Pay Went to Unintended Recipient Due to Incorrect Bank Account Number Supplied

danjerman on 22/11/2023 - 19:37

This is in South Australia in case it makes a difference.

My 16 year old son recently started a part time job. He gave the employer incorrect bank details by adding an extra digit in the middle of his bank account number. The employer entered the 10 digits into their payroll but either their payroll system or their banking software truncated the account number to 9 digits. Unfortunately, this 9 digit number was a valid bank account number at the same BSB.

Two payments went to this unintended recipient of around $350 in total. After we raised this with them, the employer has contacted their bank to initiate a process to get it back but the receiving bank has replied that the unintended recipient has refused to give the money back. Basically, they are saying tough luck.

This was reported to them more than 10 business days after the payments but less than 7 months. The epayments code says that up to 7 months, the receiving bank must take the money from the recipient if they are satisfied that it was not a valid payment. (I think the recipient gets 10 days to prove they are entitled to it). This has not occurred. I'm wondering if the epayments code applied to businesses sending money to other bank accounts or if it is only for consumer to consumer transactions?

If the epayments code does not apply in this case, is there anything similar?

Is there any recourse available to my son? If we wanted to pursue this further how would this work, who would we pursue and how would we get their details if it is the unintended recipient?

What about the employer? Their systems did not send the money to the 10 digit account number that was supplied but sent it to a 9 digit account number. Is there liability there?

I'm tempted to chalk it up to experience as a lesson in double checking numbers but it seems like a harsh punishment for a simple mistake and I wonder whether other checks and balances should have caught this and whether the banks should be doing more.

Any help or guidance would be most appreciated!

Many Thanks

Financial

Comments

    • danjerman on 23/11/2023 - 20:22

      Yes, fast food. Local company that runs several franchises though

      • AFOS on 24/11/2023 - 12:54

        Check Fast Food Industry Award. Here is the pay guide from Fair Work. https://calculate.fairwork.gov.au/payguides/fairwork/ma00000…
        Please pay close attention to weekend/evening rates and allowances (laundry allowance). From my experience very few employers are 100% compliant. Do your own maths and chances are that you son may get something extra on top of that missing money.

        And yes, they are obliged to provide him with a payslip where all of those items are explicitly specified.

    • CowFrogHorse on 24/11/2023 - 10:47
      -1

      Dont think they pay $350 a week or fortnight for fast food in South America.

  • holdenmg on 22/11/2023 - 20:55
    +1

    Bikies?

    • nobro25 on 23/11/2023 - 12:50
      +1

      Spend $2,000 on bikes to get back $350… Profit!!!

      • happydude on 23/11/2023 - 17:32

        How do you know so much about the price of bikes?

  • GordonD on 22/11/2023 - 21:09
    +9

    It is long past time for the banking industry to do the obvious with regard to this problem of money going into wrong accounts either by mistake or fraud.

    All they have to do is ask for TWO pieces of information, the BSB and account number, and the name the intended account should be in, and reject transactions where those two pieces of information don't match.

    But they use the excuse that the account name can be slightly different or hugely different to the one specified, and where do they draw the line. They'd end up having to reject lots of transactions because of middle names and slight spelling differences.

    • Settero on 22/11/2023 - 21:18
      +1

      bob burgers
      bobby burger
      bobby burgers
      bobby b
      bb
      robert
      robert burgers

      and this is just a few variations you can have for one name…now imagine typos , new accounts , business accounts that are "trading as" , trust accounts… thats a lot of variations , alias and what not

      • Protractor on 22/11/2023 - 22:08
        +2

        Do you reckon there's a real chance that the unique BSB and account number would somehow land on your scenario with a coincidental same or close name variation?
        It's not quite lotto winning odds, but it must be a sim possibility.
        I think (my assumption) in GordonD's intended model, some sort of 'alert' would pop up with options to select if there were potential dupes.. And reading between the lines if the branch (BSB) had 2 similar account numbers as well as similar names, THEY would employ an early alert to the anomaly.
        Either way with the tech we have, reducing these 'wrong account' scenarios can't be that hard.And surely they cost banks $$ over time

        • Settero on 23/11/2023 - 00:34
          +3

          I think you missed the point, all those variations could be a non match for the name, and bounce even if its to the correct account.

