Author Topic: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error  (Read 12739 times)

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #150 on: October 02, 2019, 10:33:01 AM »
No entrapment.  These people should be prosecuted
The indignation that you and the bank share could be taken more seriously if there had been any criminal or financial consequences for those causing the GFC, since after all they engaged in deliberately fraudulent practices with CDOs and misleading their own clients as to their value.

As it is, it is unclear why $120,000 is prosecutable but $700,000,000,000 is not.
because no one has 700 hump-dillion lying around... because only banks have the computers big enough to store that. and the vaults for show.
but banks are people (at least in USA), with uber powers of jerking off the stupid politicians we the masses elect.
/sarcasm-but-true

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #151 on: October 02, 2019, 01:39:52 PM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 265
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #152 on: October 02, 2019, 05:46:40 PM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #153 on: October 03, 2019, 09:56:12 AM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach. But in this instance, the bank made an error that could have easily been fixed by the couple.

Take the example of somebody losing their wallet. If you find it on the ground, do you 1) spend the money, 2) keep a finder's fee to punish that person for making a mistake that nobody should make, or 3) call that person up and try to return the wallet in a way that is convenient for both of you? Keep in mind during your answer that that person has inconvenienced your day by placing a wallet in your line of sight that had money in it that could be used to purchase things you want.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #154 on: October 03, 2019, 10:26:25 AM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach. But in this instance, the bank made an error that could have easily been fixed by the couple.

Take the example of somebody losing their wallet. If you find it on the ground, do you 1) spend the money, 2) keep a finder's fee to punish that person for making a mistake that nobody should make, or 3) call that person up and try to return the wallet in a way that is convenient for both of you? Keep in mind during your answer that that person has inconvenienced your day by placing a wallet in your line of sight that had money in it that could be used to purchase things you want.

Me personally, I'd return the wallet.  It seems like the right thing to do (I would have called the bank too).  But if someone chose to keep the money in the wallet I wouldn't expect them to go to jail . . . because the person who lost the money is ultimately personally responsible for the loss.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #155 on: October 03, 2019, 10:43:49 AM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach. But in this instance, the bank made an error that could have easily been fixed by the couple.

Take the example of somebody losing their wallet. If you find it on the ground, do you 1) spend the money, 2) keep a finder's fee to punish that person for making a mistake that nobody should make, or 3) call that person up and try to return the wallet in a way that is convenient for both of you? Keep in mind during your answer that that person has inconvenienced your day by placing a wallet in your line of sight that had money in it that could be used to purchase things you want.

Me personally, I'd return the wallet.  It seems like the right thing to do (I would have called the bank too).  But if someone chose to keep the money in the wallet I wouldn't expect them to go to jail . . . because the person who lost the money is ultimately personally responsible for the loss.

But if someone chose to keep the money, would they be on the right side of the law? https://www.lawnow.org/all-is-not-lost-law-lost-and-found/

UpNAtom

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 7
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #156 on: October 03, 2019, 10:48:47 AM »
I was just going to say something like the above.

At least here, you do not have the immediate right to open someone else's mail nor to keep possession of something that is clearly not yours.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #157 on: October 03, 2019, 12:03:14 PM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach. But in this instance, the bank made an error that could have easily been fixed by the couple.

Take the example of somebody losing their wallet. If you find it on the ground, do you 1) spend the money, 2) keep a finder's fee to punish that person for making a mistake that nobody should make, or 3) call that person up and try to return the wallet in a way that is convenient for both of you? Keep in mind during your answer that that person has inconvenienced your day by placing a wallet in your line of sight that had money in it that could be used to purchase things you want.

Me personally, I'd return the wallet.  It seems like the right thing to do (I would have called the bank too).  But if someone chose to keep the money in the wallet I wouldn't expect them to go to jail . . . because the person who lost the money is ultimately personally responsible for the loss.

But if someone chose to keep the money, would they be on the right side of the law? https://www.lawnow.org/all-is-not-lost-law-lost-and-found/


If you aren't, then I feel that there is a fundamental problem with the law.  The duty of responsibility for an object should always ultimately rely on the owner of said object.  There are some weird problems that happen when you shift that responsibility to others.

- I could write my name on a twenty dollar bill, break into your home and place the bill in your wallet, and then demand that you be imprisoned later when you spend the money.

- I could write my name on a stack of twenty dollar bills, drive around the city throwing them out my window, and then demand that anyone who tries to deposit one of these bills at the bank be arrested.

- I am unable to throw away unaddressed junk mail . . . because the unaddressed junk mail could be meant for someone else.  I should instead contact the sender of each piece in order to determine if it was truly intended for me.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2019, 01:06:12 PM by GuitarStv »

PoutineLover

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1209
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #158 on: October 03, 2019, 12:44:48 PM »
You might think that returning a found wallet is the right thing to do, but I've seen that backfire as well. While traveling, a relative of mine found a wallet with no money in it at a bar with slot machines. He turned it in to the bartender in case the owner came back to find it. Unfortunately, it belonged to an aggressive young man who claimed it, and then tried to accuse my relative of stealing a couple hundred from him. The cops ended up being called and both parties told their sides of the story, the security tapes were reviewed and eventually it was decided to just let the whole thing go since there was no evidence either way. I think the guy either lost the money at the slots or never had it to begin with, or someone else stole the money and left the wallet, but we'll never know. Such a stupid, stressful ordeal over what should have been a kind gesture. Having experienced that, I'm not so sure that I would turn in a found wallet again, especially if I found it while traveling in a foreign country.
Finders keepers, losers weepers right?
In reality, I have made efforts to return found items, and people have returned my lost items to me, so I do have some faith in society. But I would never expect a lost item to be returned, it would just be a pleasant surprise if it was.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #159 on: October 03, 2019, 12:56:48 PM »
Not sure that someone can steal something that was lost.

