Duplicate Standing Orders , Does The Bank Have The Right To Get The Money Back?

[Switchedoff]

All, in January 2014 i asked Bank "Wide" to switch my Direct Debits and standing orders from Bank "San". Bank "San" stopped the direct debits but failed to stop the standing orders , which meant that duplicate monies have been going to three recipients. I only noticed in March when i went into bank "San" to cose the account, and found myself circa £400 overdrawn. One of the recipients is under 18 . One of the recipients did not get duplictes , because when the standing orders were set up in Bank "Wide" i stopped the standing order anyway.

My question is , are Bank "San" entitled to get the money back from the recipients , and how would they ( as they do not have addresses for these people , only account numbers and sort codes).
I have asked BAnk "San" to credit my account as it was there failure , they will not do this unless they get the money back from the recipients. I do not want bank "San" to get the money back as it was their mistake and all recipients are family members. Any help would be appreciated.

[Canary42]

Since you asked bank Wide to do the switch, it may be their failure since they may not have stipulated SOs to San. But if they did (and you have evidence of same) then you should go ahead and take San to court IMO.

[Switchedoff]

Thank you Canary 42, bank "San" have admitted that they are at fault so i will persue them in court of through the banking ombudsman ,my main concern is whether they can pursue my recipients .....??

[dzug2]

Yes t can pursue the recipients

Whether they will, and whether they will succeed if they do, is another matter.

[factor-fiction]

If the recipients are family members is there any reason why they can't give you the money back as they know they have benefited at your expense

[factor-fiction]

I think that there Bank "Wide" should sort it out for you if they guaranteed to organise a smooth changeover.
If Bank San accepts that you notified them correctly and in time they should reimburse you and then seek to recover the money if they wish. I'm not sure why you would be concerned though whether the bank seeks to recover the money from your relatives

[Switchedoff]

Many thanks for the answers thus far , to answer some of the points raised , one family member is elderly and recently widowed , she does not need the stress of fighting "San". Other family members are under 18 , and as i dont live with them anymore , i dont believe it would help our relationship to take money off them.
I have been through the complete complaints procedure with Bank "Wide" , and they have offered minimal compensation, which i will take to redress the balance . I just think that bank "san" can make as many mistakes as they like because they will always be able to get there money back , especially as the Banking Ombudsman always supports the bank over the single working man . If there was a way of ensuring that bank "San" do not pursue the recipients then that would be useful. It would not be so bad , but the bank "San" have not told the truth from the outset of this , and like all banking farces , they can get away with it. Thanks again

[black_cat51]

i really don't get it - why does your elderly relative need to fight santander - they could just give you the money back couldn't they?

and surely the other two must have realise they got paid twice an it's a mistake?, so they/their adult could just ask for it back with no acrimony. Surely it would be more acrimoniuos for thwe bank to ask for it back when you could have just done it? if it wont help your relationship to take money off them, how is it any different from santander taking it off them? And if you don't want to/can't take money off them, then just dont! stop the erroneous so and carry on as normal

[black_cat51]

also if nationwide have offered compo, they must have admitted responsibility?

[factor-fiction]

Sorry switched-off but whilst I can see you clearly have a strong dislike for banks I am struggling to understand the issues here. For example I don't understand why you feel "the elderly and recently widowed" relative would have to endure " the stress of fighting "San"." I don't see a need for a fight- he received your money twice and you could just ask him to return it. I also don't agree that the Ombudsman always supports banks against the "working man" (whatever that means). Also, I don't understand why you feel Santander " can make as many mistakes as they like because they will always be able to get there money back", since in reality it is not easy for banks to clawback money in such cases. And besides- wasn't it Nationwide who made the error- their offer of compensation suggests they accept responsibility.

[black_cat51]

lol isn't that what i said ff?

[Switchedoff]

Thankyou FF for your response.

Can i clear up a couple of perefferal issues. Bank "wide" have offered minimal compensation for their part in the error , thay are not admitting liability , Bank "san" has admitted liability . However my question is , are Bank "San" entitled to get the money back from the recipients , and how would they ( as they do not have addresses for these people , only account numbers and sort codes).

You mention that in reality it is not easy for banks to claw back monies , would you like to expand on that , maybe that would answer my question thank you.

[black_cat51]

well, as you have said, for a start they don't have the addresses. With standing orders you have "given" the money to the receipient (as opposed to them "taking" the money as they do with direct debits). It's like if you put the wrong account number on a deposit, it's very hard to get it back because in essence you have given them that money. I still don't understand the problem with just asking the recipients for the money back and finishing it

[factor-fiction]

>You mention that in reality it is not easy for banks to claw back monies , would you like to expand on that

Yes. A bank cannot just take money from someone's account. It would need the recipient to agree to having the money taken back. In your case if they haven't been prepared to repay you the money that was paid from to you to them in error (albeit the bank's error), then i think it's very unlikely they'll agree to let the bank take the money back.

If you are able to collect the money back yourself you could take pleasure in having made a small profit from the deal (i.e. your compensation) at the bank's expense.

I am not sure we have all the details here though. The devil may be in teh detail- eg is it your job to cancel SOs rather than the bank's? If the situation were exactly as described I'd be very surprised if the ombudsman had turned down your claim to have the money returned to you

[Switchedoff]

Thankyou FF for the response, you are right the devil is in the detail,( always) , hopefully i gave enough information .
To answer your question , no it is not up to me to cancel the standing orders , when you are switching it is the job of the bank(s).
So i agree with you that a bank can not just take the money , but since i posted this question , i have been informed that yes the bank is entitled to get the money back any way they can. So i guess my new question is , what is the likelyhood that bank "san" would take individuals to court for approx £150?