          You think each payment is processed one by one… business do batch payments/payruns , 20 of 500 payments don't 100% match , great times, future dated payment gets bounced and you miss a payment date for something important, fun times…

          Picture the various names for something insanely low risk like a concil payment , or strata, as an average user , I would rather not be bothered with additional checks when I have already checked the details as I should have.

          • Protractor on 23/11/2023 - 10:11
            +2

            @Settero: Have I?
            A bounce is the alert. It should alert (not deposit into wrong account) unless /until all relevant additional boxes are ticked. Or to put it another way, if the system aint 100% sure, a human should check it.

        • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 09:47

          The vast majority of the errors are caused by people though, not the banks or their systems.

          The banks and their systems simply facilitate the movement of money between one or more parties - if the parties involved input the incorrect information, how is that the banks fault? The bank can't be forced to burden the responsibility of idiots not using it correctly, that would put them out of business.

    • JimmyF on 22/11/2023 - 22:06
      +2

      It is long past time for the banking industry to do the obvious with regard to this problem of money going into wrong accounts either by mistake or fraud.

      LOL Oh yes someone elses problem because you can't enter someonese details correctly or they can't give it to you correctly as in this case.

      Anyhow the banks have a system in place for this, read https://www.afca.org.au/sites/default/files/2020-04/fact-she…

      and the name the intended account should be in, and reject transactions where those two pieces of information don't match.

      They also have another system in place that does this PayID….. It even GASP shows the account name of the person you are sending it to.

    • star-ggg on 22/11/2023 - 23:07
      +4

      Our 2 biggest banks also got huge fines (1.3b for Westpac and 700m for CBA) for breaching anti-money laundering laws for not doing proper KYC. They will fix it if we make them accountable.

      • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 09:50

        Money laundering and fools entering wrong account numbers are two wildly different scenarios. OP's son is going to have to hold himself accountable for the mistake they made and learn from it now.

        • star-ggg on 24/11/2023 - 12:34

          They're both about knowing exactly who is the account holder, you have up to date contact details so if the person has committed a crime you can take action quickly as directed by relevant authorities. I assume you agree the person holding it is committing a crime. OP is holding themselves accountable by researching and going through the proper process to recover their money from the person.

          • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 14:43

            @star-ggg: One issue is about criminals committing crimes, the other is an issue of one party supplying an incorrect account number to their employer………

    • The General on 23/11/2023 - 13:55
      -1

      "TWO pieces of information" the BSB, account number and the name. That's THREE.
      You don't happen to work at this employees bank by any chance do you?

      • dzpliu on 23/11/2023 - 21:08
        +1

        To be fair, the banks dont check the names, only the BSB and account number.

      • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 09:54
        +1

        Banks only process transactions purely on the BSB and Account Number. Any information other than that is simply a text note applied to the transaction.

        In many systems, it's only additional text data recorded by your own bank for your own personal record keeping purposes & the receiver of the funds never even sees it.

    • happydude on 23/11/2023 - 17:35
      +1

      The banks did fix it with PayID.

      It's industry dragging it's heals on wide spread implementation. It's not the fault of the banking sector.

    • Worf on 23/11/2023 - 19:27

      I think there’s insufficient redundancy in bsb and account number… I think account names should match, but you do make a good point about slight errors in name/s…

      How about a check digit (like in a barcode) so that it can tell if it’s a valid account number… it will probably increase the length of an account number, but can reduce errors.

    • notfrodo on 23/11/2023 - 19:30
      +1

      Commbank does this now. It will tell you if they have never seen an account number + name combination before in their system. It is not a perfect system but is really helpful.

      • CowFrogHorse on 24/11/2023 - 10:48

        Comm Bank spend hundreds of millions on their computers and they only just got this ?

    • GordonD on 24/11/2023 - 11:41

      NEWS TODAY

      https://www.smh.com.au/business/banking-and-finance/new-offe…

      Banks to now check name matches BSB/account number.

      • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 14:45

        The system is just an idea currently, it hasn't even been designed. Not expected to be functional until at least 2025 - if at all.

  • leiiv on 22/11/2023 - 22:10
    +41

    It's mindboggling that whenever someone posts a question about the same topic but in reverse, that is, somewhere along the line "Can I spend money received mysteriously in my account?", the answers are always like a big NO: "you could get into a big trouble", "bank will forcefully get it back from you", "you will get sued", etc.
    But when the other side asks the same question, the answer is also a NO: "no you can't get it back", "it's a life lesson", "tough luck", etc. That totally defies my common sense. So where does the money go?