TheGrimSqueaker

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2189
  • Location: A desert wasteland, where none but the weird survive
  • www.theliveinlandlord.com
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #160 on: October 03, 2019, 02:03:54 PM »
You might think that returning a found wallet is the right thing to do, but I've seen that backfire as well. While traveling, a relative of mine found a wallet with no money in it at a bar with slot machines. He turned it in to the bartender in case the owner came back to find it. Unfortunately, it belonged to an aggressive young man who claimed it, and then tried to accuse my relative of stealing a couple hundred from him. The cops ended up being called and both parties told their sides of the story, the security tapes were reviewed and eventually it was decided to just let the whole thing go since there was no evidence either way. I think the guy either lost the money at the slots or never had it to begin with, or someone else stole the money and left the wallet, but we'll never know. Such a stupid, stressful ordeal over what should have been a kind gesture. Having experienced that, I'm not so sure that I would turn in a found wallet again, especially if I found it while traveling in a foreign country.
Finders keepers, losers weepers right?
In reality, I have made efforts to return found items, and people have returned my lost items to me, so I do have some faith in society. But I would never expect a lost item to be returned, it would just be a pleasant surprise if it was.

Years ago, I found a wallet in a restroom on the New York Thruway. The wallet was sitting somewhere it could easily have been left by someone using the facilities. I did not look into the wallet, but immediately turned it in to the security guard. As I was doing this, a woman came charging up saying her wallet was lost. Her picture matched the ID in it, and the ID and cards hadn't been taken, but she then announced that two hundred dollars in cash had been taken out of it, and accused me of having stolen it. She demanded that the officer search me for the money, and find out whether I had cash on me that could have been hers. I did happen to be carrying some cash in my own wallet, but I had an ATM receipt for it and it wasn't the same amount as what the woman had lost. That's probably the only thing that saved me. Because nothing else from her wallet had been taken-- not the change, or the ID, or any of the cards or the small bills-- I personally didn't think she'd lost anything at all and that she put the wallet there as a con game of some kind.

Because of this experience, and because the cop I returned the wallet to believed her and not me, I will never, ever again attempt to return a found wallet.

DadJokes

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 933
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #161 on: October 03, 2019, 02:27:04 PM »
You might think that returning a found wallet is the right thing to do, but I've seen that backfire as well. While traveling, a relative of mine found a wallet with no money in it at a bar with slot machines. He turned it in to the bartender in case the owner came back to find it. Unfortunately, it belonged to an aggressive young man who claimed it, and then tried to accuse my relative of stealing a couple hundred from him. The cops ended up being called and both parties told their sides of the story, the security tapes were reviewed and eventually it was decided to just let the whole thing go since there was no evidence either way. I think the guy either lost the money at the slots or never had it to begin with, or someone else stole the money and left the wallet, but we'll never know. Such a stupid, stressful ordeal over what should have been a kind gesture. Having experienced that, I'm not so sure that I would turn in a found wallet again, especially if I found it while traveling in a foreign country.
Finders keepers, losers weepers right?
In reality, I have made efforts to return found items, and people have returned my lost items to me, so I do have some faith in society. But I would never expect a lost item to be returned, it would just be a pleasant surprise if it was.

Years ago, I found a wallet in a restroom on the New York Thruway. The wallet was sitting somewhere it could easily have been left by someone using the facilities. I did not look into the wallet, but immediately turned it in to the security guard. As I was doing this, a woman came charging up saying her wallet was lost. Her picture matched the ID in it, and the ID and cards hadn't been taken, but she then announced that two hundred dollars in cash had been taken out of it, and accused me of having stolen it. She demanded that the officer search me for the money, and find out whether I had cash on me that could have been hers. I did happen to be carrying some cash in my own wallet, but I had an ATM receipt for it and it wasn't the same amount as what the woman had lost. That's probably the only thing that saved me. Because nothing else from her wallet had been taken-- not the change, or the ID, or any of the cards or the small bills-- I personally didn't think she'd lost anything at all and that she put the wallet there as a con game of some kind.

Because of this experience, and because the cop I returned the wallet to believed her and not me, I will never, ever again attempt to return a found wallet.

Wow. To both stories. I would bet that they were both cons, especially yours TGS.

I worked in a convenience store for a couple years during and after high school. Dozens of IDs were left behind, as well as a handful of wallets. If the person didn't return during my shift, I would take the ID/wallet to the address on the ID. They were always within a mile or two of the store. Everyone was grateful, and I never was accused of anything.

In hindsight, it was probably a bad idea. Besides the fact that a stranger is showing up at your door (creepy), people move and don't update the address on their ID all the time.

Samuel

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #162 on: October 03, 2019, 02:36:17 PM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

I'm defending this specific bank in this specific situation. I don't get why you insist that the bad behavior of their industry is relevant at all to this specific situation, where the demonstrated bad faith is all on the couple's side.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #163 on: October 03, 2019, 03:12:17 PM »
If you aren't, then I feel that there is a fundamental problem with the law.  The duty of responsibility for an object should always ultimately rely on the owner of said object.  There are some weird problems that happen when you shift that responsibility to others.

- I could write my name on a twenty dollar bill, break into your home and place the bill in your wallet, and then demand that you be imprisoned later when you spend the money.

- I could write my name on a stack of twenty dollar bills, drive around the city throwing them out my window, and then demand that anyone who tries to deposit one of these bills at the bank be arrested.

- I am unable to throw away unaddressed junk mail . . . because the unaddressed junk mail could be meant for someone else.  I should instead contact the sender of each piece in order to determine if it was truly intended for me.

Can you come up with some better examples? As far as I know, it is illegal to deface currency, it is illegal to break into somebody's home, it is illegal to litter, and I'm quite certain that everyone will agree that junk mail has essentially zero value.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 265
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #164 on: October 04, 2019, 04:19:18 AM »
You guys act like banks are bad. They actually provide a very good service at rock bottom rates. What's the spread between the borrowing rate and savings rate? If you do it right, it's less than 1%. Where else in life is the house profit less than 1%? Plus they give you a bank manager who will respond to all of your requests and which obviates the need to queue up, etc.

Banks can provide useful services. What people staunchly on the side of the bank have failed to do is explain what makes the banks above reproach for their mistake and for the fact that they often screw customers over in ways specifically related to this instance (in addition to other things they have been caught doing). They're just not a white knight good guy that we owe defense to....

That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach. But in this instance, the bank made an error that could have easily been fixed by the couple.

