3 ms·
Exactly. I'm surprised the article is so poor to not explain this.It's slightly more complicated in that there is a dispute about what money was owed when.
by Decker87 6y ago
Exactly. I'm surprised the article is so poor to not explain this.It's slightly more complicated in that there is a dispute about what money was owed when.
- KMag 6y agoUnfortunately, they get fewer page views if it's explained in a way that makes the law seem closer to being reasonable here.
- spacemanmatt 6y agoAlthough the article didn't go deep into the ins and outs of the ramifications, I think the article did a reasonable job of explaining the legal situation relevant to the story to casual readers, albeit at the cost of the backstory. From the article: > If the beneficiary is entitled to the money and did not know it was accidentally wired, they can keep it. Revlon lenders said they believed Citibank was wiring prepayments for a loan.