    • plmko on 22/11/2023 - 22:26
      -8

      You answered your own question. There's an answer in between the two scenarios you've mentioned. Have a think.

      • Protractor on 22/11/2023 - 22:38
        +7

        Is the answer ' depends on the mood of the mob, on any given day'?

      • leiiv on 23/11/2023 - 01:16

        Please enlighten us all here.
        Person A accidentally sends money to person B.
        Can person B spend the money without repercussion?
        If yes, person A can't get their money back.
        If no, person A can get their money back.
        Why can't we have consistency here?

        • Settero on 23/11/2023 - 01:50

          Both can be correct, Depends on amount, kind of expensive both in time and money to recover 700. Also not worth the risk to keep 700 however low the chances are that the sender will pursue legal action.

          People often confuse a bank for a lawyer just because they have a legal team, banks hire their own lawyers to represent them, not you.

          • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 10:01
            +1

            @Settero: Exactly.

            The police won't be doing shit over an insignificant amount like this. OP's bank has no ability to do anything as the funds are no longer with them. The person who received the money knows the likelihood of being chased over it is almost zero. The ePayments code is completely voluntary and most banks don't care about it at all, or only use it when it involves large sums of money likely to get them wide-spread bad publicity. So that leaves OP's son deciding if they want to pay for legal advice (and the cost of their own time) & costs to lodge a dispute in the relevant district/claims court, or chalk it up to a life lesson & move on.

            It's pretty obvious where this is all heading in terms of what decision is going to be made.

    • hasher22 on 23/11/2023 - 00:05
      +13

      We all know banks can add and subtract numbers in our bank accounts instantly.

      Oops the bank accidentally deposited 1m or 1c into your bank account, sorry was a mistake let's just claw that back instantly.

      Oops you made a mistake by entering 1 digit wrong? That's a you problem, our systems can't reverse the charge….

      Pathetic banks

      • Jaduqimon on 23/11/2023 - 11:46
        +3

        When banks makes a mistake they have proof that they made the mistake and thus can act on their own behalf and reclaim the money.

        When customers makes a "mistake" the bank doesn't know that and it could be the person depositing money being the scammer.
        its not the banks job to be the arbiter of who is scamming who so it needs to go through the courts. The bank will happily follow suit and make the corrections once the court deemed who's really made the "mistake".

        the problem is going through the court system is a strenuous process for the average joe.

    • trapper on 23/11/2023 - 14:25

      If it was a fraudulent transfer it will almost certainly be reversed.

      If it was a legitimate transfer, but mistakenly to the wrong account, then it's now a dispute.

      It's not for the banks to determine who is telling the truth in the case of a 'mistake'.

    • CowFrogHorse on 24/11/2023 - 11:00

      Exactly theft by finding is a crime.

      • leiiv on 24/11/2023 - 20:07

        If it is a crime then OP son does not need to go to a court to sue the 'thief', and the police will investigate the theft, if reported. Only that is not the case here.

        • CowFrogHorse on 24/11/2023 - 21:28

          https://www.armstronglegal.com.au/criminal-law/nsw/offences/…

          Larceny By Finding (NSW)

          Is “finders keepers” a crime? In some circumstances, a person can be charged with larceny by finding. The law expects the finder to make reasonable efforts to locate the owner before deciding to keep the property. Then, unless the original owner makes a claim, the finder will have the best claim of right over the property.
          Legislation

          Larceny is the crime of taking property or money that belongs to another, regardless of value. The High Court defined larceny in the leading case of Ilich v R in 1987:

          “A person steals who, without the consent of the owner, fraudulently and without a claim of right made in good faith, takes and carries away anything capable of being stolen with intent, at the time of such taking, permanently to deprive the owner thereof.”

          Section 117 of the Crimes Act 1900 states the maximum punishment for larceny is a maximum of 5 years imprisonment. The maximum penalty is 2 years if the matter is dealt with in the Local Court.
          What police must prove

          There are seven elements that must be proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, for a court to find a person guilty of larceny.

