83,357
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
And nor can we put this down to [[wokeness]]: firstly, it was 1998, so ''everyone'' was racist, misogynist and cis-biased etc. etc. etc. — i.e., ''no-one'' was [[woke]] — and secondly, in any case, “bank” takes the neuter pronoun “[[it]]”, so would have been perfectly [[woke]] in the [[singular]] anyway. | And nor can we put this down to [[wokeness]]: firstly, it was 1998, so ''everyone'' was racist, misogynist and cis-biased etc. etc. etc. — i.e., ''no-one'' was [[woke]] — and secondly, in any case, “bank” takes the neuter pronoun “[[it]]”, so would have been perfectly [[woke]] in the [[singular]] anyway. | ||
I have re-rendered the Lord Justice’s pronouns as, in my opinion, they ''should'' be.<ref>Yes: like most | I have re-rendered the Lord Justice’s pronouns as, in my opinion, they ''should'' be.<ref>Yes: like most commercial lawyers I have some kind of obsessive-compulsive disorder, but unusually, also I have appalling attention to detail. This is a cross I have had to bear my whole life.</ref> | ||
Right. | Right. | ||
Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
There is some confusion to be navigated not only on account of [[Lord Justice Waller]]’s curious facility with [[pronoun]]s, but because ''both'' WFL and Independent had accounts at RBS. WFL was apparently moving its business from RBS to Lloyds. There was a bit of a [[S.N.A.F.U.]] where WFL first sent Independent a [[cheque]] drawn on RBS, which bounced, but this is all a bit of pre-conflict theatre. | There is some confusion to be navigated not only on account of [[Lord Justice Waller]]’s curious facility with [[pronoun]]s, but because ''both'' WFL and Independent had accounts at RBS. WFL was apparently moving its business from RBS to Lloyds. There was a bit of a [[S.N.A.F.U.]] where WFL first sent Independent a [[cheque]] drawn on RBS, which bounced, but this is all a bit of pre-conflict theatre. | ||
The meat of the action happened when WFL instructed its new bank, Lloyds, to credit the same amount, £162,387.90, to Indepedent’s RBS account by wire transfer. At the time, Lloyds account only had £982 in it. Lloyds said, “we’ll do it as soon as you put us in [[cleared fund]]s”. Funds were incoming by means of a cheque for £168,000 drawn in | The meat of the action happened when WFL instructed its new bank, Lloyds, to credit the same amount, £162,387.90, to Indepedent’s RBS account by wire transfer. At the time, Lloyds account only had £982 in it. Lloyds said, “we’ll do it as soon as you put us in [[cleared fund]]s”. Funds were incoming by means of a cheque for £168,000 drawn in WFL’s favour by a third part, Kaffco. | ||
Lloyds credited Kaffco’s cheque to | Lloyds credited Kaffco’s cheque to WFL’s new account, but marked it as “uncleared funds”, awaiting clearance from Kaffco’s bank. | ||
You’ll never guess what happened next.<ref>Not, if you have the same acumen as the average distressed lender in the New York market, at any rate: about 12 of them [[Citigroup v Brigade Capital Management|testified in court]] that they could not imagine in a trillion years, such a thing happening.</ref> Lloyds only went and paid out the £168,000 before the third-party Kaffco cleared by mistake, didn’t it. | You’ll never guess what happened next.<ref>Not, if you have the same acumen as the average distressed lender in the New York market, at any rate: about 12 of them [[Citigroup v Brigade Capital Management|testified in court]] that they could not imagine in a trillion years, such a thing happening.</ref> Lloyds only went and paid out the £168,000 before the third-party Kaffco cleared by mistake, didn’t it. | ||
And you’ll never guess what happened after that: the Kaffco cheque bounced. ''Whoops''. Lloyds put | And you’ll never guess what happened after that: the Kaffco cheque bounced. ''Whoops''. Lloyds put WFL’s account into overdraft, but in the meantime, asked Independent for the money back. | ||
===Issues=== | ===Issues=== |