A woman in Henan mistakenly transferred 230,000 yuan to a wrong account. After multiple attempts to contact the recipient, they refused to return it. The involved party: will file a lawsuit based on "unjust enrichment"

NightAirdropper · 2026-03-17T23:05:04+00:00

Ms. Niu from Xinyang, Henan made a transfer error and accidentally sent 232,000 yuan to Company A. Although the other party promised to refund the money, they failed to return it on schedule. Ms. Niu filed a lawsuit based on "unjust enrichment" and requested the return of funds according to the Civil Code. The case faces enforcement difficulties. It is recommended to continue legal action and apply for property preservation measures.

NightAirdropper

2026-03-17 23:05:04

Abstract generation in progress

According to public reports, Ms. Niu from Xinyang, Henan, transferred 232,000 yuan by mistake during a business transaction. The other company refused to return the funds. She has filed a lawsuit claiming “unjust enrichment.” Below are the key details of the case and legal analysis:

Event Details

On March 9, 2026, Ms. Niu, acting as the legal representative of a real estate company in Xinyang, mistakenly transferred 232,000 yuan to Henan Elevator Company (Company A) due to similar company names while transferring elevator funds. The transfer was intended for Guangdong Elevator Company.

Transfer Screenshot

After discovering the mistake, Ms. Niu reported the incident to the police on the same day. Mr. Tian, the person in charge of Company A, promised to verify and refund the money, but as of March 13, the funds had not been returned.

Ms. Niu contacted Mr. Tian multiple times. He delayed with reasons such as “U盾 not in hand” and “on a business trip,” but no actual refund was made.

Legal Action

On March 10, Ms. Niu authorized her lawyer to sue Company A for “unjust enrichment,” demanding the return of 232,000 yuan.

The legal basis is Article 985 of the Civil Code: A person who gains benefits without legal grounds has no right to keep unjust enrichment, and the injured party has the right to request restitution.

Case Challenges

Company A has been listed as a high-consumption restricted entity by the court. Mr. Tian has also been restricted from high consumption, and the company’s account may be in a “dormant” status, making enforcement difficult.

If Company A lacks sufficient assets or intentionally conceals assets, even winning the case may not guarantee enforcement.

Recommendations: Ms. Niu should continue pursuing legal channels. The court may require Company A to explain the whereabouts of the funds. If Company A refuses to cooperate, it could face more severe legal consequences. Additionally, Ms. Niu can apply for property preservation to prevent Company A from transferring assets.

Source: Reporter Liang Qihui, Dahe News

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

1 Likes