Take the example of somebody losing their wallet. If you find it on the ground, do you 1) spend the money, 2) keep a finder's fee to punish that person for making a mistake that nobody should make, or 3) call that person up and try to return the wallet in a way that is convenient for both of you? Keep in mind during your answer that that person has inconvenienced your day by placing a wallet in your line of sight that had money in it that could be used to purchase things you want.

I'm defending this specific bank in this specific situation. I don't get why you insist that the bad behavior of their industry is relevant at all to this specific situation, where the demonstrated bad faith is all on the couple's side.

With this comment, I think I'm going to bow out of the conversation, because it's apparent that the pro-bank perspective will never see the other side. I will end with this:

To your question about a wallet, I don't know what I would do about a wallet. I would probably call them up if it was in a random park or give it to an authority if it were in an establishment with one. With the stories that have come up, though, I might not now....but that's a different story :).

"That's because nobody has stated that the banks are above reproach." This quote is probably why I'm going to bow out, no offense. The thing is, it has been implicitly stated that the banks are above reproach. For Pete's sake, people taking my viewpoint have basically been accused of victim blaming for trying to say the banks have responsibility in it and that that they caused the situation - a ridiculous and extreme point. In addition, your example of giving back a wallet or not and really all of the analogies used along that line are missing a key point that people keep trying to avoid that I have stated in most of my last messages. When I lose a wallet, I, average Joe citizen, made a mistake in one of my 18,000 daily things I did. When banks take money out of one account and move it to another incorrectly, they are making a mistake at their job. Thankfully in their job, the significant risks are smaller than in other professions, but they're screwing up at their job. That's the difference between the wallet perspective. Also, your comment on would I try to get them to pay a finders fee is silly - no, of course I wouldn't. They made a mistake in one of their, again, 18,000 daily things they did. Fortunately that's not only not what happened, but it happened in reverse which I'll get to in a bit. When a corporation makes a mistake at their job, it's a little more serious. I don't think the couple should have tried to pay them back 118k and pocket 2k for the inconvenience. I do, however, think regulations should evaluate this in terms of how often it happens and what the banks do when it happens - it = their mistake.

Moving on from this to your point and Samuel's point about this particular bank in this particular situation, for one, it can't be divorced from the overall ways in which banks act. That is to charge fees whenever they absolutely can. Overall actions of corporations are what drive regulation, so to try to look at this in isolation is flawed. But let's do that, because we don't even have to look at it overall to see the same problem I keep talking about. The bank charged the couple fees on top of the money they incorrectly transferred in this situation. They've literally made the case themselves. Let's go back to the wallet analogy (even though I've showed why it's flawed) just to argue the point. I'd be happy to have my money back if I lost my wallet because I had made the mistake. I wouldn't be thinking about trying to charge the means through which it got back to me in any way a fee for failing to get it back to me in time or whatever. In this very situation, the bank showed that they are incompetent and jerks, proving why they should take some responsibility in this situation - whether to improve their methods so this couldn't happen again or whatnot. Instead, they doubled down and tried to charge fees for their mistake.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #165 on: October 04, 2019, 05:48:22 AM »
The reason you are bowing out of the conversation is because you cannot accept that a corporation can be shady in some dealings, proper in other dealings, and have those dealings separately evaluated. For example, for all I know Walmart might treat its employees like shit (I don't know, maybe it does or doesn't), but this doesn't excuse me from trying to shoplift from them or abuse their returns policy.

In simpler terms, two wrongs don't make a right.


Kyle Schuant

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 852
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #166 on: October 04, 2019, 06:36:45 AM »
The reason you are bowing out of the conversation is because you cannot accept that a corporation can be shady in some dealings, proper in other dealings, and have those dealings separately evaluated.
Though corporations are treated as legal persons, they are different from real persons in this regard.

jinga nation

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1276
  • Location: 'Murica's Johnson
  • Left, Right, Peddlin' Shite
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #167 on: October 04, 2019, 08:07:54 AM »
You might think that returning a found wallet is the right thing to do, but I've seen that backfire as well. While traveling, a relative of mine found a wallet with no money in it at a bar with slot machines. He turned it in to the bartender in case the owner came back to find it. Unfortunately, it belonged to an aggressive young man who claimed it, and then tried to accuse my relative of stealing a couple hundred from him. The cops ended up being called and both parties told their sides of the story, the security tapes were reviewed and eventually it was decided to just let the whole thing go since there was no evidence either way. I think the guy either lost the money at the slots or never had it to begin with, or someone else stole the money and left the wallet, but we'll never know. Such a stupid, stressful ordeal over what should have been a kind gesture. Having experienced that, I'm not so sure that I would turn in a found wallet again, especially if I found it while traveling in a foreign country.
Finders keepers, losers weepers right?
In reality, I have made efforts to return found items, and people have returned my lost items to me, so I do have some faith in society. But I would never expect a lost item to be returned, it would just be a pleasant surprise if it was.

Years ago, I found a wallet in a restroom on the New York Thruway. The wallet was sitting somewhere it could easily have been left by someone using the facilities. I did not look into the wallet, but immediately turned it in to the security guard. As I was doing this, a woman came charging up saying her wallet was lost. Her picture matched the ID in it, and the ID and cards hadn't been taken, but she then announced that two hundred dollars in cash had been taken out of it, and accused me of having stolen it. She demanded that the officer search me for the money, and find out whether I had cash on me that could have been hers. I did happen to be carrying some cash in my own wallet, but I had an ATM receipt for it and it wasn't the same amount as what the woman had lost. That's probably the only thing that saved me. Because nothing else from her wallet had been taken-- not the change, or the ID, or any of the cards or the small bills-- I personally didn't think she'd lost anything at all and that she put the wallet there as a con game of some kind.

Because of this experience, and because the cop I returned the wallet to believed her and not me, I will never, ever again attempt to return a found wallet.
A good deed seldom goes unpunished.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #168 on: October 04, 2019, 08:22:44 AM »
I do, however, think regulations should evaluate this in terms of how often it happens and what the banks do when it happens - it = their mistake.

I would agree, if the bank's mistake had done any material harm to the couple. For example, if the couple had $12k in their bank account and the bank mistakenly removed $10k, the bank should make the couple right for all overcharges, interest, and an additional penalty for the trouble the couple had to go through and the possible hit to their credit score. Regulations are in place to this effect.

