Cheque reversed after 6 months - quick to the internet!!!

COYS said:
This is a solicitor's cheque from their account not the client, they don't go reversing payments. I'd be phoning them up and threating to speak with the Law Society if you didn't get anywhere
Click to expand...

Thanks,

I'll see what Nationwide say on monday, I'm hoping at the very least I can deny or contest the payment.
 
It sounds like nothing to do with the law firm, and nationwide think they've paid it into the wrong account, and when you ask them to state why, they will realise they have not paid the check into the wrong account, and simply roll over.
Be very interested to hear if they do not.
If it does not happen, immediately ask for the contact details for the banking ombudsman, and their complaints policy or team.
They'll run away at rapid rates soon as you mention the ombudsman as it costs them more than £162 to even take a case there, and this is clearly your money in your account, and someone else's error.
 
Destination said:
It sounds like nothing to do with the law firm, and nationwide think they've paid it into the wrong account, and when you ask them to state why, they will realise they have not paid the check into the wrong account, and simply roll over.
Be very interested to hear if they do not.
If it does not happen, immediately ask for the contact details for the banking ombudsman, and their complaints policy or team.
They'll run away at rapid rates soon as you mention the ombudsman as it costs them more than £162 to even take a case there, and this is clearly your money in your account, and someone else's error.
Click to expand...

Awesome, thanks for your input :cool:
 
TheOracle said:
I'd like to know where the solicitors got there time machine from. Cheques in 2019?

I know science has a few wild theories, but to actually have a physically working time machine is quite something. I'd be making a thread on that rather than a recall of £162.50
Click to expand...

Solicitors love cheques and still use fax machines. A mate of mine works for Apple Pay and the banks are even worse. Anything not delivered in person by a uniformed minion is the devil’s work.
 
I had something sort of similar happen with my previous bank (TSB). The circumstances are different buy the bank's behaviour seems to be the same. I had a warranty replacement from Amazon, they didn't collect the old stuff and then debited my account a few months later for the old items that weren't collected. I've had issues a few times with them not collecting when they should.

I didn't recognise the transactions at the time they went out, so I reported them to my bank. They refunded them on the spot, then about 2 months later they sent me a letter stating that they were reversing the refunds because Amazon had shown them proof that the charges were "legitimate orders."

The "proof" consisted of them showing that they'd delivered something that correspondended to the value of the charges. The bank wouldn't have it, neither would Amazon, so I went to the Ombudsman and a few months later I got a letter from my bank stating that while they didn't make a mistake, they're still refunding me because they weren't previously aware of the fact that Amazon just hadn't collected the items... Which was a lie because I'd told them that multiple times and tried to get them to explain why they're defending being charged for something I didn't actually buy, as their remit doesn't extend beyond the issue with me being charged for something I didn't actually buy.

But they've still pledged to refund me despite also firmly insisting that they made no mistake...

So I do wonder just what happens behind the scenes between them and the Financial Ombudsman.
 
  1. Have you bought anything on ebay lately?
  2. Did you cancel the purchase on the grounds that you're going through financial hardship?
 
TheOracle said:
fax machines!!!!!!

my time travel comment was supposed to be a joke
Click to expand...
IIRC it's considered to leave a better paper trail and if it goes through you know it's there (as the fax machine either connects and completes or doesn't) and not been eaten by a spam filter either at the client, or at the isp/mail provider.

Also cheques are/were less likely to be paid into the wrong account, one of my friends works in a solicitors office and works on property sales, he's got some hair raising tales about how easy it is to send very large sums of money to the wrong person because you've entered a digit wrong on the computer or the recipient has transposed two numbers when telling them, and until recently there was no automatic check/feedback from the system to tell you the account name didn't match the number, and that's before the issues with fraud (people actively target solicitors to get the money sent to a different account things like sending instructions via an email address that looks like it's from the real client but isn't*).
I think things have improved a bit now, but IIRC it's only in the last few months that all UK banks have implemented a warning if the account you're sending money to doesn't match the name you've given it (and even that isn't fool proof, if you consider how common some names are).

A lot of the "out of date" practices used by some professions are there because they offer a level of safety, or checking that simply isn't there with newer methods, or has only just been adopted so there tends to be inertia, especially when if you can't prove you did everything correctly you are on the hook for very large sums of money, and possible malpractice/sanctions from a governing body.
When the NHS got hit by the ransomeware that took down many systems, hospitals and doctors were still able to continue working in part because they do tend to keep at least the more recent/important documentation partly on paper filed away.

*Email is horrible for security, as most clients don't tell you if the email address that is shown matches the one that was actually used by default, so spoofing the from field is pathetically easy.
 
A fax is a pretty secure way of sending documents providing the operator punches in the correct destination number. Two known and fixed end points for a start. Very labour intensive to hack and can’t transmit anything nasty such as trojans which is a big consideration for institutions that have shocking IT security.

Encrypted email between 2 secure servers is far better and who knows; by the 22nd century these rather hidebound institutions might have it.
 
The cheque is made out to you so it is legally binding and can't be reversed. To get their money back they would have to take you to court with good reason as it's a civil matter.

The bank shouldn't in any way get involved in this, I would be asking what they are playing at. The only time they should use this is if it wasn't made out to you but somehow found its way into your account.
 
They claim the cheque wasn't honoured by lloyd's (the solicitors bank) and it took a 'while' to let me know, I obviously was mildly miffed, I've raised a complaint and it's now ongoing.

Quite frankly ridiculous
 
Will Gill said:
They claim the cheque wasn't honoured by lloyd's (the solicitors bank) and it took a 'while' to let me know, I obviously was mildly miffed, I've raised a complaint and it's now ongoing.

Quite frankly ridiculous
Click to expand...

Have you contacted the solicitor directly? I’d do that too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom