Money Transferred by Mistake in Kuwait: How to Recover It When the Recipient Refuses (Bank Transfers and WAMD)

Sent money to the wrong account or phone number and the recipient will not return it? A practical guide to your right of recovery under the Kuwaiti Civil Code: the banks' role and banking secrecy, Central Bank complaints, payment orders and lawsuits, and mistake versus fraud.

One wrong digit is all it takes. You type an account number and miss a character, pick a contact whose name looks like the one you meant, or enter a mobile number into the WAMD instant payment service and swap two adjacent digits. You press "confirm", and seconds later the money has left your account for someone you do not know, who does not know you, and with whom you have no relationship at all. It may be a small sum. It may also be a month's rent, a car instalment, or a year's savings.

Often the story ends quickly: the bank contacts the recipient, who agrees to return the money, or the recipient reaches out and sends it back. Other cases get complicated. The bank tells you it "cannot" take the money out of the recipient's account, and cannot give you the recipient's name or number. The recipient does not respond, or responds and refuses, or says the money has already been spent. That is when the real questions begin: what are your legal rights, who is obliged to return the money, and how do you get it back?

This article walks through the whole issue under Kuwaiti law: what the sending bank and the receiving bank can and cannot do given banking secrecy; how a recall request works; the legal basis of your claim in the Civil Code (Decree-Law No. 67 of 1980), namely payment of what is not due and unjust enrichment; whether refusing to return the money is a crime; when to complain to the Central Bank of Kuwait; and when to use a payment order or a civil lawsuit. We also dedicate a section to the difference between a mistaken transfer and a transfer induced by fraud, because confusing the two wastes precious time, and we refer to our existing articles for the fraud details rather than repeating them.

Quick Answer

Money transferred by mistake does not become the recipient's property. Anyone who receives money they are not entitled to must return it. That is the core of the rule on "payment of what is not due" in the Kuwaiti Civil Code.
Act immediately: call your bank within minutes or hours of discovering the error, formally ask it to raise a recall request for the transfer, and obtain a reference number.
A bank generally cannot debit the recipient's account without the recipient's consent or a legal basis, and it will not disclose the recipient's details to you because of banking secrecy. Its main role is to contact the recipient and ask for consent to return the funds.
If the recipient refuses or stays silent: file a written complaint with your bank, then with the Central Bank of Kuwait if the complaint is not resolved satisfactorily, and then go to court with a civil recovery claim. A payment order may be available in certain cases, and an attachment over the funds may be sought.
Is refusing a crime? As a rule the dispute is civil. However, deliberately appropriating money one knows arrived by mistake may, depending on the facts, raise criminal liability. That assessment requires careful case-by-case analysis.
If the transfer was induced by deception (a fake message, an impersonation call, a fake payment link), you are dealing with fraud, not a mistake. The steps are different and more urgent.
If money reaches you by mistake: do not spend it, and do not send it to "another number" at the request of a stranger. Tell your bank and let the return go through it.

The Legal Framework

Kuwait has no dedicated statute called "the mistaken transfers law". The relevant rules are spread across several pieces of legislation, most importantly:

The Civil Code, Decree-Law No. 67 of 1980: the substantive basis of the claim, through the rules on unjust enrichment and its specific form, payment of what is not due. Under these rules, a person enriched at another's expense without legal cause must restore the enrichment within the limits of the other party's loss, and a person who pays what they did not owe may recover it.
Law No. 32 of 1968 concerning Currency, the Central Bank of Kuwait and the Organisation of Banking: the source of the Central Bank's supervisory powers over banks, including its instructions on customer protection, complaint handling and payment systems.
The Civil and Commercial Procedure Code, Decree-Law No. 38 of 1980: which governs how claims are brought to court, including ordinary lawsuits, the payment-order procedure, precautionary attachments and garnishment of the debtor's funds held by a third party.
The Law of Evidence in Civil and Commercial Matters, No. 39 of 1980: which determines how the transfer and the absence of any cause for it are proved, including the evidential weight of documents, statements and correspondence.
The Penal Code (Law No. 16 of 1960) and the Criminal Procedure Code (Law No. 17 of 1960): relevant when assessing whether the recipient's conduct amounts to an offence, and how a criminal complaint is filed.
Law No. 63 of 2015 on Combating Information Technology Crimes: relevant where the transfer resulted from electronic fraud rather than an innocent slip.
Law No. 106 of 2013 on Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing: which explains much of the caution banks show, and why someone who receives money by mistake should never forward it to a party they do not know.