Quote
When banks take money out of one account and move it to another incorrectly, they are making a mistake at their job.

You are saying this like somebody making a mistake at their job should be punished with a day at the stockade. I'm not sure if you're aware, but everyone who has ever worked has made a mistake at their job. Some mistakes are consequential, some less so; this one should have fallen in the latter category, if it weren't for the couple's greed.

Quote
Moving on from this to your point and Samuel's point about this particular bank in this particular situation, for one, it can't be divorced from the overall ways in which banks act.

This is both faulty logic and based off a faulty premise. Starting with the logic, any mistake someone makes should generally be judged based off the severity of that mistake. So yes, a bank should be punished heavily when it seriously fucks up, but in this case it was a very minor fuck up that could have easily been rectified (until the couple majorly fucked it up).

The faulty premise is that all banks act in some shady way. This is not my experience. Some banks act pretty shady, and you know what? I avoid doing business with those banks. Other banks I've had nothing but pleasant experiences with. Additionally, if you think the banking industry as a whole is rotten, you could even live your life without ever using the services of a bank (well, sort of; you would still need to carry around Federal Reserve Notes in order to make transactions).

Quote
Overall actions of corporations are what drive regulation, so to try to look at this in isolation is flawed. But let's do that, because we don't even have to look at it overall to see the same problem I keep talking about. The bank charged the couple fees on top of the money they incorrectly transferred in this situation. They've literally made the case themselves. Let's go back to the wallet analogy (even though I've showed why it's flawed) just to argue the point. I'd be happy to have my money back if I lost my wallet because I had made the mistake. I wouldn't be thinking about trying to charge the means through which it got back to me in any way a fee for failing to get it back to me in time or whatever. In this very situation, the bank showed that they are incompetent and jerks, proving why they should take some responsibility in this situation - whether to improve their methods so this couldn't happen again or whatnot. Instead, they doubled down and tried to charge fees for their mistake.

First, your analogy with the wallet is deeply flawed. The couple did not give back the wallet. Rather, they spent the money as quickly as they could on a bunch of bullshit in hopes that they would never have to pay back the money. A better analogy would be that this couple maxed out your credit cards after finding your wallet, then after you trace back the purchases to their house, they tell you "Sorry, I thought that money was mine since I found it. I guess you can have the RV and Camaro that I bought with it, but please don't get angry at me, I didn't know any better."

Second, whether the bank should have charged late fees is debatable. I think the tactic is a form of playing hardball in order to try to recover as much of that money as they can. This tactic may backfire in the form of public opinion, though in my opinion they are doing nothing wrong except playing by the rules that were generated by law and the terms of contract that the couple signed when joining the bank.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #169 on: October 04, 2019, 08:23:25 AM »
You might think that returning a found wallet is the right thing to do, but I've seen that backfire as well. While traveling, a relative of mine found a wallet with no money in it at a bar with slot machines. He turned it in to the bartender in case the owner came back to find it. Unfortunately, it belonged to an aggressive young man who claimed it, and then tried to accuse my relative of stealing a couple hundred from him. The cops ended up being called and both parties told their sides of the story, the security tapes were reviewed and eventually it was decided to just let the whole thing go since there was no evidence either way. I think the guy either lost the money at the slots or never had it to begin with, or someone else stole the money and left the wallet, but we'll never know. Such a stupid, stressful ordeal over what should have been a kind gesture. Having experienced that, I'm not so sure that I would turn in a found wallet again, especially if I found it while traveling in a foreign country.
Finders keepers, losers weepers right?
In reality, I have made efforts to return found items, and people have returned my lost items to me, so I do have some faith in society. But I would never expect a lost item to be returned, it would just be a pleasant surprise if it was.

Years ago, I found a wallet in a restroom on the New York Thruway. The wallet was sitting somewhere it could easily have been left by someone using the facilities. I did not look into the wallet, but immediately turned it in to the security guard. As I was doing this, a woman came charging up saying her wallet was lost. Her picture matched the ID in it, and the ID and cards hadn't been taken, but she then announced that two hundred dollars in cash had been taken out of it, and accused me of having stolen it. She demanded that the officer search me for the money, and find out whether I had cash on me that could have been hers. I did happen to be carrying some cash in my own wallet, but I had an ATM receipt for it and it wasn't the same amount as what the woman had lost. That's probably the only thing that saved me. Because nothing else from her wallet had been taken-- not the change, or the ID, or any of the cards or the small bills-- I personally didn't think she'd lost anything at all and that she put the wallet there as a con game of some kind.

Because of this experience, and because the cop I returned the wallet to believed her and not me, I will never, ever again attempt to return a found wallet.
A good deed seldom goes unpunished.

I have to say, that's some crazy scammy shit.

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 265
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #170 on: October 04, 2019, 10:35:31 AM »
The reason you are bowing out of the conversation is because you cannot accept that a corporation can be shady in some dealings, proper in other dealings, and have those dealings separately evaluated. For example, for all I know Walmart might treat its employees like shit (I don't know, maybe it does or doesn't), but this doesn't excuse me from trying to shoplift from them or abuse their returns policy.

In simpler terms, two wrongs don't make a right.

Lol, the reason I'm bowing out of this conversation is my questions continually aren't answered and you're ignoring my answers to your question. In no way have I once excused the couple for stealing or said that criminal charges shouldn't be levied against them. Please, that straw man is out of straw, stop hitting him :).

For my questions, no one addresses the fact that the bank charged fees for their mistakes. No one addresses the fact that charging fees is part of a bigger picture issue that shows the banks have leverage that means that it might be worth addressing their responsibility in the issue of making a mistake beyond just verbal acknowledgement that they did. This can be done in conjunction with criminal charges for the couple. I can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time :).

Wolfpack Mustachian

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 265
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #171 on: October 04, 2019, 10:44:29 AM »
I do, however, think regulations should evaluate this in terms of how often it happens and what the banks do when it happens - it = their mistake.

I would agree, if the bank's mistake had done any material harm to the couple. For example, if the couple had $12k in their bank account and the bank mistakenly removed $10k, the bank should make the couple right for all overcharges, interest, and an additional penalty for the trouble the couple had to go through and the possible hit to their credit score. Regulations are in place to this effect.


