Please be ware that I am in the UK and that this question can only be
answered in the context of UK law, this is what I require.

In September of 2005 a sum of money valuing £1000 was credited, in error, to my
bank account from a company I have had no dealings with. Four
weeks later, the company had not claimed the money so I deposited the
money in a high interest account. Three monthes later my bank
forwarded a letter from the company to my home address. The letter
(which had been originally sent to my bank) only referred to me as (to
whom is concerned) and it appears that the company does
not know either my name or address, (just my account number and sort
code). The company said that they would be "grateful" if I returned
the money in the form of a cheque and that I should do it at my own
convienience,

My question is this, I want to keep the money, legally how likely am I
to get away with keeping the money thorugh not responding to the company?
Also, can the company force my bank (legally or otherwise) to release
my name and address?

Most importantly, am I likely to be prosecuted for trying to do this?



























Thanks in advance.

Simon

---

Request for Question Clarification by answerfinder-ga on 02 Jan 2005 02:58 PST

Dear fireball99,
Are you situated in England/Wales or Scotland? The law may be slightly
different in either country. I can provide an answer for England by
referring you to similar cases and what the law states.
Do you want both Criminal and Civil law covered?
Do you appreciate that an answer is subject to the disclaimer printed
at the bottom of this page and any answer I give is not any any way
the correct legal answer. For this you must seek help of a solicitor
or lawyer.
answerfinder-ga

---

Clarification of Question by fireball99-ga on 02 Jan 2005 08:27 PST

In response to answerfinder's comments. I am resident in England.

Thanks for your prompt response answerfinder. I feel that you are the
one with whom I wish to request an answer.

I look forward to hearing from you again.

Simon

Dear Simon,
I answer this question from my research and from my experience as I
retired police officer with over 30 years experience. In a nutshell, I
would advise you to return the money otherwise you may lay yourself
open to criminal or civil court action - but of course that is a
matter for you.

I base the answer on the information that you have supplied:
Money arrived in your account.
You acknowledge it is not yours and you have no right to it.
You have transferred it out of that account into another.
You are now on notice that there is no doubt it belongs to another.

Even though it is the fault of the company, or the bank, that this
money has been placed in your bank account, I regret to say that the
money is and always will be the property of the company. It is like
finding a £1000 in the street. You should make an effort to trace the
owner. In this case therefore, if you withdraw it and spend it, you
will making yourself liable to be charged with Theft which is contrary
to Section 1, Theft Act, 1968, or you will make yourself liable at the
minimum, to a civil action to recover the money from you.

This web site contains details of the Theft Act. The first six
sections are relevant.
The basic definition in Section 1 is:
?A person is guilty of theft if he dishonestly appropriates property
belonging to another with the intention of permanently depriving the
other of it.?

Each part of this definition is itself defined by sections 2-6, and
each of these must be fulfilled to prove theft.  I cannot go into
detailed discussion here of each section but you may wish to note that
appropriates means ?where he has come by the property (innocently or
not) without stealing it, any later assumption of a right to it by
keeping or dealing with it as owner? ? in your case by transferring
the money knowing that it was not yours, you have appropriated the
money. Dishonesty is not defined and it is the matter for the jury to
decide whether the act was dishonest.

Theft Act
http://www.sixthform.info/law/06_miscellaneous_originals_definitions/statutes/theft_act_1968.htm

An act of theft is also actionable in civil law.

So what can the company do? If you do not reply, they could report the
matter to the Police. They may decide to investigate ? much depends on
the police force involved and their view of the facts of the case. It
is a matter for the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether charges
would be preferred. There are too many variables to say whether they
would take any action.

The most likely course of action by the company is to pursue you
civilly. At the moment your bank, quite correctly, are keeping your
details confidential. However, the company could instruct solicitors
to apply for a Court Order in the High Court compelling your Bank to
reveal your details. The company would then commence civil action
against you in High Court to recover the money. You could take the
view that this would cost far more than the £1000 which you have and
this may cost may prohibit the company from taking action and they
could just write it off. Only the company would know what they intend
doing.

There are circumstances in which you could keep them money, but these
do not apply in this case as you acknowledge it is not yours and you
have no right to it. The Financial Ombudsman Service deals with
banking complaints and they take the view that ?ordinarily, customers
should repay money that does not belong to them, or that they have
borrowed.?
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org/publications/ombudsman-news/33/credits-33.htm

This solicitors? web site gives a short and concise reply to the question:
Q: Can I keep money which has been wrongly credited to my account.
A: I am afraid that usually you cannot, even if you have spent it.
http://www.mogerssolicitors.co.uk/commercial/commercial-questions2.htm

From another solicitors? factsheet:
?Payment by mistake through a clearing system
When a payee receives money paid by mistake by a bank, the bank has a
valid legal claim against him for the recovery of the sum paid in
error. The payee will not ordinarily be able to argue successfully
that the money paid by mistake became mixed with other monies held by
him and is therefore untraceable.?
http://www.foot-ansteys.co.uk/pdf/factsheets/company_commercial/Cheque%20Clearing%20factsheet%20Oct%202004.pdf


You may be interested in these news items where people have kept money
wrongly paid into their accounts and have been prosecuted. The amounts
are much greater, but the principals are the same.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/3901593.stm

http://www.creditman.biz/uk/members/news-view.asp?newsviewID=2783&id=1&mylocation=News&chksrc=NNow4251

http://www.thisisessex.co.uk/essex/archive/1998/09/07/NEWS40ZM.html

I hope this answers your question and is helpful. If it does not, or
the answer is unclear, then please ask for clarification of this
research before rating the answer. I shall respond to the
clarification request as soon as I receive it.
Thank you
answerfinder


Search strategy
Personal knowledge
Variations of theft ?bank account? wrongly credited error

I doubt you would be prosecuted, but the right move here is to return
the money. Come now. Put yourself in the business owner's shoes. Or in
the shoes of the employee whose job may be at risk over this error.

leapinglizard

I think leaping lizard is correct. Low probability you will be forced
to return the money, and less you will fined. A reasonable compromise
might be to return the money minus the early withdrawl penilty, if
any.   Neil

I disagree with the answer given.  This is not a bank error where the
bank can correct their mistake and recover the money.  This is an
error by an outside company who has no action against you.  I don't
know about the law in the UK, but in the US, if your bank gave out
personal information about you to this company who you do not do
business with, you have legal recourse against the bank.

And I'll disagree with part of that disagreement. While this does
appear to be an error by an outside company as opposed to the bank,
that does not mean that the outside company is without legal recourse.
They have an action in equity for "unjust enrichment", for example.

In terms of the bank "giving out" information, assuming all that was
"given out" was your account number that pretty much follows
inexorably from any bank-to-bank transaction. (Somewhere there will be
a record of your bank account number to which the payor has access.)
Assuming that the outside company chooses to commence civil
litigation, they could presumably subpoena more specific information
about you from the bank.

May I put a slightly different slant on this. No one has mentioned the
responsibility of the paying bank here. If a cheque was paid in to an
account with an incorrect payee then the bank should not accept the
transaction.

Why is it then that an automated payment is accepted even though the
details show an incorrect payee. I am fully aware that the bank will
say that they only check the bank sort code and account number but
surely this is not acceptable.

Interestingly, there is a case in the weekend papers covering exactly
the same issue where the bank quoted the above paragraph as a defence
but still refunded the monies.

To my knowledge there is only one piece of case law on this in Canada
which ruled against the paying bank. I believe that many cases in the
UK are settled out of court by the banks if pushed hard enough