an account in his business name, rather than that he has opened an account in her name.

I would have hoped that what actually mattered here was the name of the account that the OP paid money to (ie "Bill Smith Trading" - because that's where the money has gone) rather than whose account that was.  But that's pie in the sky...

tightauldgit

Okell said:

tightauldgit said:

Okell said:

tightauldgit said:

Jmoo said:

So I've managed to speak to their legal department. 

Apparently Tidal are the ones with the account, so you were right. But Clear Bank say because the TPDO is Bill Smith t/a Bill Smith Trading and the account is Bill Smith Trading and registered to his partner they won't release the funds as they say they have no record of Bill Smith. 

Not sure where to go from there... 

So he's a sole trader but he's opened a business account in his wife's name? I didn't think you could do that as a sole trader to be honest. I'm not sure how you would go about unravelling that but it sounds highly improper. 

Or rather his wife has opened an account in his trading name...

Could be, but that would not legally be the same business. Two sole traders can have the same trading name but it would still be two separate businesses. You would have though a bank would have done some checks to confirm applicant actually was trading as the business name. 

I know.  I'm agreeing with you that it all sounds highly improper.

But if the bank has "no record" of Bill Smith, it sounds more like his "partner" (and I'm pretty certain it'll be his domestic partner and not a business partner) has opened an account in his business name, rather than that he has opened an account in her name.

I would have hoped that what actually mattered here was the name of the account that the OP paid money to (ie "Bill Smith Trading" - because that's where the money has gone) rather than whose account that was.  But that's pie in the sky...

What matters most is who the contract was with I would think. We've had situations here where people have had contracts with Entity X but been told to pay into Account in Name Y and then had to pursue actions against Entity X. Whether they could alternatively claim against Y i'm not sure but once they have an order in one name or the other then they can only enforce it against that entity. All very messy when dealing with these small businesses - especially if they're trying to be shady. 

Jmoo

So from my understanding his domestic partner is his secretary and handles the accounts, so I would guess that is who the second person is, and who the account is registered to. As the address differs (I think they live separately) this would explain it.

I'm surprised given the TPDO featured the name of the business, which is the name of the account, that wasn't enough, although I appreciate the ownership muddies the water.

DullGreyGuy

Jmoo said:

So from my understanding his domestic partner is his secretary and handles the accounts, so I would guess that is who the second person is, and who the account is registered to. As the address differs (I think they live separately) this would explain it.

I'm surprised given the TPDO featured the name of the business, which is the name of the account, that wasn't enough, although I appreciate the ownership muddies the water.

This is getting more muddy and its probably not too surprising that its not going forward.

Who is your court order against? Mr Joe Blogs? Joe Blogs Plumbing Ltd? Mr Joe Blogs trading as Joe Blogs Plumbing? Joe Blogs Plumbing?

Who were you in contract with?

Is the TPDO against? The identical name?

Who do you believe the account is in the name of? Miss Jo Smith? Mr Joe Blogs? Joe Blogs Plumbing Ltd?

Did you apply for the TPDO as the TP being a bank or non-bank?

Jmoo

DullGreyGuy said:

Jmoo said:

So from my understanding his domestic partner is his secretary and handles the accounts, so I would guess that is who the second person is, and who the account is registered to. As the address differs (I think they live separately) this would explain it.

I'm surprised given the TPDO featured the name of the business, which is the name of the account, that wasn't enough, although I appreciate the ownership muddies the water.

This is getting more muddy and its probably not too surprising that its not going forward.

Who is your court order against? Mr Joe Blogs? Joe Blogs Plumbing Ltd? Mr Joe Blogs trading as Joe Blogs Plumbing? Joe Blogs Plumbing?

Who were you in contract with?

Is the TPDO against? The identical name?

Who do you believe the account is in the name of? Miss Jo Smith? Mr Joe Blogs? Joe Blogs Plumbing Ltd?

Did you apply for the TPDO as the TP being a bank or non-bank?

Sorry, it's probably been lost in the thread.

The TPDO is for 'Joe Bloggs T/A Hull Roofing'. They're saying Hull Roofing is the name of the account, as per my payment, but it's registered to somebody else - a Jo Smith (for example).

I've been speaking with Clear Bank as I believed it to be a bank. They confirm it's part of them, but the branch is Tide.

eskbanker

Jmoo said:

I've been speaking with Clear Bank as I believed it to be a bank. They confirm it's part of them, but the branch is Tide.

Returning to the theme of identifying correct legal entities, that's not really an accurate characterisation of the parties - the trader will have a contract with Tide, who in turn will use ClearBank to provide their actual banking services, i.e. ClearBank is effectively a supplier to Tide, as explained in the footer on Tide web pages:

Tide Platform Limited (Tide) designs and operates the Tide website and app. Tide is not a bank.

Tide is authorised by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) under the Electronic Money Regulations 2011 under firm reference number 900843 for the issuing of electronic money and the provision of payment initiation services and account information services under the Payment Services Regulations 2017. Tide is also authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority in relation to its credit and insurance broking activities (firm reference 718743).

Tide offers bank accounts provided by ClearBank® Ltd (ClearBank) (account sort code is 04-06-05). ClearBank is authorised by the Prudential Regulation Authority and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority under registration number 754568.

tightauldgit

Jmoo said:

So from my understanding his domestic partner is his secretary and handles the accounts, so I would guess that is who the second person is, and who the account is registered to. As the address differs (I think they live separately) this would explain it.

I'm surprised given the TPDO featured the name of the business, which is the name of the account, that wasn't enough, although I appreciate the ownership muddies the water.

IF she is his secretary then she is an employee nothing more. That would not give her any legal authority to have a bank account for the business.

Simply having a trading name on the TPDO isn't going to help you, because the legal entity is the person. You can see the issue if you imagine there might be five hundred completely different Mr Bun The Baker shops all operating as sole traders "trading as". Just because the business has the same name wouldn't make it the same entity or responsible for the debts. 

If the bank are correct that your man isn't the name on that account then you won't be able to get anything from it. 

Jmoo

tightauldgit said:

Jmoo said:

So from my understanding his domestic partner is his secretary and handles the accounts, so I would guess that is who the second person is, and who the account is registered to. As the address differs (I think they live separately) this would explain it.

I'm surprised given the TPDO featured the name of the business, which is the name of the account, that wasn't enough, although I appreciate the ownership muddies the water.

IF she is his secretary then she is an employee nothing more. That would not give her any legal authority to have a bank account for the business.

Simply having a trading name on the TPDO isn't going to help you, because the legal entity is the person. You can see the issue if you imagine there might be five hundred completely different Mr Bun The Baker shops all operating as sole traders "trading as". Just because the business has the same name wouldn't make it the same entity or responsible for the debts. 

If the bank are correct that your man isn't the name on that account then you won't be able to get anything from it. 

I understand that but it was quite specific with the account number and sort code. It's not like I've asked them to look at every Hull Roofing account.

Would I have been better putting one forward as 'Hull Roofing' (as an example name) with that account number? Does a TPDO have to be in the same name as the CCJ if both documents have the business name? Or does the other person mean I wouldn't get it either way?