The bank charged them a fee for their mistake beyond repayment of the money. No one has answered this. Feel free to do so.

Quote
When banks take money out of one account and move it to another incorrectly, they are making a mistake at their job.

You are saying this like somebody making a mistake at their job should be punished with a day at the stockade. I'm not sure if you're aware, but everyone who has ever worked has made a mistake at their job. Some mistakes are consequential, some less so; this one should have fallen in the latter category, if it weren't for the couple's greed.


The couple will be punished for their mistake. The bank will not be punished for their mistake (albeit one with less malice) and will in fact try to punish further because of their mistake.

Quote
Moving on from this to your point and Samuel's point about this particular bank in this particular situation, for one, it can't be divorced from the overall ways in which banks act.

This is both faulty logic and based off a faulty premise. Starting with the logic, any mistake someone makes should generally be judged based off the severity of that mistake. So yes, a bank should be punished heavily when it seriously fucks up, but in this case it was a very minor fuck up that could have easily been rectified (until the couple majorly fucked it up).



The extent of the mistake along with statistics on how often it happens should certainly play into how it is handled. You claim I have faulty logic in looking at the bigger picture and then argue against something completely different than me looking at the bigger picture.......Can you be coherent on that point?


Quote
The faulty premise is that all banks act in some shady way. This is not my experience. Some banks act pretty shady, and you know what? I avoid doing business with those banks. Other banks I've had nothing but pleasant experiences with. Additionally, if you think the banking industry as a whole is rotten, you could even live your life without ever using the services of a bank (well, sort of; you would still need to carry around Federal Reserve Notes in order to make transactions).

I'm glad you've had good experiences with banks....

Quote
Overall actions of corporations are what drive regulation, so to try to look at this in isolation is flawed. But let's do that, because we don't even have to look at it overall to see the same problem I keep talking about. The bank charged the couple fees on top of the money they incorrectly transferred in this situation. They've literally made the case themselves. Let's go back to the wallet analogy (even though I've showed why it's flawed) just to argue the point. I'd be happy to have my money back if I lost my wallet because I had made the mistake. I wouldn't be thinking about trying to charge the means through which it got back to me in any way a fee for failing to get it back to me in time or whatever. In this very situation, the bank showed that they are incompetent and jerks, proving why they should take some responsibility in this situation - whether to improve their methods so this couldn't happen again or whatnot. Instead, they doubled down and tried to charge fees for their mistake.

First, your analogy with the wallet is deeply flawed. The couple did not give back the wallet. Rather, they spent the money as quickly as they could on a bunch of bullshit in hopes that they would never have to pay back the money. A better analogy would be that this couple maxed out your credit cards after finding your wallet, then after you trace back the purchases to their house, they tell you "Sorry, I thought that money was mine since I found it. I guess you can have the RV and Camaro that I bought with it, but please don't get angry at me, I didn't know any better."

Second, whether the bank should have charged late fees is debatable. I think the tactic is a form of playing hardball in order to try to recover as much of that money as they can. This tactic may backfire in the form of public opinion, though in my opinion they are doing nothing wrong except playing by the rules that were generated by law and the terms of contract that the couple signed when joining the bank.

It was your analogy of a wallet to begin with....I agree it was flawed :). The couple didn't give it back, but my point is the bank charge fees beyond giving it back. Could someone please for the love of Pete answer that point :)?

And no, saying it's "debatable" to play hard ball is not answering for why the bank should ethically charge money for their mistake.

So yes, someone please explain the ethical reasons for charging fees for your mistake and why we shouldn't look at the overall picture of banks having more leverage to actually do the charging of fees even when they have made the mistake, and then the conversation might be worthy of continuing imo...

Dang, bowing out is really hard, lol.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #172 on: October 04, 2019, 12:20:54 PM »
So yes, someone please explain the ethical reasons for charging fees for your mistake and why we shouldn't look at the overall picture of banks having more leverage to actually do the charging of fees even when they have made the mistake, and then the conversation might be worthy of continuing imo...

The bank should ethically charge fees because the couple illegally spent the bank's money, and it is now requiring the bank to expend a lot of effort to get that money back. They should charge these fees in a method that complies with the law and the contract between the bank and couple. I said that in this case it was more a form of hardball because that couple is unlikely to ever pay back the full amount, let alone late fees.

If someone found my wallet and maxed my credit cards, and if I was able to determine their identity, and if they had any money to their name, I'd sue their ass off for that money, lawyer's fees, and the cost for my time used to get that money back.

The minor mistake of the bank is irrelevant toward whether or not the couple owes the money back to the bank. Its only relevancy is in the level of punishment the couple should receive for spending it (which, in my opinion, they should not receive jail time for this action, as they have professed that they did not intend to defraud the bank).

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #173 on: October 04, 2019, 12:29:21 PM »
The couple didn't max out credit cards.  They spent the money they found in the 'wallet'.


Why is handing someone 120,000$ (and letting them withdraw it over an extended period of time) a minor mistake . . . but spending 120,000$ that an idiot gives you a crime?

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #174 on: October 04, 2019, 01:40:17 PM »
The couple didn't max out credit cards.  They spent the money they found in the 'wallet'.


Why is handing someone 120,000$ (and letting them withdraw it over an extended period of time) a minor mistake . . . but spending 120,000$ that an idiot gives you a crime?

There are numerous examples of what I consider to be minor mistakes which could result in major consequences. For example, I've made minor mistakes when driving or riding my bike that, under different circumstances, could have had dire consequences. Let's say I'm riding my bike and accidentally drift out of the bike lane into a lane of traffic right in front of a car. The car in that lane could respond by (1) asserting what he believes to be his right to that lane and running me over or (2) realizing I made a mistake, move over or brake as necessary, and totally avoid the mess. Let's say he chooses (1) and proceeds to squash me. He then drives off, because he feels he's done nothing wrong, because I was the one who made the mistake. Video evidence is found, and the police try to track down the perp, who avoids the police because of course he's done nothing wrong. When finally apprehended, he points out I was the one who made the mistake, so I got what was coming for me. And he wouldn't be totally wrong, except that the punishment was (a) illegal and (b) incommensurate with the mistake. The proper punishment would be for police to pull over people who cut off other people.

