We considered that Rose’s description of her husband’s behaviour was sufficient to make the bank realise the funds in the joint account were more than likely to be the subject of a dispute between her and her husband. Rose had described how he had left her, was on the run from police and had “cleaned out” their joint accounts. Knowing that, it should have told Rose it was putting a lock on the funds. We could find no evidence of the bank ever having discussed with Rose the possibility of taking such a step. The bank agreed to repay Rose the $12,000 so she could undertake earthquake repairs. In turn, Rose agreed to repay the money if she recovered it in a relationship property settlement. She also agreed to give the bank evidence of the repairs undertaken.
We closed the case on the basis of the agreed settlement.Print this page