Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

yes Des exactly, They must do this routinely. None of the 8 or 10 call centre advisers I spoke to gave me the correct clearing cycle and the banking industry itself has identified this as a serious problem

The bank did not ask me for my consent.

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Amethyst,

I'm confused, could you be agreeing with me and Des here? :tinysmile_hmm_t2:

[wales01man]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Having read this thread I have to wonder what it is you want from the bank?

A big payout or any costs you incurred returned I would agree it all looks a mess and there seems to be different stories about the clearance of cheques which may be rules set in stone or are they just guidelines?

As with the PPI scandal banks do not like paying out if they believe they are in the right can only see them fighting this till they get a result spending a lot more in the process and hoping the Courts award costs against the OP.

Have to think that they will win unless they reach a settlement without the Court as we allknow Banks and Bankers in this Country seem to do no wrong ( JOKE) but come out on top to often

[des8]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

[QUOTE=Amethyst;559445]Raymond Cox


I can't get the referenced document ''Rules for the Automated Debit Clearing, (C&CCCL, July 2009, version 1.0)''[/QUOTE

Nor could I !
The nearest regarding this matter is at http://www.chequeandcredit.co.uk/abo...sing_overview/
Cox is a well respected QC, but is only giving an opinion which IMO does not invalidate Nicola's position..
He says that after the 6 days the bank cannot recover thru' clearing system without consent (consent was not sought) unless there was fraud (only on this forum have there been any such unfounded suggestions) but implies the money may be recovered on other grounds (but doesn't enumerate them, and the bank hasn't referred to them)

Really don't see that Cox's commentary progresses the discussion.

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Hi Wales01man,

I haven't really thought about the end bit, I was more aware that my 'ethical' bank treated me badly and I didn't want them to just be able to carry on like that.

Do you think they will win because they have a case or just because they are the banks?

Nicola

p.s. like the logo

[wales01man]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

I would hope you win Banks deserve a kicking ,The logo is the work of Admin on here naughty people

[Kati]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

I can't get the referenced document ''Rules for the Automated Debit Clearing, (C&CCCL, July 2009, version 1.0)''

Nor could I !
The nearest regarding this matter is at http://www.chequeandcredit.co.uk/abo...sing_overview/

I found this if it's any use??

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

whoa, thanks Des, that saves me a job.

Now, it seems that there is a problem here, so what is the problem I ask myself?

I'm assuming that the legal beagles don't really support the idea of the banks getting away with bad practice, nor that they don't support the idea of the 6 day rule.

So, is it that some don't like the idea of personal gain? I'm assuming that all the VIPs and contributors here are people who are doing very valuable work, and are giving their time and their expertise free and I'm sure are very knowledgeable and principled people, so it follows that you could feel that it would be wrong, or at least not right, under any circumstances to obtain money in an unearned way. Maybe that is part of the problem and that is stopping the real issue being focussed on.

So, I am going to show my respect and thanks and hopefully answer any concerns about my motivation by saying that if I obtain any money from this process I will donate it to the site so that it can be used to support the work of the site which I think is brilliant:tinysmile_twink_t2:

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

hi Kati,

thanks, will check it out

[Kati]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

whoa, thanks Des, that saves me a job.

Now, it seems that there is a problem here, so what is the problem I ask myself?

I'm assuming that the legal beagles don't really support the idea of the banks getting away with bad practice, nor that they don't support the idea of the 6 day rule.

To tell you the truth, I hadn't even known about the 6 day rule until you posted on here

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

well that wouldn't get in the way of a career at a call centre anyway lol

[des8]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Thanks Kati, but that is Cox's article.
Having read it several times I can confidently state it is a legal master piece, in that you can find in it statements supporting either of the conflicting views

[Nicola Bell]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

sterling work Des,

well done for reading that and for your view, what do you think supports the bank's position there then? (Singlemindedness prevents me from seeing both sides on this you understand )

[Amethyst]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Now, it seems that there is a problem here, so what is the problem I ask myself?

I'm assuming that the legal beagles don't really support the idea of the banks getting away with bad practice, nor that they don't support the idea of the 6 day rule.

So, is it that some don't like the idea of personal gain? I'm assuming that all the VIPs and contributors here are people who are doing very valuable work, and are giving their time and their expertise free and I'm sure are very knowledgeable and principled people, so it follows that you could feel that it would be wrong, or at least not right, under any circumstances to obtain money in an unearned way. Maybe that is part of the problem and that is stopping the real issue being focussed on.

