Barclays - moving money without permission

[BeleagueredSinner]

Hi, bit of an unusual one here - for me anyway.

 

I had three business accounts with Barclays, which had a 'group' overdraft facility.

 

I then set up another business, which was unconnected with the group facility above, with a different shareholding, etc. albeit run out of the same offices

 

Over time, our Barclays Relationship Manager would move money from the new account into the 'group facility' when there was an excess showing on the group facility.

 

Such movement of funds were without permission.

 

Would I be correct in assuming that such transactions are unlawful, and the money should be given back?

 

Second point, if this were the case and a refund was appropirate; could I insist the money be paid into a third party account (I have an account with NatWest) rather than back into a Barclay's account?

 

Any wise words gratefully received. Cheers

[Guest Old_andrew2018]

Bump

[rippedoffagain]

Hi, bit of an unusual one here - for me anyway.

 

I had three business accounts with Barclays, which had a 'group' overdraft facility.

 

I then set up another business, which was unconnected with the group facility above, with a different shareholding, etc. albeit run out of the same offices

 

Over time, our Barclays Relationship Manager would move money from the new account into the 'group facility' when there was an excess showing on the group facility.

 

Such movement of funds were without permission.

 

Would I be correct in assuming that such transactions are unlawful, and the money should be given back?

 

Second point, if this were the case and a refund was appropirate; could I insist the money be paid into a third party account (I have an account with NatWest) rather than back into a Barclay's account?

 

Any wise words gratefully received. Cheers

 

Without knowing all the details.

 

The new business is not part of the other three, and as you know is an entirely different legal entity. Company #4 has effectively loaned the group, the funds, albeit without permission. So the group now owes Company #4 the funds, not the bank.

 

Interestingly, if the group has accepted the funds, knowing that they had no entitlement to do so, then IMO a technical fraud has taken place, of which the bank are co-conspirators.

 

If the directors of Company #4 were aware of funds being moved from #4's bank account to Company #1,2,3, and failed to protect the shareholders from potential loss, they would be negligent in their duties.

 

The bank should have been prevented from taking this action at the very first instance.