WAMD is an instant payment service that allows transfers between customers of local banks using a registered mobile number instead of a full account number, operating within Kuwait's domestic payment infrastructure under the supervision of the Central Bank of Kuwait. The channel does not change the legal rule: money that reached the wrong person by mistake must be returned, whether it was sent to an account number or a phone number. Operational details of the service, such as limits and what beneficiary information is shown before confirmation, are set by the banks and the operator and may change over time, so check them with your bank.

The Substantive Rules: Why the Recipient Must Pay It Back

1. Payment of what is not due is a form of unjust enrichment

The Kuwaiti Civil Code deals with this situation under the doctrine of unjust enrichment, a principle found in virtually every legal system: no one may be enriched at another's expense without a justifying cause. Payment of what is not due is its clearest application. Someone pays money believing they owe it, or believing they are paying a different person, and it turns out they owed the recipient nothing. There is no contract, no debt, no gift and no other legal cause for the money to stay with the recipient, so it must be returned.

A transfer to the wrong account is the textbook example. You meant to pay your landlord, a relative or a shop, and the money reached a third party with no connection to the transaction. That person sold you nothing, lent you nothing, and you never intended a gift. The money sits with them without cause. Our article on unjust enrichment under the Kuwaiti Civil Code covers the general doctrine; here we focus only on mistaken transfers.

2. What you need to prove

The transfer itself: that a specific amount left your account and entered the recipient's account on a given date. Your statement, the transfer receipt and its reference number prove this, together with whatever the bank provides to the court on request.
The absence of cause: that nothing between you and the recipient justifies the payment. Usually it is enough to show that you do not know the recipient and intended to pay someone else, supported by evidence of the intended beneficiary, such as a lease, an invoice or a chat showing the correct number.
The mistake: usually obvious from the facts themselves: a number one digit off from the correct one, a similar name, or a report to the bank minutes after the transaction. Prompt reporting is strong practical evidence that this was an error and not a gift.

Conversely, the recipient can defeat the claim by proving a cause, for example that you genuinely owed them money and the transfer settled that debt, or that you intended to pay them. So keep your messages unambiguous: "This amount was transferred to you by mistake. Please return it through the bank."

3. Good faith and bad faith

The Civil Code distinguishes between a recipient in good faith, who received the money without knowing it was not owed, and a recipient in bad faith, who knows the money is not theirs yet keeps it. The bad-faith recipient is treated more strictly and may be liable not only for the principal but also for its fruits, interest or damages from the time they knew. The good-faith recipient is treated more leniently while they remain unaware.

The practical consequence is significant: once the recipient has been told the money arrived by mistake, whether by the bank, by your message or by a formal notice, it becomes very difficult for them to claim good faith afterwards. That is why we always recommend notifying the recipient, in a way you can later prove, as early as possible. The precise scope of what must be returned, including interest and compensation, depends on the provisions, the facts and the court's assessment.

4. "I already spent it" is not a sufficient defence

Recipients often reply that they have "spent the money". That generally does not extinguish the obligation to repay, especially where they spent it after learning it was not theirs. Money is fungible; what was spent is repaid with equivalent money. Exceptional situations, where a recipient proves genuine good faith and acted on a legitimate belief before learning the truth, are assessed by the courts on their facts. They are not a shield for someone who kept or spent the money knowing it was not theirs.

5. Your own mistake does not forfeit your right

You may hear: "It was your mistake, so live with it." That is wrong. Entering the wrong number does not give the recipient any right to the money. The rule on recovering undue payments exists precisely to deal with mistakes; if it required the payer to be blameless, it would have almost no field of application. Your error may matter for other questions, such as the extent of the bank's liability, but it does not relieve the recipient of the duty to return what is not theirs.

6. Limitation periods: do not wait

Claims for unjust enrichment and for recovery of undue payments are not open forever. The Civil Code sets limitation periods for them, including a shorter period running from when the payer learned of the right to recover, and a longer outer period that applies in all cases. Because identifying the applicable period, when it starts and what interrupts it is a technical question that depends on the facts, do not rely on guesswork; take legal action promptly if an amicable solution stalls. Delay hurts in practice even before it hurts legally: the longer you wait, the likelier the recipient withdraws and disposes of the money.

7. Sending to the wrong phone number via WAMD

The legal basis is the same whether you pay by phone number or account number. The difference is practical. A phone number is shorter and easier to get wrong, and an instant transfer usually means the funds are credited and available to the recipient straight away, with no "pending" window in which the payment might be stopped. Speed in reporting matters even more for instant transfers. Before confirming, check any beneficiary information the app displays against the person you intend to pay, and save frequent payees rather than typing numbers each time.