To relate this back to the bank's case: there are several on here that insist the bank should be punished when it makes a transactional mistake, but it already is punished. Just like the bike rider who makes a mistake and was run over by a douche, banks can find that their often minor transactional mistakes can have huge consequences if they happen to involve unscrupulous individuals (or couples); also, if they accidentally drain somebody's account, they will have to cover fees and interest and any lawyer's fees, if applicable. So the banks clearly have incentives not to make these kinds of mistakes.

Samuel

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
  • Location: the slippery slope
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #175 on: October 04, 2019, 02:27:22 PM »
The reason you are bowing out of the conversation is because you cannot accept that a corporation can be shady in some dealings, proper in other dealings, and have those dealings separately evaluated. For example, for all I know Walmart might treat its employees like shit (I don't know, maybe it does or doesn't), but this doesn't excuse me from trying to shoplift from them or abuse their returns policy.

In simpler terms, two wrongs don't make a right.

Lol, the reason I'm bowing out of this conversation is my questions continually aren't answered and you're ignoring my answers to your question. In no way have I once excused the couple for stealing or said that criminal charges shouldn't be levied against them. Please, that straw man is out of straw, stop hitting him :).

For my questions, no one addresses the fact that the bank charged fees for their mistakes. No one addresses the fact that charging fees is part of a bigger picture issue that shows the banks have leverage that means that it might be worth addressing their responsibility in the issue of making a mistake beyond just verbal acknowledgement that they did. This can be done in conjunction with criminal charges for the couple. I can walk and chew bubble gum at the same time :).

The only fees I saw referenced were overdraft fees. When the bank reversed the mistaken deposit the account was $107,000 in overdraft due to the intentional (and we all agree, criminal) spending. Combined with the attempted ghosting an overdraft fee seems appropriate to me.

Our actual disagreement seems to be in our assumptions of how the bank would handle a much smaller error, where the extra money could have been overlooked and the overdraft be unintentional. If it was $100, and the couple were cooperative and worked with the bank to recoup the money I expect the bank would not charge an overdraft fee, or waive any that were applied automatically. My banks have usually been reasonable (or at least wary of public outrage). I'm guessing you assume the bank would hammer them with any fee they think applies and not budge, regardless of their responsibility or the good faith exhibited by the customer.

I see the other side, I just don't share the assumptions.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #176 on: October 04, 2019, 02:27:49 PM »
The couple didn't max out credit cards.  They spent the money they found in the 'wallet'.


Why is handing someone 120,000$ (and letting them withdraw it over an extended period of time) a minor mistake . . . but spending 120,000$ that an idiot gives you a crime?

Intention.

Are we really having this conversation? Christ almighty.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #177 on: October 04, 2019, 02:35:18 PM »
You're equating driving a vehicle into someone with cycling out of a lane.  These are very different actions.

I was equating a bank putting 120,000$ into someone's account with a couple taking 120,000$ out of their own account.  These are the same actions - transfer of the same amount of money.  If the one is a minor mistake (as you said), surely the other is as well.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #178 on: October 04, 2019, 02:57:21 PM »
If the couple genuinely believed the $120,000 was their own money, e.g. they had regular 6 figure transactions all the time, or if they intended to not dissipate it but accidentally (somehow) withdrew it by mistake, then it would be equivalent.

If the couple knew the $120,000 was not their own money, but dissipated it anyway (like these felons did), then they intended to deprive the rightful owner of it and it is stealing.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #179 on: October 04, 2019, 03:07:35 PM »
You're equating driving a vehicle into someone with cycling out of a lane.  These are very different actions.

I was equating a bank putting 120,000$ into someone's account with a couple taking 120,000$ out of their own account.  These are the same actions - transfer of the same amount of money.  If the one is a minor mistake (as you said), surely the other is as well.

You state they are different actions, but they seem similar enough to me. The motor vehicle driver and the cyclist are both simply using the road for transportation. The cyclist made the mistake of cutting into the car's lane, and the car simply just kept driving in its lane. If the one is a minor mistake, surely the other is as well.

And what Bloop Bloop said.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #180 on: October 07, 2019, 08:17:09 AM »
If the couple genuinely believed the $120,000 was their own money, e.g. they had regular 6 figure transactions all the time, or if they intended to not dissipate it but accidentally (somehow) withdrew it by mistake, then it would be equivalent.

If the couple knew the $120,000 was not their own money, but dissipated it anyway (like these felons did), then they intended to deprive the rightful owner of it and it is stealing.

You've taken a pretty hard line on the assumption that these people knew what they were doing... I'm less certain. Considering the level of ignorance some people have with regards to money, I think it's plausible that they thought the money just "appeared" and didn't belong to anyone. Viewing money as having magical properties is actually quite common*. Or perhaps they think banks print/create money; I've talked to adults who believed this. If they had thought it through to the extent that you are so certain they did, they should have also known they'd be caught but that doesn't seem to be the case.

None of this changes the fact that they stole the money, but I think it's worth consideration. I suspect your abilities for cognitive reasoning are above average but given this conversation and others on this forum I'm not sure you fully acknowledge that. Not everyone is working with the same set of tools. And again, I'm not suggesting that this means they should get a pass, just that it's worth consideration. When I keep an open mind and try to see different perspectives I get a lot more out of these conversations than just trying to beat my point of view into someone else.

*One of my favorite lines from a coworker was, "Before you have kids you better take some vacations and spend some money while you still have it". This, from an otherwise intelligent person, leads me to the conclusion that dollar signs cause a short circuit in some people's brains.

Lichen

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 423
  • Location: PNW
  • Just another dharma bum
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #181 on: October 07, 2019, 08:32:06 AM »


You've taken a pretty hard line on the assumption that these people knew what they were doing... I'm less certain. Considering the level of ignorance some people have with regards to money, I think it's plausible that they thought the money just "appeared" and didn't belong to anyone. Viewing money as having magical properties is actually quite common*.