          The four physical elements are that a person:

          took and carried away;
property capable of being stolen;
which belonged to another;
without the consent of the owner.
  • singlemalt72 on 23/11/2023 - 08:33
    +2

    Banking Ombudsman
    https://www.afca.org.au/

  • Not SkyNet on 23/11/2023 - 09:38
    -3

    Since your Son and the other account is the same BSB you know what branch and bank it was go it in person and ask to speak to someone.
    Tell them the scenario and that the funds were "not rightfully belonging to the recipient", ask them to put again in writing that they intend not to pursue the funds and that the intended recipient has acknowledged that the funds were not rightfully theirs but are keeping it. Tell them you need this in writing as you are going to take it further.
    Then say your whole family will be closing accounts with them.

    End of the day this may not do anything, but it is one final chance since it was the same bank.

    • Settero on 23/11/2023 - 09:55
      +2

      Didn't neg , but this is pretty bad advice and if followed would lead to disappointment. Op's son has nothing to do with the transaction, op's sons employer does, and also op dosnt say they got a reason for the refusal, just a refusal which is industry standard.

    • Not SkyNet on 23/11/2023 - 21:27

      Yes, you can Neg me but hey at least this way the bank would have to admit they either spoke to the other person who was admitting to stealing the funds by not returning or returning it and then they could go to the business with that to get repaid based on the fact they have proven that the money is gone.

      It is an offence to spend money that is mistaken transferred into your account I quote https://www.afca.org.au/ "You should not spend or withdraw the money transferred into your account by mistake because it is not legally yours and you have to pay it back. "

      And if I was with a bank that did not try and get my funds back that would be a reason i would not deal with them and would move so I stick by what I said negs and all.

      • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 10:18
        +1

        And if I was with a bank that did not try and get my funds back that would be a reason i would not deal with them and would move

        You'd be without a bank then, because the The ePayments code is optional for financial institutions in Australia.

        That's why banks and others persistently put it in writing to their customers to ensure they input the correct Account and BSB with ePayments. Because if you don't, the fault is solely on you & you are responsible alone for attempting to get the money back.

        • Not SkyNet on 24/11/2023 - 13:02

          That fair comment too, i just would hope my bank would put some effort into it rather than just saying no which a lot do these days.
          These days banks treat us like they are doing us the favor with our money (loans are a different story).

  • jonkvh on 23/11/2023 - 11:23
    +4

    Ended up with $2400 into my account one day, went to the bank. told them it isn't mine & take it out. In about 4 hours it was gone. Bank admitted it was a mix up with account numbers.

    Never tempt fate. You don't know whose money you're using if you decide to keep it for yourself.

  • samfisher5986 on 23/11/2023 - 11:43
    +1

    Not sure what is wrong with everyone here….

    The employer paid to the wrong account number, end of story.

    Their only job was to pay to the specified account number, right or wrong and they failed to do that.

    • Jaduqimon on 23/11/2023 - 11:48

      yeh the person failed to provide the correct number and the employer failed to enter in the "correct" incorrect number.

      So employer should give back 50% of the pay… fair?

      • samfisher5986 on 23/11/2023 - 11:49
        +1

        Providing the correct number is not relevant. The employer needed to pay to the number they were given.

        • Jaduqimon on 23/11/2023 - 11:56
          +1

          "Providing the correct number is not relevant"

          Lol what? If the correct number was provided, this wouldn't have happened. Not a good lesson to teach a 16yr old… To push blame on others(even if others was subsequently negligent).

          • samfisher5986 on 23/11/2023 - 13:17
            +2

            @Jaduqimon: If they sent it to the supplied number, there also wouldn't be an issue.

            Its kind of like if you ordered a package on Amazon and put in an address that didn't exist. If the post office then delivers it to a random address, they post office have messed up as the address doesn't exist.

            • OzBarAnon on 23/11/2023 - 16:43

              @samfisher5986: Even if it did exist, you'd still be complaining that you didn't receive your package. So there is no scenario in which OP's son would have received the money.

              • samfisher5986 on 23/11/2023 - 17:08

                @OzBarAnon: If it did exist, they would have delivered it as they were told. You could only blame yourself.

                But thats not the case.

          • pennypacker42069 on 25/11/2023 - 20:41

            @Jaduqimon: if the correct number was 10 digits the same thing would have happened
            the employer should probably pay them a bonus for revealing a serious error in their payment system

  • johnfuller on 23/11/2023 - 12:45
    +2

    usually if the bsb and account number dont match, the bank will bounce it back and may charge a small fee, you can test the same account number for yourself and send $1 to it and see if the $1 comes back and if it does then it likely means the employer is withholding the money

  • gorgrond on 23/11/2023 - 13:17

    Quite ridiculous that they do not require a check digit for ACC and BSB numbers in Australia.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Check_digit

  • KaTst3R on 23/11/2023 - 13:24
    -2

    CBA has a name check when transferring. It will prompt you if the account recipient's name is significantly different to what was entered. You would assume payroll / bookeeper would have thought about re-confirming?

