Mistaken wire transfer/payment error

Thomas Fowler84 said:Both you and David Scott9 make valid points.
One must distinguish between the currency date, the recording date, and so on. Essentially, once I initiate a transaction, there is a specific window to cancel it—specifically before the funds actually settle in the recipient's account. In my experience, if I execute a transfer at 7:00 PM, I can call the bank by 9:00 AM the next morning and potentially void it. However, once a transaction is finalized, the situation becomes far more complex. I would have to prove the funds weren't intended for that individual, or sue them for the return of the money. There is no automatic reversal, and the bank has no authority to intervene simply because I requested it.

Exactly! You have the right—well, the opportunity—to reverse something that hasn't cleared yet and is just sitting there waiting to be posted. But that's not what happened here; since the OP saw the money hit their balance, the transaction is officially finalized.

Thomas Fowler84 said:Both you and David Scott9 make valid points.
One must distinguish between the currency date, the recording date, and so on. Essentially, once I initiate a transaction, there is a specific window to cancel it—specifically before the funds actually settle in the recipient's account. In my experience, if I execute a transfer at 7:00 PM, I can call the bank by 9:00 AM the next morning and potentially void it. However, once a transaction is finalized, the situation becomes far more complex. I would have to prove the funds weren't intended for that individual, or sue them for the return of the money. There is no automatic reversal, and the bank has no authority to intervene simply because I requested it.

Bingo! 👍

Thomas Fowler84 said:I hear you, but while you claim Atlantic Marine made the mistake, the bank acted as if they were the ones at fault. I understand why you didn't want to cause a scene—I wouldn't have either—but it makes me wonder what would have happened if you had actually protested.

What interests me most are the transaction dates. Based on my understanding of how these things work, if I were to deposit $33 into your account today, those $33 might show up immediately, but there would likely be two distinct dates (I assume, though I'm not sure how Chase handles it)—one for today and one for tomorrow (the "value date" or "transaction date," depending on the terminology used here). You would see a credit of +$33 today, yet the funds wouldn't truly settle until tomorrow, which is when interest starts accruing. My theory is that if Atlantic Marine messed up and transferred $33, and then caught the error instantly and voided it, your statement would simply show +100 and -100 without the $33 ever actually settling in your balance. If you have the records handy, could you tell us if the +100 and -100 occurred on the same day, and whether they carried different dates?

The initial +100 and that -100 actually share the same date, and then the deposit based on the official shareholder registry for the +100 shows up two days after the whole mess happened.

Anyway, regarding how the currency gets booked, you’ve basically got two windows—daytime and overnight.

Anything processed before 3 PM hits the books the same day, but anything after 3 PM through to 9 AM the next morning carries tomorrow's date—that’s assuming we're talking about an external wire transfer; if it's just moving money within the same bank, it should be instantaneous.

You really need to take a hard look at the fine print in those contracts they make you sign when you’re opening an account. Banks—they love sliding in all these vague clauses that can be twisted to suit their needs whenever they feel like it. Honestly, if memory serves, I think I actually signed off on something stating that it's my own responsibility to notify the bank if I spot a deposit that doesn't belong to me. 😁

Nicholas Turner said:Exactly! You have the right—well, the opportunity—to reverse something that hasn't cleared yet and is just sitting there waiting to be posted. But that's not what happened here; since the OP saw the money hit their balance, the transaction is officially finalized.

Bingo! 👍

I am not sure how Chase handles things, but when I transfer money between my own accounts at the same bank, my available balance jumps almost instantly. The system recognizes the incoming funds immediately, even if the official settlement doesn't occur until the next business day. I will double-check the specific mechanics next time, but it seems clear that the recipient's balance reflects the deposit right away.

It all depends on whether we're talking about internal transfers or moving money outside the bank

If it’s within, say, Chase—like you're using your checking account to pay bills via their own cards—everything shows up instantly, like, in the same millisecond

But beyond that, there isn't much to see; I mean, the cash is pulled from your account immediately, but once it hits the recipient's side, you're basically flying blind anyway...

