Kids savings missing---has bank a responsibility?

[scaniaman]

One for the (Scottish ) legal eagles.

 

Man & wife divorce and £750 put into their childs savings account.

When it was set up, both parents had to administer the account.

 

One parent has just discovered the other has systematically emptied the kids account over a six month period without prior consent or knowledge of the other parent.

 

Police say it's not theft or mis appropriation of funds.

 

Bank says T&C's were changed and this allowed one parent to administer the kids account.

 

Other parent swears blind they were never notified of this change by the bank or would have taken appropriate action at that time.

( I know my bank notifies me of changes but letters arrive by normal post---not rec del etc)

 

1. Despite this being a despicable thing to do, has any crime been committed?

 

2.How does kid get money back?

 

3. Does the bank have any responsibility for this dastardly situation??

[dx100uk]

sar time

prove the bank did not advise you of the rule changes?

[BankFodder]

In addition to the SAR, it might easily be theft. The police say these things in order to get rid of you but there is no reason why it shouldn't be theft if the funds have been taken dishonestly.

Persuading the police to take an interest and to do their job can be a difficult matter.

[scaniaman]

Thanks guys. I don't think SAR is the road because the bank has disclosed all info about these transactions including which bank account the money was transferred too. It is impossible to prove bank did not send info re change to T&C's.

Or did you mean SAR would show if bank had in fact sent out changes letter but it had not been delivered?

Edited February 7, 2016 by scaniaman
dippit

[dx100uk]

must be in the account log of the sar if they sent them

 

 

dx

[CrappoMan]

If the child doesn't live with the OP and the address on the account is the childs, maybe the new T&Cs were sent to only ONE parent, i.e: to the account address.

If that parent read the new T&Cs they may have realised that withdrawals could be made by one signatory.