You’re right, both morally and legally. My friend a government law professor told me that in the EU you could probably even construct a pretty solid case arguin

You’re right, both morally and legally. My friend a government law professor told me that in the EU you could probably even construct a pretty solid case arguing this. The argument would be that If there is not a single slip of evidence tying you physically to the money Except your PII Then the banks anti-money laundering should have catched it. That gets their attention right away since the fines in that cases are proper billions. If they don’t settle, you go for the kill and settle that PII is not uniquely tied to legal intent (heck, it wasn’t you! The intent is missing and that’s what you point out as well.) The problem is that that case will take you 7+ years, all the way to the various supreme courts (local, European). It’s why Max Schrems is a hero, except banks are worse adversaries than government regulators. This whole digital world has had some impact on our two thousand years plus of contract law. It’s sad judges don’t go back to the basics in these cases. Show me the contract (into the abyss).