And honestly, there's this one shady practice over at Chase that's just straight-up dirty:

Look, if it's Saturday at 10 PM and I pay off a bill through the Chase app, they snatch the money from my balance right then and there. If I'm sitting in the red, they'll politely slap me with interest charges for it. But the actual funds don't reach the recipient until Monday morning. So, what's the difference? Whether I pay now or wait until Monday morning, the recipient gets paid at the exact same time, nothing sooner. The only thing that changes is that the bank grabs my money earlier and pulls those little interest fees out of my pocket while it sits in limbo

Where that money actually goes during those 36 hours? Nobody knows. Not me, and certainly not the person receiving it

Mark Sullivan62 said:It all depends on whether we're talking about internal transfers or moving money outside the bank

If it’s within, say, Chase—like you're using your checking account to pay bills via their own cards—everything shows up instantly, like, in the same millisecond

But beyond that, there isn't much to see; I mean, the cash is pulled from your account immediately, but once it hits the recipient's side, you're basically flying blind anyway...

And honestly, there's this one shady practice over at Chase that's just straight-up dirty:

Look, if it's Saturday at 10 PM and I pay off a bill through the Chase app, they snatch the money from my balance right then and there. If I'm sitting in the red, they'll politely slap me with interest charges for it. But the actual funds don't reach the recipient until Monday morning. So, what's the difference? Whether I pay now or wait until Monday morning, the recipient gets paid at the exact same time, nothing sooner. The only thing that changes is that the bank grabs my money earlier and pulls those little interest fees out of my pocket while it sits in limbo

Where that money actually goes during those 36 hours? Nobody knows. Not me, and certainly not the person receiving it

I am familiar with those tactics. A few years ago, there was a massive outcry regarding this within the European Union. It is possible they adjusted regulations so that capital cannot simply vanish into thin air. It was the exact same issue you described, though it wasn't limited to weekends; it happened during business days too, where neither the sender nor the receiver saw any interest benefits.

Mark Sullivan62 said:I went through something pretty similar recently when ExxonMobil was paying out dividends based on a faulty list... since I hold positions in both, I wasn't technically losing anything, but looking at my checking account activity, I saw a deposit, then a withdrawal, then another deposit

I sent an inquiry over to Chase and got an official response stating that because I signed off on their Basic Account bundle, Article 1 explicitly states the bank has the right to correct any bookkeeping errors without needing my approval—in fact, I basically gave them the green light to do exactly this type of thing

How are we even supposed to know if it's a bookkeeping error? Well, based on what I saw:

On my deposit history, it showed something like:

+ $33
- $33
+ $33

It was obviously an error because these weren't actual payouts—those transactions $33 didn't show up on the credit side, they were on the debit side

If they had been actual withdrawals, there wouldn't be a minus sign; it would just show the amount $33 (at least, that's how it looks on the mobile app...)

Lesson learned: read what you're signing. I signed that basic account agreement five or six years ago—I honestly have no idea where the copy is anymore, let alone what the fine print actually says🤣

But then my personal banker reached out and sent me this note:

On X, you signed the Comprehensive Account Bundle Agreement while setting up your Y package. According to Article 3.2 of that agreement:
3.2. The Account Holder authorizes the Bank to rectify errors occurring within payment processing that cause account balances to deviate from the actual payment orders issued for or against the account, without requiring additional specific authorization from the Account Holder.
Please feel free to reach out if you have any further questions.

That’s what you’d call it if you were being all technical about it. So, I just saw that chargeback hit the statement—basically a total reversal. It’s one of those annoying little administrative hiccups that always seems to pop up right when you think everything is squared away. Just one of those things, I guess.Look, it’s not like someone just reached into an account and pulled money out—it was a transaction reversal. So, we can't even really say the bank was skimming cash from the account; they were just voiding the payment.

Thomas Fowler84 said:I am not sure how Chase handles things, but when I transfer money between my own accounts at the same bank, my available balance jumps almost instantly. The system recognizes the incoming funds immediately, even if the official settlement doesn't occur until the next business day. I will double-check the specific mechanics next time, but it seems clear that the recipient's balance reflects the deposit right away.

Look, you really have to distinguish between internal transfers and anything going outside the bank—especially when it’s gotta run through the Nationalist Party and can't happen instantly. When money gets pulled from someone's checking account, it just sits in a clearing account until it actually hits the Nationalist Party. It's not immediate.

