Legal Advice Please

[Mikeage]

Hi, I started my claims procedure against Natwest back in December 06, I recived a cheque for the full ammount of my claim in February 07, however, the cheque they sent me was not signed and I had to return it. The cheque came back signed with a letter of apology.

 

Two weeks later I recieved another letter from Natwest saying 'In response to your letter 12th February...' followed by another offer, again for the ammount of charges I had originally claimed. I signed and returned the form as I would with any correspondence from my bank.

 

Today I recieved another cheque. Where do I stand as this is a mistake by the bank offering me money in response to my complaint regarding the original cheque being unsigned.

[RobberBank]

Bank it in a high interest easy access account.....but dont spend it. They'll come asking for it eventually.

[RobberBank]

Or you could take the moral high ground and inform them of their mistake!!!

[Mikeage]

ok, is that all they can do though, ask for it back? I did nothing decietful to obtain the offer, it litterally dropped through my door! People have been scaring me now saying it could be seen as fraud. My confusion lies with the fact both offers are 'in response to *date*...we offer...' where *date* is different in each case, therefore they are 2 separate settlements! (albeit, one that I wasnt actually asking for any money for, was just a complaint!!)

[fendyweather]

I would do as Robber Bank says. Bank it in high interest account, and just sit and wait for them to come back to ask for it back. So long as you havent spent it, and its earning you a bit of interest, and you can always play dumb, even though we know you are not, but they do it, play dumb, "have not received list of charges " when weve sent it 6 times, so you have a valid argument if they come back asking why you cashed it. You say, well I thought one was settlement of claim and other was a goodwill offer being as it was a different date and all, thought you must be compensating me for being an *rse to me, but no harm done, heres your cheque back. My genuine mistake, so sorry, and all that, heres your money. Its not fraud unless you plan to keep it, and if you spend it. I would give em 6 months to come back to you to see if they claim it back and realise their mistake and if they dont by then I would drop them a line saying, what happened, and that you never thought anything of it, double settlement etc. until a friend pointed out to you that it could have been a mistake therefore you are checking with them that it was a goodwill payment and not another settlement etc. etc. Play dumb. They do when it suits em and so long as you have the money to give back to them, then you havent stolen it. Its just been earning you a nice bit of interest and so youve benefited in some way. Just dont spend it. Good Luck. Fendy xxxxx

[reverley]

hi, i too would bank it in a high interest account and sit on it until and if they request it back.

[hagenuk]

I would not recommend that you keep this money under any circumstances.

 

This is money paid under a mistake of fact and Nat West are entitled to recover it. There is caselaw going back over 160 years, one of the earliest is Kelly v. Solari (1841) 152 E.R. 24 at 26 where Baron Parke stated,

 

"I think that where money is paid to another under the influence of a mistake, that is, upon the supposition that a specific fact is true, which would entitle the other to the money, but which fact is untrue, and the money would not have been paid if it had been known to the payer that it was untrue, an action will lie to recover it back, and it is against conscience to retain it."

 

The law on the recovery of money paid by a banker under a mistake of fact was reviewed by Robert Goff J in the case of Barclays Bank Ltd v. WJ Simms & Cooke (Southern) Ltd & Anor [1980] 1 QB 677.

 

Goff J after a detailed analysis of the law deduced the following principles that:

 

(1) If a person pays money to another under a mistake of fact which causes him to make the payment, he is prima facie entitled to recover it as money paid under a mistake of fact.

 

Notwithstanding the above, if you keep quiet about it you are behaving in exactly the same way as the bank you have just made a claim against for unlawfully removing money that was not theirs to take...

 

You should return the cheque. Put simply, it is not yours.

 

This is the second one of these we have seen today and in the other instance, I also advised that the bank was alerted to their mistake.

[livelylad]

Hi, I started my claims procedure against Natwest back in December 06, I recived a cheque for the full ammount of my claim in February 07, however, the cheque they sent me was not signed and I had to return it. The cheque came back signed with a letter of apology.

 

Two weeks later I recieved another letter from Natwest saying 'In response to your letter 12th February...' followed by another offer, again for the ammount of charges I had originally claimed. I signed and returned the form as I would with any correspondence from my bank.

 

Today I recieved another cheque. Where do I stand as this is a mistake by the bank offering me money in response to my complaint regarding the original cheque being unsigned.

 

 

I strongly advise you to send the cheque back. I am not going to get into a debate regarding the legalities of keeping the cheque, banking it etc.

Send the cheque back keep the moral highground.

 

Please be aware any posts that condone unlawful action will be edited.