    • doczoid on 23/11/2023 - 17:31
      +2

      Wage payments will be part of a batch and not get this, they may also not bank with CBA

      • happydude on 23/11/2023 - 17:40

        I worked next to our payroll guy a while ago.

        The amount of people that would ask him if he could process their pay first that fortnight was incredible. He had to keep explaining that is not how payroll works.

        • John Kimble on 23/11/2023 - 17:46
          +1

          First line in the batch file, duh

  • Black Brown Blue on 23/11/2023 - 13:33
    +3

    Learn the lesson
    Reflect
    Be careful next time
    Everyone has to learn

    • GrueHunter on 23/11/2023 - 14:34
      +5

      I've learned that people aren't entitled to keep money that isn't theirs.

      Apparently I'm wrong according to all the "in my day we let people keep our money and we liked it because it builds character, also why are young people today such push overs who aren't willing to stand up for anything" boomers in the comments.

  • OBEY YOUR MASTERS on 23/11/2023 - 13:40
    +9

    Some of these "life lessons" that people keep talking about are great if you want your kid to be a complete pushover that never stands up for themselves. Also teaching them that hard work doesnt pay.

    I would teach my kid to not give up until he gets whats owed to him. Its ok to annoy other people if they cant be bothered following it up.

    Had a similar situation in my first job.

    • OzBarAnon on 23/11/2023 - 17:12
      +1

      I agree that he should try every avenue to get his money back, but I also think that a lesson should be learned in being more careful when it comes to matters like this. Let the son jump through the hoops (or have him present if he's not able to do everything if a parent is required because he's a minor), but have him experience what it takes to correct the issue.

  • drprox on 23/11/2023 - 14:25

    Worked in a bank for many years and can confirm that is the process. Essentially one bank asking another back for it nicely. Lesson learned here.

    • smartazz104 on 23/11/2023 - 16:07

      And the lesson is, banks suck.

      • doczoid on 23/11/2023 - 17:31

        The bank has done nothing wrong

        • BlueGlass on 23/11/2023 - 21:42

          What the bank considers to be a reasonable effort to recover the funds and what the average citizen considers to be a reasonable effort, maybe very different.
          I doubt they spent even an hour of human processing time on this.

          • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 10:24

            @BlueGlass: It's not any bank's fault or responsibility to teach OP's son how to write a series of numbers correctly, or take due care with their personal finances.

            If banks had to take on the burden of every financial clown's actions, they wouldn't exist.

            • BlueGlass on 24/11/2023 - 13:39

              @infinite: If OP's employer raises a MIP as per the ePayment code and the bank subscribes to the code, it absolutely is the banks burden to investigate the 'financial clowns actions'.

              Expect more of your civic institutions, you deserve it.

              https://download.asic.gov.au/media/lloeicwb/epayments-code-p…

              • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 14:40

                @BlueGlass: The ePayments code is optional for financial institutions in Australia and don't apply at all for small-to-medium size businesses.

                That's why banks and others persistently put it in writing to their customers to ensure they input the correct Account and BSB with ePayments. Because if you don't, the fault is solely on you & you are responsible alone for attempting to get the money back.

                As per the link you provided: https://download.asic.gov.au/media/lloeicwb/epayments-code-p…

                This Code is a voluntary code of practice. The ePayments code is a voluntary code, it is not developed by industry or enforced under any Australian law.

      • iLikeSales on 23/11/2023 - 20:59
        +1

        Naah they actually dont suck if you take advantage. Get a credit card and make a mistake theyll do whatever is in their power to get "THEIR" money back for you. If its debit and you accidentally pay someone its your money who cares. Credit cards however, they'll suddenly take interest when its their money on the line.

  • trapper on 23/11/2023 - 14:37
    +10

    This is theft. So you can and should report this to the police.

    You should be able to get the receivers contact info, if not from the bank then via the police.

    Now take them to court and get your money back.

    They will probably pay up as soon as they realise you're not going to let this go.

    • [Deactivated] on 24/11/2023 - 08:06
      +1

      Neither the police or the bank will give the receiver's information. We have privacy laws.