Terry Howard said:That’s what you’d call it if you were being all technical about it. So, I just saw that chargeback hit the statement—basically a total reversal. It’s one of those annoying little administrative hiccups that always seems to pop up right when you think everything is squared away. Just one of those things, I guess.Look, it’s not like someone just reached into an account and pulled money out—it was a transaction reversal. So, we can't even really say the bank was skimming cash from the account; they were just voiding the payment.

Look, you really have to distinguish between internal transfers and anything going outside the bank—especially when it’s gotta run through the Nationalist Party and can't happen instantly. When money gets pulled from someone's checking account, it just sits in a clearing account until it actually hits the Nationalist Party. It's not immediate.

Oh, brilliant. Really. Now why don't you walk me through the logic of how you can just "reverse" a payment once it's already been cleared and posted to the recipient's account? Makes perfect sense, right?

I remember this one time I accidentally sent $67 over to the wrong checking account, and despite me fighting with Chase for an entire month, those funds vanished into thin air—never saw them again, and they wouldn't lift a finger to help.

So, if anyone can reverse a payment, why am I stuck in limbo? Aren't we all supposed to be equal under the law? At least, that's what the textbooks say.

They told me point-blank that they couldn't touch a single cent from someone else's checking account $67 without the owner giving the green light.

And when I actually asked them who the hell owns the account so I could go talk to them myself—since the bank obviously won't help—they had the nerve to tell me that was protected by banking privacy laws.

So, tell me, who's the crazy one here?

Mark Sullivan62 said:Oh, brilliant. Really. Now why don't you walk me through the logic of how you can just "reverse" a payment once it's already been cleared and posted to the recipient's account? Makes perfect sense, right?

I remember this one time I accidentally sent $67 over to the wrong checking account, and despite me fighting with Chase for an entire month, those funds vanished into thin air—never saw them again, and they wouldn't lift a finger to help.

So, if anyone can reverse a payment, why am I stuck in limbo? Aren't we all supposed to be equal under the law? At least, that's what the textbooks say.

They told me point-blank that they couldn't touch a single cent from someone else's checking account $67 without the owner giving the green light.

And when I actually asked them who the hell owns the account so I could go talk to them myself—since the bank obviously won't help—they had the nerve to tell me that was protected by banking privacy laws.

So, tell me, who's the crazy one here?

Look, in a situation like this, they absolutely should have handed over those details. Honestly, the standard procedure ought to be for the bank representative to reach out to the recipient directly. If that fails, and you make a formal inquiry, the bank (I’m pretty sure they’re legally obligated to, though I can't say for certain) should provide the info because that money clearly isn't the recipient's to keep. You have every right to sue them for it... I actually know someone who went through a similar mess once and it worked out...

Kimberly Nguyen said:Look, in a situation like this, they absolutely should have handed over those details. Honestly, the standard procedure ought to be for the bank representative to reach out to the recipient directly. If that fails, and you make a formal inquiry, the bank (I’m pretty sure they’re legally obligated to, though I can't say for certain) should provide the info because that money clearly isn't the recipient's to keep. You have every right to sue them for it... I actually know someone who went through a similar mess once and it worked out...

Naturally, the bank cannot simply hand over private data; imagine the chaos if banks routinely leaked their customers' personal information.

What is possible is filing a claim against an anonymous "offender" who misappropriated funds that don't belong to them (though technically, this doesn't qualify as a criminal offense).

P.S. Of course, the bank can contact the individual and act as a mediator to facilitate communication.

Thomas Fowler84 said:Naturally, the bank cannot simply hand over private data; imagine the chaos if banks routinely leaked their customers' personal information.

What is possible is filing a claim against an anonymous "offender" who misappropriated funds that don't belong to them (though technically, this doesn't qualify as a criminal offense).

P.S. Of course, the bank can contact the individual and act as a mediator to facilitate communication.

Look, I totally get it—customer privacy is a cornerstone of banking secrecy. Period. But for heaven's sake, I’m telling you, I know of at least one instance where it actually happened through legal channels in a very specific situation.

Since we’ve veered into the territory of banking privacy, I have a question—if I were to just type in a random account number on Bank of America's online banking portal (assuming it's an account held at Bank of America, obviously) and hit "Verify," wouldn't the app just spit out the owner's full name and their city? It feels like banking secrecy is practically non-existent here—why isn't anyone raising an alarm about this?