So, I am going to show my respect and thanks and hopefully answer any concerns about my motivation by saying that if I obtain any money from this process I will donate it to the site so that it can be used to support the work of the site which I think is brilliant

Bless you Nicola, but no that isn't the issue. Banks treat people terribly unfairly, we see so many awful cases, set up to fail being some of the worst where homes and businesses are lost and lives are destroyed. I do have morals and yes morally in my view it is wrong to profit from others misfortune or mistake. Annoyingly that extends to banks in both directions. However that never gets in the way of looking at the legal issues. I'm not a lawyer by any stretch of the imaginiation, so everything is just my opinion based on my experience of other cases and research... If I thought you had a case, then I'd say. I don't and I worry that you may put yourself at risk of costs if you proceed.

The facts are this;

You have sued the bank for around £9k - this was the balance in your account before the farting about with cheques began. It was still your balance once everything was sorted out. There being no loss.

The only loss to you was some charges and interest on the temporary overdraft caused by the bank taking back the available funds from the cheque after you had withdrawn the money. the bank have admitted their error in telling you the cheque was cleared and recompensed you the charges and interest incurred - returning you in to the exact position you were in before you started.

The cheque was ''missing'' for a few days - leading to your mum cancelling it and issuing a second cheque. That's demonstrated to be true by the date stamp on the 1st cheque of the 13th, and the second cheque being paid in on the same day directly at the branch. However the 1st cheque was paid in. to the Post office, on the 5th December, and the bank do appear to uphold that as fact.

On the day you telephoned the bank the cheque was at T+4 - and available for withdrawal - however it was misrepresented to you as cleared. You already knew that the cheque had been cancelled and that worried you so you presumed it must be the second cheque that had cleared despite knowing it had only been paid in the day before. The bank insisted it was the first cheque so you asked your mum to cancel the second cheque so she wasn't debited twice. Even though your mum hadn;t actually been debited at all (which you knew as you live with her). So yes, some confusion and a pain in the bum - but at the point you withdrew the money you knew that your mum had cancelled both cheques.

That could be seen as fraud - opportunistic fraud rather than premeditated fraud but still an attempt to get away with money that you were not entitled to.

At the point you withdrew the money neither cheque was at T+6 - I'm not sure why you are ignoring the quite clear terms of the bank that paying in at the post office adds two business days on before T, but the effect is that the cheque was only available for withdrawal at the point you withdrew it and the bank therefore were entitled to remove it back from your account when the cheque was returned by your mother's bank.



SO lets forget it was your mother.....

a cheque was given to you by a stranger who wanted to purchase a houseboat from you. You wouldn't release the houseboat to the stranger until the money was safely in your account. The same situation with the first cheque arises - it appears on your account late and you are in contact with the bank to find out when it clears. Unbeknown to you the stranger cancelled the cheque on day 3/4 and you' called the bank on day T+4 ( as you didn't realise it took longer when paying it at the post office and didn't really understand the t+1 - t+6 stuff then and were relying on the representations made to you by the bank that the cheque was cleared) You are very specific on the phone ( as you were ) and the bank assures you it is cleared and 'yours' - and you remove the money into your other account to be sure, and then allow the stranger to take your houseboat as you have his £35k.

The day after the bank tells you the cheque is definately cleared it withdraws the money from your account as the cheque has come back cancelled, leaving you £35k overdrawn. It is within its rights to do so as it is before T+6.

You have lost your houseboat (worth £35k) due to the a) fraud by the stranger and b) representations by the bank that the cheque had definately cleared and could not be returned.

The misrepresentation by the bank has caused you to act in a certain way which has caused a loss. You relied totally on the banks representation of the status of the cheque.

So moral / fairness / legal ?????????? ( in other words ombudsman / court )

Now consider that the stranger had rung you on day 4 and told you he'd cancelled the cheque..... and you didn't give him the houseboat ...... but still withdrew the money from the account when the bank told you it was cleared.

[Amethyst]

Re: Can the bank ‘UNCLEAR’ cleared funds?

Oh and the final point is no one has shown me anything to say that legally the money is yours after T+6 (unless through fraud) it only ever says they can't just take it back without consent.