[fendyweather]

But hes not planning on keep it, just reaping some interest on it for a while. We all know the bank will come asking for it, and so long as he has a plausible excuse for having held onto it, and so long as he hasnt spent it then wheres the harm. He plans on giving it back anyway,, but just holding it for a wee while to make a bit more money on it. I DONT THINK ANYBODY IS SUGGESTING HE KEEP IT PERMANENTLY. Im certainly not anyway, but I just dont see the harm in him making it work for him for a little while, and then wait no more than six months to draw their attention to it. Play dumb...... Fendy xx Your choice, I know, but thats what I would do.

[Mikeage]

(1) If a person pays money to another under a mistake of fact which causes him to make the payment, he is prima facie entitled to recover it as money paid under a mistake of fact.

 

Notwithstanding the above, if you keep quiet about it you are behaving in exactly the same way as the bank you have just made a claim against for unlawfully removing money that was not theirs to take...

 

You should return the cheque. Put simply, it is not yours.

 

This is the second one of these we have seen today and in the other instance, I also advised that the bank was alerted to their mistake.

 

thanks to all that have replied,re the above, the letter stated the offer was 'not accepting responsibility, but as a gesture of *goodwill*...' which I would obviously be entitled to accept!also, could you set me a link to the other similar thread if you have it, might be useful.

 

Not planning on spending the money, just would be nice if I could keep it!

 

Also, with light to hearing about another case of this on the same day, could the banks deliberatly be 'setting people up', so to speak?

[fendyweather]

Did both letters with cheque state same thing, i.e. not admitting liability but as gesture of goodwill etc. Were both amounts identical and did both say as GESTURE OF GOODWILL. ? and were both letters dated different days.

[Mikeage]

yea, identical letters but in response to my letters on 2 separate dates. 1 for the original claim, the second for a complaint about the incompetence of the bank in dealing with my claim.

[Janet-M]

I would not recommend that you keep this money under any circumstances.

 

This is money paid under a mistake of fact and Nat West are entitled to recover it. There is caselaw going back over 160 years, one of the earliest is Kelly v. Solari (1841) 152 E.R. 24 at 26 where Baron Parke stated,

 

"I think that where money is paid to another under the influence of a mistake, that is, upon the supposition that a specific fact is true, which would entitle the other to the money, but which fact is untrue, and the money would not have been paid if it had been known to the payer that it was untrue, an action will lie to recover it back, and it is against conscience to retain it."

 

The law on the recovery of money paid by a banker under a mistake of fact was reviewed by Robert Goff J in the case of Barclays Bank Ltd v. WJ Simms & Cooke (Southern) Ltd & Anor [1980] 1 QB 677.

 

Goff J after a detailed analysis of the law deduced the following principles that:

 

(1) If a person pays money to another under a mistake of fact which causes him to make the payment, he is prima facie entitled to recover it as money paid under a mistake of fact.

 

Notwithstanding the above, if you keep quiet about it you are behaving in exactly the same way as the bank you have just made a claim against for unlawfully removing money that was not theirs to take...

 

You should return the cheque. Put simply, it is not yours.

 

This is the second one of these we have seen today and in the other instance, I also advised that the bank was alerted to their mistake.

Any posts that even hint at advising anyone to keep money that they are not entitled to will be removed.

Cag is here to help consumers 'regain the right' not avoid debt or do the same to banks that has been done to them.

[fendyweather]

Have you fully read the thread though Janet M. It could be a genuine payment twice. Different letters, dated different dates in reponse to different letters. I think you should read the whole thread first before gagging anybody. This could be a genuine mistake by Nasty West or it could be a genuine payment of goodwill for two different letters. NOBODY WAS EVER ADVOCATING HE RIP THEM OFF FOR ANYTHING. Read it through yourself.......................

[Janet-M]

I have read the thread

[fendyweather]

So if you read the thread how come you are of the opinion that he is trying to rip them off ???? Hes not, he said he has every intention of giving them the cheque back. ?? He never said otherwise. ??

[Bookworm]

Hagenuk has quoted law to support the view that OP has no right to keep the money.

 

Unless someone can quote law to support the opposite view, I suggest we're done here.

[Janet-M]

I have not stated that anywhere ..

if you do not like something I have said then please address it with me by PM and not hi-jack someones thread to discuss it .I will leave this post here temp but then will be removing the past couple of post so this thread is not hi-jacked .

[maxine989]

I can't believe you are even considering keeping it, all be it temporarily... after what you have had to go through to get your money back...

 

What happens if they slap a court case on you asking for it back plus unauthorised interest???

 

Send it back... don't push your luck... things have a way of coming back to bite you on the butt!!

 

Be honest and do the right thing. I know it is tempting to keep it, but you will only get into difficulties one way or another if you keep it.

 

 

[fendyweather]

As I dont agree with my gagging order on this one Janet M, Ive sent you a PM about it. We could go on debating this one on here forever otherwise, and Im sure its not the place. Please check your PM's. Thanks.

 

Fendy xx