I'm not entirely sure which bank you used to initiate that transfer, Edgar, but if you had tried it through Bank of America, finding out who is behind a specific account number would be a total breeze—privacy basically doesn't exist in that scenario. 🙂

Even with Chase, they have that option available, but there's a catch—it only works if you're registered as a business entity.

Nicholas Turner said:Since we’ve veered into the territory of banking privacy, I have a question—if I were to just type in a random account number on Bank of America's online banking portal (assuming it's an account held at Bank of America, obviously) and hit "Verify," wouldn't the app just spit out the owner's full name and their city? It feels like banking secrecy is practically non-existent here—why isn't anyone raising an alarm about this?

I'm not entirely sure which bank you used to initiate that transfer, Edgar, but if you had tried it through Bank of America, finding out who is behind a specific account number would be a total breeze—privacy basically doesn't exist in that scenario. 🙂

So what do you think—which one of your favorite Bank of America branches would handle it? 🤣

Kimberly Nguyen said:Look, in a situation like this, they absolutely should have handed over those details. Honestly, the standard procedure ought to be for the bank representative to reach out to the recipient directly. If that fails, and you make a formal inquiry, the bank (I’m pretty sure they’re legally obligated to, though I can't say for certain) should provide the info because that money clearly isn't the recipient's to keep. You have every right to sue them for it... I actually know someone who went through a similar mess once and it worked out...

Hand over data? 🤣 Please. I spent three days on the phone and couldn't even get a hold of some manager who was supposedly the only one authorized to approve anything... I mean, on day one she was stuck in meetings, day two she was out at the ranch, and by day three, she had already gone on maternity leave.

Then I tried sending an email... never got a single reply, let alone anything useful.

Thomas Fowler84 said:Naturally, the bank cannot simply hand over private data; imagine the chaos if banks routinely leaked their customers' personal information.

What is possible is filing a claim against an anonymous "offender" who misappropriated funds that don't belong to them (though technically, this doesn't qualify as a criminal offense).

P.S. Of course, the bank can contact the individual and act as a mediator to facilitate communication.

Oh yeah? So how does it look when the bank starts messing around with my own account, but suddenly refuses to find my money when it's sitting in someone else's?

Thomas Fowler84 said:Naturally, the bank cannot simply hand over private data; imagine the chaos if banks routinely leaked their customers' personal information.

What is possible is filing a claim against an anonymous "offender" who misappropriated funds that don't belong to them (though technically, this doesn't qualify as a criminal offense).

P.S. Of course, the bank can contact the individual and act as a mediator to facilitate communication.

Yeah, and here we go, another tense episode of CSI: Las Vegas—pardon me, more like CSI: Bank of America. 😂

Mark Sullivan62 said:So what do you think—which one of your favorite Bank of America branches would handle it? 🤣

Hand over data? 🤣 Please. I spent three days on the phone and couldn't even get a hold of some manager who was supposedly the only one authorized to approve anything... I mean, on day one she was stuck in meetings, day two she was out at the ranch, and by day three, she had already gone on maternity leave.

Then I tried sending an email... never got a single reply, let alone anything useful.

Oh yeah? So how does it look when the bank starts messing around with my own account, but suddenly refuses to find my money when it's sitting in someone else's?

Yeah, and here we go, another tense episode of CSI: Las Vegas—pardon me, more like CSI: Bank of America. 😂

And that’s where you left it? 🙂 ... Man, Mark, you're losing your edge, 🤣

Mark Sullivan62 said:Oh, brilliant. Really. Now why don't you walk me through the logic of how you can just "reverse" a payment once it's already been cleared and posted to the recipient's account? Makes perfect sense, right?

I remember this one time I accidentally sent $67 over to the wrong checking account, and despite me fighting with Chase for an entire month, those funds vanished into thin air—never saw them again, and they wouldn't lift a finger to help.

So, if anyone can reverse a payment, why am I stuck in limbo? Aren't we all supposed to be equal under the law? At least, that's what the textbooks say.

They told me point-blank that they couldn't touch a single cent from someone else's checking account $67 without the owner giving the green light.

And when I actually asked them who the hell owns the account so I could go talk to them myself—since the bank obviously won't help—they had the nerve to tell me that was protected by banking privacy laws.

