> But, it's important to also point out how bizzare this exception is, how did this even get included as the one and only exception? It's not really 'an except

> But, it's important to also point out how bizzare this exception is, how did this even get included as the one and only exception? It's not really 'an exception'. The article most likely written by a non business person confuses a mistake (money sent to the wrong account) with money sent to the right account. The law almost certainly doesn't allow a wire transfer sent to be recovered for that reason and type of mistake. It does (by design) allow a transfer sent to a mistake (like a typo) to be recovered. This actually makes sense and here is why: A wire transfer is payment for 'goods or services' let's say. Often that 'goods or services' is released (or relied upon) when money is received. Wire transfers are by design 'final'. ACH is not. An ACH can be reverse (for a number of reasons). If you could claw back wire transfers all sorts of things (that depend on them being final) would break down and you'd have all sorts of problems down the transaction line. It's like giving someone money in a sense. You give someone money they give you something in return.