82,964
edits
Stupid banker cases: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
There is a series of what we can only describe as the “stupid banker” cases, which involve bankers negligently paying money to people they didn’t mean to, who then refuse to give it back. | |||
{{tabletop}} | {{tabletop}} | ||
! Case | ! Case | ||
| Line 53: | Line 46: | ||
|Payee kept the money. | |Payee kept the money. | ||
{{tablebottom}} | {{tablebottom}}{{a|casenote|{{stupidbanker}}}}The cases are all quite similar in facts — the boil down to, well, bankers paying money on their customers’ behalves to creditors and later regretting it, but the courts come to wildly different conclusions, and it is quite the epistemological struggle to hold all of them in your head at once. So here is our handy cut-out-and-keep guide. | ||
The following factual variables: | |||
*'''Where did this happen?''' Possible answers: New York or the United Kingdom; | |||
*'''What were the customer’s instructions?''' Possible answers: ''do'' pay the money; definitely do ''not'' pay the money; and ''no particular instruction'' (so prima facie, do not pay the money, but room for that presumption to be rebutted) | |||
*'''Did the customer actually owe the payee anything?''' Possible answers: yes and no; | |||
*'''If the customer did own the payee, when was the debt due?''' Possible answers: On the day it was actually paid; at some point in the next month at the customer’s discretion (i.e., a normal trade invoice); at a specified date in the future (such as a loan repayment date) | |||