      • gromit on 24/11/2023 - 08:11
        -1

        You should be able to get a court order to obtain the details given the receiver is intentionally committing a crime by withholding the funds. Personally I would chase this to hell and back for the principle of it. criminals shouldn't get to hide behind privacy laws.

        • [Deactivated] on 24/11/2023 - 08:26
          +2

          I think you've been watching too much TV.
          Good luck with that.

          • gromit on 24/11/2023 - 08:27

            @[Deactivated]: I think it is the other way around. refusing to return the money is a crime, no ifs buts or maybes. chasing this up with the authorities and an appropriate police report should result in details being provided to the courts. No they won't provide the details directly to you, but they can be provided to the authorities and court.

            • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 10:31
              -1

              @gromit: So your solution is paying thousands of dollars in legal costs in an attempt to chase down $350, for a teenager that made a poor life choice ?

              This is Reddit level problem solving.

              • trapper on 24/11/2023 - 11:58
                +1

                @infinite: Thousands of dollars in legal costs? lol

                In small claims there are no lawyers, and only a nominal fee to file your claim.

                This fee can also be included as part of the claim, so the thief will end up paying that too.

                • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 14:37
                  -2

                  @trapper: Who are you bringing to small claims court when the Police won't give you the persons information? If the police won't give it to you, they won't be giving it to a small claims tribunal either.

                  • gromit on 24/11/2023 - 18:00
                    -1

                    @infinite: you don't need the end persons details, you just have to present the evidence and details, the court can then order the bank to provide the details or return the money.

                    • infinite on 24/11/2023 - 23:05
                      -1

                      @gromit: You've definitely been watching too much TV if you think that's how any of this works.

      • trapper on 24/11/2023 - 12:08
        +2

        Most likely: Police give the guy a call and ask for his side of the story, the guy craps his pants and returns the money.

    • pennypacker42069 on 25/11/2023 - 20:45

      OP can just report the employer to the Fair Work ombudsman who will deem the wages were never paid into the specified bank account. The employer will then be responsible to chase the money from the third party

  • LFO on 23/11/2023 - 14:54
    +7

    Agree as trapper just wrote.

    This is theft and should be reported as soon as possible to the police.

    I have the gut feeling the bank never actually said "tough luck". Certainly not the banking institution as such, may be a lazy clerk did.

    Don't let it pass.

    Finding money on the street does not implies to keep it.
    This is quite similar.

  • Alonzo on 23/11/2023 - 14:54
    +3

    Geez, there’s some absolute mongrels in this world.

  • Jimmycfc on 23/11/2023 - 14:58

    Both in the wrong which is an unusual case, if the company was decent they would reach out and get the correct details and fix their payment.
    IF they are not nice, they will claim they paid it to the incorrect supplied account and thats it.
    $350 not worth crying over

    • pennypacker42069 on 25/11/2023 - 20:47

      Given the employer paid it to an unspecified third party the Fair Work ombudsman will side with OP

  • bob smith on 23/11/2023 - 15:18
    +1

    Different set of rules.

    When a bank makes a mistake = recoverable.
    When someone else makes a mistake = tough luck.

    What the f.

    • trapper on 23/11/2023 - 16:44
      +1

      Because when the bank makes a mistake they know they made a mistake and so can reverse it.

      If a person makes a mistake then bank doesn't know if it was a mistake, or if it's some kind of scam. What if they got it wrong and gave your money to a scammer?

  • Dack Smith on 23/11/2023 - 15:57
    -5

    Added an extra digit is not a typo

    Time to grow up and man up

    If he’s a man

  • cameldownunder on 23/11/2023 - 16:12

    the receiving bank has replied that the unintended recipient has refused to give the money back. Basically, they are saying tough luck.

    The receiving back is just being lazy. I discovered that if you just ask nicely, nothing happens, you need to threat with all you got: Police, 60 minutes, ACA, bikies, X, facebook, …

    • doczoid on 23/11/2023 - 17:33

      If the money is not in the receiving account anymore which is quite possible, what should the bank do differently?

      • gromit on 24/11/2023 - 08:14

        They should provide you some advise even if just pointers to your legal avenues to chase the scumbag thief.

      • cameldownunder on 24/11/2023 - 08:27

        Claim it back from the account holder, as obviously the money wasn't meant for them.
        What is so difficult to understand ?

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join