Banking Law Clarifcation Needed - "Gift"

[CAD125]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? PA

I deposited money into a friend's account to be kept as a form of savings, which my friend agreed to keep for me. Unbeknownst to either of us, my friend's wife decided to take and spend the money. My friend is apologetic but unable to help. All parties admit there was never donative intent, but his wife is sticking to the general fact that any money deposited in someone's account are considered a gift, and that I can not therefore do anything about it.
Are there any precedents or clarifications for a deposit without donative intent? I thought for something to legally be considered a gift it needed Delivery, Intent &, Acceptance; and without all of those it is NOT a gift. If anyone can help clarify this situation it would be supremely helpful. If you have any questions or need further details, just let me know. Thank you.

[Country Living]

Originally Posted by CAD125

08-21-2009, 05:45 PM Forum: Other Crimes – Federal and State
PA Bank Account Theft

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Pennsylvania

4 years ago I started a new job in a new area. In talking with a family member in the area I mentioned that I needed to setup a new bank account. The family member mentioned that they had a bank account at a bank right up the street from my new job that they were no longer using and I was welcome to use if I wanted. For whatever reason (convenience, laziness, stupidity) I took them up on the offer.

For the 3 years I worked that job I walked my check up to the bank each payday at lunch, deposited it into the account ($1,200) and withdrew $1,000 cash against the deposit. For the entire 3 years I was working that job the family member never made any transaction on the account. After 3 years I left that job. I withdrew most of the surplus money that had accumulated in the account over the past 3 years, but left a balance of just over $5,000 as a safety net incase of emergency.

After a year, during which I had made no transaction on the account, I came to need the safety net money. I went to withdrawal some of the money only to find that the current account balance was $39! The family member and his wife had stolen and spent all the money. Needless to say I was outraged.

I confronted them and got them to admit to the theft and sign a promissory note for the amount of the balance. Since then however they have been evasive and made not motion to move forward or payback any of the stolen sum. I have a forfeiture of judgement clause in the note and am hopefully in a good position to get a judgement against them. That was was what I was originally hoping for but, my problem comes from the fact that they are almost judgment proof having minimal assets.

My question is where do I stand as far as filing a criminal charge against them? They have both admitted to the crime verbally and in writing (via the promissory note). The charge should be fairly sever as the amount stolen makes this a grand theft case instead of petty theft. The only murky question is the fact that I was using their account. I'm not sure how this would be any different that if I had given them a sum of money in cash to hold for me and they subsequently spent it, but I don't know what if any complications the bank account passthrough might cause.
Any advice as far as the pros and cons of filing criminal charges against them, and what I might expect would be supremely helpful. If you have any questions or need any specifics, please let me know. Thank you in advance.

Isn't this the same situation as the above post from August 2009? It looks like you deleted the other posts in which you received answers.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by Country Living

Isn't this the same situation as the above post from August 2009? It looks like you deleted the other posts in which you received answers.

That would be correct.

And lo and behold, the answers have not changed...

[Proserpina]

...but I'll recap as best I can.

The account was owned by someone other than OP - the owners are entitled to do whatever they wish with any and all funds placed in that account.

The fact that a promissory note was signed will generally preclude criminal charges from being filed - the best OP can do is file in civil court.

OP, why you're back asking the same thing is beyond me - it was explained to you why you have no recourse as far as pressing criminal charges and above everything else you were advised to speak with an attorney.

So, have you done this?

[CAD125]

Thank you again for your replies and advice. Yes, this question stems from the same situation (unfortunately), but in this instance I was not asking for generalize advice regarding the entire scope of the problem, but a specific clarification on banking law as it may apply. I did contact a lawyer and they are the ones that expressed to me that for ANY money to be considered a gift EVER by the legal definition it would need to meet the precepts of delivery, acceptance, and (most importantly in this case) donative intent.

The two principals seem to be generally accepted facts but are at odds in this situation. I was therefore hoping for clarification from someone with greater experience in this area. The other party in this instance has stated multiple times (in writing, and in person) that the money was NOT a gift, loan, payment, or for there use and that there was NEVER donative intent; however they are standing behind the blanket statement that once put in their account it was there to use as they saw fit regardless of any intent.

Does the banking law trump the legally accepted definition of a gift? Does donative intent and the legal definition of a gift trump the banking law? I dont see how they both can hold true; so, striped of most of the extraneous circumstances of the case, I was seeking some clarification as to how far each extends and what the dividing lines between the two would be.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by CAD125

Thank you again for your replies and advice. Yes, this question stems from the same situation (unfortunately), but in this instance I was not asking for generalize advice regarding the entire scope of the problem, but a specific clarification on banking law as it may apply. I did contact a lawyer and they are the ones that expressed to me that for ANY money to be considered a gift EVER by the legal definition it would need to meet the precepts of delivery, acceptance, and (most importantly in this case) donative intent.

The two principals seem to be generally accepted facts but are at odds in this situation. I was therefore hoping for clarification from someone with greater experience in this area. The other party in this instance has stated multiple times (in writing, and in person) that the money was NOT a gift, loan, payment, or for there use and that there was NEVER donative intent; however they are standing behind the blanket statement that once put in their account it was there to use as they saw fit regardless of any intent.

Does the banking law trump the legally accepted definition of a gift? Does donative intent and the legal definition of a gift trump the banking law? I dont see how they both can hold true; so, striped of most of the extraneous circumstances of the case, I was seeking some clarification as to how far each extends and what the dividing lines between the two would be.