So, tell me, who's the crazy one here?

Look, if I were going to explain a reversal to you, I'd basically have to give you a crash course in accounting basics.

It seems pretty clear from what's being said: a bank can fix its own screw-ups, but they aren't touching anyone else's mistake.

On another note, think about this: you and a representative from ExxonMobil both walk into a bank asking for a better exchange rate on foreign currency (you for yourself, and he for ExxonMobil). Who do you think is getting the better deal?
I think it's a similar situation to what we're talking about here.
I've seen several times where a bank teller's error was fixed immediately and the transfer was reversed (even after the cash hit the recipient's account). But for an error made by the sender? I've never seen that get reversed.

Kimberly Nguyen said:Even with Chase, they have that option available, but there's a catch—it only works if you're registered as a business entity.

For corporations, account numbers are public info because of the business registry.

Nicholas Turner said:Since we’ve veered into the territory of banking privacy, I have a question—if I were to just type in a random account number on Bank of America's online banking portal (assuming it's an account held at Bank of America, obviously) and hit "Verify," wouldn't the app just spit out the owner's full name and their city? It feels like banking secrecy is practically non-existent here—why isn't anyone raising an alarm about this?

I'm not entirely sure which bank you used to initiate that transfer, Edgar, but if you had tried it through Bank of America, finding out who is behind a specific account number would be a total breeze—privacy basically doesn't exist in that scenario. 🙂

And would you honestly prefer if they didn't allow that? This feature actually helps prevent people from sending money to the wrong account, and I don't see any harm in accidentally finding out that Joe Biden has an account ending in 3200000001.

There isn't any direct damage—but, well, that falls under bank secrecy laws. Simple as that!

Terry Howard said:Look, if I were going to explain a reversal to you, I'd basically have to give you a crash course in accounting basics.

It seems pretty clear from what's being said: a bank can fix its own screw-ups, but they aren't touching anyone else's mistake.

On another note, think about this: you and a representative from ExxonMobil both walk into a bank asking for a better exchange rate on foreign currency (you for yourself, and he for ExxonMobil). Who do you think is getting the better deal?
I think it's a similar situation to what we're talking about here.
I've seen several times where a bank teller's error was fixed immediately and the transfer was reversed (even after the cash hit the recipient's account). But for an error made by the sender? I've never seen that get reversed.

For corporations, account numbers are public info because of the business registry.

And would you honestly prefer if they didn't allow that? This feature actually helps prevent people from sending money to the wrong account, and I don't see any harm in accidentally finding out that Joe Biden has an account ending in 3200000001.

Thanks, really needed that, because I was just sitting here enjoying my six hours of weekly lectures on the subject...

Terry Howard said:Look, if I were going to explain a reversal to you, I'd basically have to give you a crash course in accounting basics.

It seems pretty clear from what's being said: a bank can fix its own screw-ups, but they aren't touching anyone else's mistake.

On another note, think about this: you and a representative from ExxonMobil both walk into a bank asking for a better exchange rate on foreign currency (you for yourself, and he for ExxonMobil). Who do you think is getting the better deal?
I think it's a similar situation to what we're talking about here.
I've seen several times where a bank teller's error was fixed immediately and the transfer was reversed (even after the cash hit the recipient's account). But for an error made by the sender? I've never seen that get reversed.

For corporations, account numbers are public info because of the business registry.

And would you honestly prefer if they didn't allow that? This feature actually helps prevent people from sending money to the wrong account, and I don't see any harm in accidentally finding out that Joe Biden has an account ending in 3200000001.

Yeah, sure, but it was also made perfectly clear that in my specific situation, the blunder was on the sender's end, not the bank's.

So why am I still sitting here without a single coherent answer from anyone—not even from the bank itself?

I'm talking about an airline wire transfer reversal here.

Terry Howard said:Look, if I were going to explain a reversal to you, I'd basically have to give you a crash course in accounting basics.

It seems pretty clear from what's being said: a bank can fix its own screw-ups, but they aren't touching anyone else's mistake.

On another note, think about this: you and a representative from ExxonMobil both walk into a bank asking for a better exchange rate on foreign currency (you for yourself, and he for ExxonMobil). Who do you think is getting the better deal?
I think it's a similar situation to what we're talking about here.
I've seen several times where a bank teller's error was fixed immediately and the transfer was reversed (even after the cash hit the recipient's account). But for an error made by the sender? I've never seen that get reversed.