Add to this the urban legends surrounding bank errors and the mentality that the customer is always right, and these people may have actually thought they were in the right. I've met a lot of people that think that bank errors (or payroll errors, any financial error) in their favor are theirs to keep, just like they were in the game of Monopoly. True, they should have actually researched to see if this was fact, but many people don't seem to have the cognitive reasoning skills or common sense to think that far ahead.

Plus, U.S. banks ARE the enemy in many cases, especially for lower income people. I can't speak to banking in other countries, of course. I don't expect pity for low income people from certain posters considering their history on such topics, but it's true. Ridiculous and complicated fees, bank errors in the bank's favor that are difficult to correct, holding deposits or withdrawals to pump up fees, and shady practices trying to push products are the norm. (I worked account services for a big bank that did not survive the great recession. I'm sure some things have changed, but man, there are a lot of bad consumer practices that banks still need to atone for. As for myself, I'll stick to smaller credit unions.)


Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #182 on: October 07, 2019, 08:45:12 AM »
By the same token, if the bank hands money over to a client's account and then facilitates their removal of the money from the bank I don't think the bank should be considered blameless and should shoulder an amount of financial loss.  While not typical, this kind of 'leaving the virtual bank doors open' does happen surprisingly often.

Please tell us, how much of the loss should the bank shoulder? (Not de facto how much they will shoulder, but the law should state that if the bank places $x in someone's account by mistake, that person is entitled to y% and the bank to 1-y%. Call it a finder's fee.)

There's certainly a lot of room for discussion on this, but going with my gut I'd say that about 15% of total amount should be immediately non-recoverable, with the non-recoverable amount increasing by 2% per month after that.  That would both provide penalty for the error they committed initially, and incentive to quickly find their misplaced money . . . while not being unduly punitive.

Been meaning to respond to this one. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with government setting laws that penalizes errors made by a profession. However, I feel for this case a civil suit would be appropriate if there is any loss that is not compensated by the bank.

The main reason I'm against this kind of law: if one uses government laws to penalize banks for these types of mistakes, what other professions should be penalized by law for making mistakes? And if a party is harmed, what is wrong with using the currently available tort system to make the parties whole?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #183 on: October 07, 2019, 10:04:00 AM »
I'd argue that the currently available legal system is heavily slanted to favor the party with the most money.

Boofinator

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1117
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #184 on: October 07, 2019, 12:25:17 PM »
I'd argue that the currently available legal system is heavily slanted to favor the party with the most money.

Made a slight change to your statement. I doubt there has ever been a legal system that did not probabilistically favor the wealthy, for reasons both inherent (being able to afford better lawyers) and prejudicial (some equate wealth to honor or some other prestige).

That being said, it would be interesting to read a case study or two where a party was wronged by a bank, and the tort system or arbitration did not side with the wronged party. The case under discussion certainly does not fit the bill.

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #185 on: October 07, 2019, 10:00:21 PM »


You've taken a pretty hard line on the assumption that these people knew what they were doing... I'm less certain. Considering the level of ignorance some people have with regards to money, I think it's plausible that they thought the money just "appeared" and didn't belong to anyone. Viewing money as having magical properties is actually quite common*.

Add to this the urban legends surrounding bank errors and the mentality that the customer is always right, and these people may have actually thought they were in the right. I've met a lot of people that think that bank errors (or payroll errors, any financial error) in their favor are theirs to keep, just like they were in the game of Monopoly. True, they should have actually researched to see if this was fact, but many people don't seem to have the cognitive reasoning skills or common sense to think that far ahead.

Plus, U.S. banks ARE the enemy in many cases, especially for lower income people. I can't speak to banking in other countries, of course. I don't expect pity for low income people from certain posters considering their history on such topics, but it's true. Ridiculous and complicated fees, bank errors in the bank's favor that are difficult to correct, holding deposits or withdrawals to pump up fees, and shady practices trying to push products are the norm. (I worked account services for a big bank that did not survive the great recession. I'm sure some things have changed, but man, there are a lot of bad consumer practices that banks still need to atone for. As for myself, I'll stick to smaller credit unions.)

If the couple magically thought that the money was in fact theirs (despite never earning it), then they should not have evaded/resisted the bank's attempts to communicate with them afterwards. The fact that they did, bespeaks a consciousness of guilt.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #186 on: October 09, 2019, 11:11:35 AM »
Part of the "magical" thinking here is the bank taking money back after it has been spent(overdraft). 

If money can magically disappear, why can't it magically appear?

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #187 on: October 09, 2019, 04:25:29 PM »
You should have been the defence lawyer! Perhaps the couple would have got acquitted with your strategy.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #188 on: October 09, 2019, 06:31:01 PM »
You should have been the defence lawyer! Perhaps the couple would have got acquitted with your strategy.
Maybe if the judge was Jay Powell.

But like I said earlier in the thread, there's an aspect of fungibility that makes this weird.  If I hand you $20, or $20 of merchandise, I can't un-hand it to you.  But banks can!

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #189 on: October 09, 2019, 08:22:45 PM »
You should have been the defence lawyer! Perhaps the couple would have got acquitted with your strategy.
Maybe if the judge was Jay Powell.

But like I said earlier in the thread, there's an aspect of fungibility that makes this weird.  If I hand you $20, or $20 of merchandise, I can't un-hand it to you.  But banks can!

That's because you're held responsible for your actions (even if they're mistakes).  A bank is not held responsible for their actions.

Wrenchturner

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 503
  • Age: 31
  • Location: Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #190 on: October 09, 2019, 09:15:18 PM »
You should have been the defence lawyer! Perhaps the couple would have got acquitted with your strategy.
Maybe if the judge was Jay Powell.

But like I said earlier in the thread, there's an aspect of fungibility that makes this weird.  If I hand you $20, or $20 of merchandise, I can't un-hand it to you.  But banks can!

That's because you're held responsible for your actions (even if they're mistakes).  A bank is not held responsible for their actions.

Schrodinger's money.  Macro rules for fiat banks don't scale down to simple one-on-one transactions very well.

(If banks get held responsible for their actions, we'll all be broke!)

