She was mistakenly transferred $10.5m – so she bought a mansion
A costly bungle has resulted in two Aussie women going on a spending spree and a cryptocurrency company left $10.5 million ($NZD 11.76 million) out of pocket.
Thevamanogari Manivel received the hefty injection of cash after Crypto.com, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency trading platforms, attempted to process a refund of just $100 ($NZD 111) in May last year.
But, instead of sending through the refund, an account number was entered in the payment section, resulting in the accidental transfer.
Seven months later, the company has launched legal action against Ms Manivel and her sister, Thilagavathy Gangadory, after discovering the error during an audit in December, per court documents.
The only issue is that the sisters have already spent a chunk of the cash.
The court found that Ms Manivel transferred the funds into a joint account last year, before taking out some of the money to buy a $1.35 million ($NZD 1.51 million) property in the Melbourne suburb of Craigieburn in February 2022.
It’s understood that Ms Manivel bought the five-bedroom home - which reportedly includes a gym and home cinema - as a gift for her sister.
The home, which sold on February 3 according to property records, is described as having a “monochrome palette”, four “designer” bathrooms, an outdoor entertaining area and an expansive kitchen/dining/family area with a butler’s pantry, per the listing,
According to the Herald Sun, Ms Manivel sent $430,000 ($NZD 481,000) to her daughter and transferred the ownership of the home to her sister, Ms Gangadory.
Crypto.com has since won part of its legal battle after a judge in Victoria’s Supreme Court ordered that the luxury home be sold and that the $1.35 million be returned to the company, along with $27,369 ($NZD 30,644) in interest and other costs.
It is believed that separate orders have been made for the remaining sum.
Because Ms Gangadory failed to appear in court for the May hearing, Justice James Dudley Elliott said that “the allegations in the statement of claim are taken to be admitted”, after the reasons for his judgement were made publicly available last week.
If Ms Gangadory doesn’t put the property on the market, a receiver could be appointed to arrange its sale or, if she ignores the orders, she could be in contempt of court, as reported by 7News.
“There’s no doubt that if you saw that in your account you would know it shouldn’t be there, and the onus is actually on you to actually call the sender and to say look that shouldn’t have come into my account,” Justin Lawrence from Henderson and Ball Lawyers told the outlet.
“If you’re withholding property of someone else you’re effectively holding property by deception, you’re not entitled to it, you need to give it back.”
The case is scheduled to return to court in October.
Images: Realestate.com.au/Getty Images