For corporations, account numbers are public info because of the business registry.

And would you honestly prefer if they didn't allow that? This feature actually helps prevent people from sending money to the wrong account, and I don't see any harm in accidentally finding out that Joe Biden has an account ending in 3200000001.

If we're talking about roughly the same amount of money, they'll both get a deal, but one is going to be significantly better, and I think you can guess which one that is.😍

Terry Howard said:Look, if I were going to explain a reversal to you, I'd basically have to give you a crash course in accounting basics.

It seems pretty clear from what's being said: a bank can fix its own screw-ups, but they aren't touching anyone else's mistake.

On another note, think about this: you and a representative from ExxonMobil both walk into a bank asking for a better exchange rate on foreign currency (you for yourself, and he for ExxonMobil). Who do you think is getting the better deal?
I think it's a similar situation to what we're talking about here.
I've seen several times where a bank teller's error was fixed immediately and the transfer was reversed (even after the cash hit the recipient's account). But for an error made by the sender? I've never seen that get reversed.

For corporations, account numbers are public info because of the business registry.

And would you honestly prefer if they didn't allow that? This feature actually helps prevent people from sending money to the wrong account, and I don't see any harm in accidentally finding out that Joe Biden has an account ending in 3200000001.

Well, funny thing is, I see reversals for sender errors every single time I check my February transaction history.

The airline openly admitted they were paying out based on the wrong list—so the mistake lies with the airline, not the bank.

So how does that work then?

Mark Sullivan62 said:Thanks, really needed that, because I was just sitting here enjoying my six hours of weekly lectures on the subject...

Yeah, sure, but it was also made perfectly clear that in my specific situation, the blunder was on the sender's end, not the bank's.

So why am I still sitting here without a single coherent answer from anyone—not even from the bank itself?

I'm talking about an airline wire transfer reversal here.

If we're talking about roughly the same amount of money, they'll both get a deal, but one is going to be significantly better, and I think you can guess which one that is.😍

Well, funny thing is, I see reversals for sender errors every single time I check my February transaction history.

The airline openly admitted they were paying out based on the wrong list—so the mistake lies with the airline, not the bank.

So how does that work then?

Look, I really shouldn't have to spell out the difference between a reversal and a withdrawal for you—you clearly get how this works. You already know that a reversal isn't about pulling money out of an account; it's just canceling out a payment that was already made.

Mark Sullivan62 said:Thanks, really needed that, because I was just sitting here enjoying my six hours of weekly lectures on the subject...

Yeah, sure, but it was also made perfectly clear that in my specific situation, the blunder was on the sender's end, not the bank's.

So why am I still sitting here without a single coherent answer from anyone—not even from the bank itself?

I'm talking about an airline wire transfer reversal here.

If we're talking about roughly the same amount of money, they'll both get a deal, but one is going to be significantly better, and I think you can guess which one that is.😍

Well, funny thing is, I see reversals for sender errors every single time I check my February transaction history.

The airline openly admitted they were paying out based on the wrong list—so the mistake lies with the airline, not the bank.

So how does that work then?

I wouldn't know, honestly. Like I said before, I didn't see any actual reversal being processed because of some client error—but just because I didn't see it doesn't mean they aren't doing it behind the scenes. As someone else pointed out earlier, I'm pretty sure they tucked that little detail right into the fine print of the account opening agreement.

Mark Sullivan62 said:Thanks, really needed that, because I was just sitting here enjoying my six hours of weekly lectures on the subject...

Yeah, sure, but it was also made perfectly clear that in my specific situation, the blunder was on the sender's end, not the bank's.

So why am I still sitting here without a single coherent answer from anyone—not even from the bank itself?

I'm talking about an airline wire transfer reversal here.

If we're talking about roughly the same amount of money, they'll both get a deal, but one is going to be significantly better, and I think you can guess which one that is.😍

Well, funny thing is, I see reversals for sender errors every single time I check my February transaction history.

The airline openly admitted they were paying out based on the wrong list—so the mistake lies with the airline, not the bank.

So how does that work then?

You? 😉

So, you actually had your doubts 😍