Edit: another way to think of this is to play it out with--say--gold.  80oz of gold are mistakenly given to me, I then spend it all, then somehow 80oz of gold are conjured with magic, given back to the first party, and I now own -80oz of gold.  Not possible in this universe.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2019, 09:22:21 PM by Wrenchturner »

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #191 on: October 10, 2019, 08:19:45 AM »
You should have been the defence lawyer! Perhaps the couple would have got acquitted with your strategy.
Maybe if the judge was Jay Powell.

But like I said earlier in the thread, there's an aspect of fungibility that makes this weird.  If I hand you $20, or $20 of merchandise, I can't un-hand it to you.  But banks can!

That's because you're held responsible for your actions (even if they're mistakes).  A bank is not held responsible for their actions.

Schrodinger's money.  Macro rules for fiat banks don't scale down to simple one-on-one transactions very well.

(If banks get held responsible for their actions, we'll all be broke!)

Edit: another way to think of this is to play it out with--say--gold.  80oz of gold are mistakenly given to me, I then spend it all, then somehow 80oz of gold are conjured with magic, given back to the first party, and I now own -80oz of gold.  Not possible in this universe.

Totally possible.

-80oz of gold is worth two kneecaps and a broken nose.

Montecarlo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 311
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #192 on: October 10, 2019, 11:39:08 AM »
Lol you all crack me up.

Of course the bank has the responsibility to immediately credit the missing funds to the legitimate owners and pay damages, and the shareholders take the loss.

Of course stealing money is a crime.

Of course putting these criminals in jail would be a foolish use of taxpayer money.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 14182
  • Age: 38
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #193 on: October 10, 2019, 12:21:36 PM »
Of course stealing money is a crime.

Stealing money is a crime.

If I pickpocket you, put 100$ in your wallet, and then put it back into your pocket and you spend the 100$ . . . is that really theft?  Even if you didn't remember putting the 100$ in your wallet to begin with?

That's where things get a little tricky on this one.

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #194 on: October 10, 2019, 12:32:36 PM »
Of course stealing money is a crime.

Stealing money is a crime.

If I pickpocket you, put 100$ in your wallet, and then put it back into your pocket and you spend the 100$ . . . is that really theft?  Even if you didn't remember putting the 100$ in your wallet to begin with?

That's where things get a little tricky on this one.

Around and around we go :)

Two major differences between your scenario and the bank error. Intent -  If you placed $100 is their wallet, it was intentional, not an error. I could even argue that I was under the impression that you intended to surprise me with the money as a gift. I can't say for sure but I bet it would hold up in front of a reasonable judge, hiding money for other people to find is a thing people do. Plausible deniability -  $100 is not the same as $120k. I could plausibly argue that I didn't notice the extra $100. This couple could not make that argument due to the sum and the sudden and drastic change in their spending habits.

Courts are allowed to use basic human reasoning, they are not a computer program which take in data and spit out verdicts.

Montecarlo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 311
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #195 on: October 10, 2019, 01:58:49 PM »
I think the difference between money in the wallet scenario is that money is “abandoned”, not “lost”.  Generally speaking you aren’t allowed to claim lost property as your own, only abandoned.  It might have been legal for them to withdraw the money, give it to the police, and if the error wasn’t caught on a certain time period they could claim it.  Not sure about that.  Would be cheeky to try!

Bloop Bloop

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1035
  • Location: Melbourne, Australia
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #196 on: October 10, 2019, 04:24:06 PM »
Wow, wow, wow.

All I can say is: thank god for the justice system.

Just Joe

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3218
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #197 on: October 11, 2019, 08:18:27 AM »
Of course stealing money is a crime.

Stealing money is a crime.

If I pickpocket you, put 100$ in your wallet, and then put it back into your pocket and you spend the 100$ . . . is that really theft?  Even if you didn't remember putting the 100$ in your wallet to begin with?

That's where things get a little tricky on this one.

Around and around we go :)

Two major differences between your scenario and the bank error. Intent -  If you placed $100 is their wallet, it was intentional, not an error. I could even argue that I was under the impression that you intended to surprise me with the money as a gift. I can't say for sure but I bet it would hold up in front of a reasonable judge, hiding money for other people to find is a thing people do. Plausible deniability -  $100 is not the same as $120k. I could plausibly argue that I didn't notice the extra $100. This couple could not make that argument due to the sum and the sudden and drastic change in their spending habits.

Courts are allowed to use basic human reasoning, they are not a computer program which take in data and spit out verdicts.

Okay what if our dinner jackets were mixed up at the coat check in a nice restaurant and my jacket had $100 in the pocket....

Davnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2051
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #198 on: October 11, 2019, 09:03:45 AM »
Of course stealing money is a crime.

Stealing money is a crime.

If I pickpocket you, put 100$ in your wallet, and then put it back into your pocket and you spend the 100$ . . . is that really theft?  Even if you didn't remember putting the 100$ in your wallet to begin with?

That's where things get a little tricky on this one.

Around and around we go :)

Two major differences between your scenario and the bank error. Intent -  If you placed $100 is their wallet, it was intentional, not an error. I could even argue that I was under the impression that you intended to surprise me with the money as a gift. I can't say for sure but I bet it would hold up in front of a reasonable judge, hiding money for other people to find is a thing people do. Plausible deniability -  $100 is not the same as $120k. I could plausibly argue that I didn't notice the extra $100. This couple could not make that argument due to the sum and the sudden and drastic change in their spending habits.

Courts are allowed to use basic human reasoning, they are not a computer program which take in data and spit out verdicts.

Okay what if our dinner jackets were mixed up at the coat check in a nice restaurant and my jacket had $100 in the pocket....

Then argument 1 no longer applies but argument 2 does. The money was not intentionally placed in their possession but the person who got your jacket could reasonably argue that they thought the money was theirs.

I think for these analogies to be useful, the funds must be transferred in error AND we need to use the same amount of money in each scenario. If you left $120,000 in your jacket and the restaurant gave it to another customer who then spent the money, the person who spent it is guilty of stealing the money. It is not plausible that they thought it was their jacket/money.

I'll add that spending the $100 is also stealing if the person who received it knew it wasn't theirs, but we can reasonably argue that they did not when the amount of money is small.

Montecarlo

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 311
Re: Bank transfers $120k into couples bank account in error
« Reply #199 on: October 11, 2019, 09:31:55 AM »
No it’s still stealing