Banking law doesn't come in to play. If the money was in the account that is owned by both parties, then either party can access it.

Your recourse is to sue in civil court. Get it?

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Banking law doesn't come in to play. If the money was in the account that is owned by both parties, then either party can access it.

Your recourse is to sue in civil court. Get it?

I don't think he does. He'll be back again after he deposits money into someone else's account. You watch

[wyett717]

And why have you not opened your own bank account?

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Originally Posted by wyett717

And why have you not opened your own bank account?

The OP deleted the thread from August, but if I remember correctly he didn't open his own account because his "friend" told him that he hadn't used this account for year and that it would be okay. Since the OP didn't have time to make it to the bank he decided to go that route.

Now, you and I both know that is not true. It is more likely than not that this OP cannot open his own account and is hiding money for reasons we can only speculate on.

[wyett717]

I noticed the shenanigans from the August post. Clearly there is more to the story, but I am curious anyway.

[Proserpina]

Originally Posted by CAD125

Thank you again for your replies and advice. Yes, this question stems from the same situation (unfortunately), but in this instance I was not asking for generalize advice regarding the entire scope of the problem, but a specific clarification on banking law as it may apply. I did contact a lawyer and they are the ones that expressed to me that for ANY money to be considered a gift EVER by the legal definition it would need to meet the precepts of delivery, acceptance, and (most importantly in this case) donative intent.

Either you didn't explain the situation correctly or you're misunderstanding what you were told.

(A father who is paying child support without a court order has often been rather disappointed when he's told that his payments - regardless of his intent - are considered a gift and that he still owes what he thought he'd paid off....)

[CAD125]

Originally Posted by Dogmatique

Either you didn't explain the situation correctly or you're misunderstanding what you were told.

Thank you again for your helpful replies. If the error lies in my explanation or understanding of the limits or legal definition of a gift, THAT is the exact thing I sought to clarify and reason I posted this question. The reason I posted a second thread instead of following up on my first (besides its inherit age) was to attempt to get that clarification without reopening (and being distracted by) all the sidelines and speculation that while pertinent to the original thread; were largely false, and extraneous to the above question.

Let me ask this; are there any circumstances (short of someone using force to compel you to sign over a check or make a deposit) where money deposited into an account would NOT be considered a gift to the account holder or for their use regardless of any circumstance? I am asking this beyond the scope of (and irregardless to) my situation and the above question.


Lastly, OUCH, on the child support illustration (no I dont have children, lol). While I think that example punishes a person who is attempting to take responsible or proactive steps in regards to their children; I can clearly see how, even regardless of a precise legal definition, the support would be considered a gift. I don't see how my circumstance (if it werent for the overriding banking laws), would ever be considered a gift either morally or legally. Thank you for your help in trying to explore the limits of my situation.

[Zigner]

Originally Posted by CAD125

Let me ask this; are there any circumstances (short of someone using force to compel you to sign over a check or make a deposit) where money deposited into an account would NOT be considered a gift to the account holder or for their use regardless of any circumstance? I am asking this beyond the scope of (and irregardless to) my situation and the above question.

Your question has to do with "Banking Law". As you were told, this does not involve "banking law" in any way. You need to look to your "friends" for repayment of your money.

[Antigone*of*Greece]

Originally Posted by Zigner

Your question has to do with "Banking Law". As you were told, this does not involve "banking law" in any way. You need to look to your "friends" for repayment of your money.

Actually there is no "law" that can help this guy. It was his lack of common sense that got him in this situation. There was no theft since the money they took was legally theirs.

Had the OP done things in the right manner, he wouldn't be here.

He is going to go round and round in circles and get a big fat NOTHING. There is no legal remedy for his stupidity.

[Proserpina]

Let me ask this; are there any circumstances (short of someone using force to compel you to sign over a check or make a deposit) where money deposited into an account would NOT be considered a gift to the account holder or for their use regardless of any circumstance? I am asking this beyond the scope of (and irregardless to) my situation and the above question.

There may be circumstances. But to delve into the "what ifs" goes far beyond the scope of this forum and not only because your situation is actually quite straightforward.

Lastly, OUCH, on the child support illustration (no I dont have children, lol). While I think that example punishes a person who is attempting to take responsible or proactive steps in regards to their children; I can clearly see how, even regardless of a precise legal definition, the support would be considered a gift. I don't see how my circumstance (if it werent for the overriding banking laws), would ever be considered a gift either morally or legally. Thank you for your help in trying to explore the limits of my situation.

The example I used was to illustrate how intent is not necessarily an essential component in deciding whether something is or is not a gift, contrary to this statement:

ANY money to be considered a gift EVER by the legal definition it would need to meet the precepts of delivery, acceptance, and (most importantly in this case) donative intent

Many would agree that a parent who supports a child outside of a legal obligation (remembering that "morally" is not the same thing as "legally") and is then penalised - by having to pay the amount all over again - for what is (usually) their own failure to play by the rules is perhaps not being treated "fairly" but is, very clearly, subject - as are we all - to the legal realities of the situation.

Your situation is not so dissimilar - in choosing not to "play by the rules" so to speak you chose to put yourself at risk; ignorance of the law is rarely an adequate reason overturn a legal conclusion.

But the part that really puts a nail in the coffers here is that promissory note - this effectively removes any possibility of criminal charges and leaves you with only civil remedies to pursue...which you have been advised to try