8. What the sending bank and the receiving bank can do

The sending bank is your bank, and your relationship with it is contractual. It must carry out your instructions as given; if you entered a wrong number and the bank executed it faithfully, the bank has not, in principle, made an error. But good faith in performing the contract and the customer-protection instructions require it to help you genuinely with the recall, forward your request to the receiving bank without delay, and respond to your complaint within the applicable timeframes.

The receiving bank is the recipient's bank; its contract is with its own customer, not with you. It generally cannot debit its customer's account without consent or a legal basis such as a judgment or court order, and it is bound by banking secrecy, so it will not give you the customer's name, phone number or balance. What it can do is contact its customer, explain that funds arrived by mistake, request consent to return them, and take whatever steps the regulations allow where fraud is suspected. We explain banking secrecy and account attachments in detail in our article on banking secrecy, account freezes and attachments in Kuwait.

This is where most misunderstanding arises. Customers feel the bank is "covering" for the recipient or "refusing to help", when the bank is in fact bound by law. Pressuring branch staff will not change that. The route that lifts the restriction is the court or the investigating authorities, which can order the bank to disclose information, attach the funds and compel repayment.

9. Is refusing to return the money a crime?

As a rule, the dispute is civil. A recipient who did nothing fraudulent and received the money without any involvement is civilly liable to return it, and is pursued through a recovery claim.
Criminal liability may arise where retention is coupled with knowledge that the money arrived by mistake and an intention to appropriate it, for example rushing to withdraw or move the funds after being notified, or denying receipt while knowing otherwise. Whether such conduct is an offence, and under which Penal Code provision, is a delicate question that depends on the facts and on the assessment of the investigating authorities and the court. It is not accurate to say that every refusal is a crime, nor that every refusal is criminally irrelevant.
The position is entirely different if the recipient took part in a deception that caused the transfer, or if the account is being used to receive stolen funds. That is fraud, and possibly money laundering, not a simple mistake.

In practice, a criminal complaint can sometimes help because investigators can access the account data and summon the holder, and many recipients repay once summoned. But a criminal complaint should be used responsibly and after legal assessment: a complaint that does not meet the elements of an offence may be shelved, and misuse of complaints can have consequences for the complainant.

Settled Principles of the Court of Cassation

Kuwaiti courts handle claims to recover funds transferred without cause within the general principles of unjust enrichment and payment of what is not due. In broad terms, the Court of Cassation has consistently held that:

Unjust enrichment is an independent source of obligations, resting on the enrichment of one person, the corresponding loss of another, and the absence of a legal cause, and restitution is limited to the lesser of the enrichment and the loss.
An enrichment claim does not lie where a contract or other legal cause governs the relationship. If the transfer is shown to have had a cause, such as payment of a debt, a price or a loan, the matter falls under that contract instead.
Whether a cause exists, and whether the recipient acted in good or bad faith, are questions of fact for the trial court, provided its reasoning is sound and grounded in the record.
The burden of proving the payment and the absence of cause lies, in principle, on the party seeking restitution, and the court may infer the absence of cause from circumstantial evidence and the surrounding facts.
Bank documents such as statements and transfer advices can prove the transfer, while their evidential weight remains for the trial court to assess alongside the other evidence.

A note on method

We have stated these principles in general terms reflecting the settled direction of the case law as reflected in the commentary and practice on the Civil Code. We deliberately do not cite appeal numbers or judgment dates, because citing a specific judgment requires checking its full text and facts. Nor have we cited the article numbers governing unjust enrichment, undue payment and their limitation periods, or the periods themselves; refer to the Civil Code in force. None of this replaces a review of recent judgments relevant to the facts of a given case, which is part of a lawyer's preparation of the claim.

Practical Steps to Recover the Money

Step 1: Report to your bank immediately

As soon as you notice the mistake, call your bank's customer service and ask explicitly to "raise a recall request for a transfer made in error". Give the date and time, amount, reference number, the account or phone number the money went to, and the correct number you intended. Ask for a reference number for your request and note the agent's name and the time of the call. Then follow up in writing through the bank's official channel (the app, the bank's official email, or a branch visit), because the written request is what you will rely on later.

Step 2: Follow up the recall

Your bank forwards the request to the receiving bank, which contacts its customer. The recipient may agree and the money returns; the funds may still be in the account with no response yet; the recipient may refuse outright; or the money may already have been withdrawn. Follow up regularly and ask for a written statement of the outcome. A bank letter stating that the recipient refused or did not respond is a useful document for everything that follows.

Step 3: Contact the recipient if you know the number

With phone-number transfers you may know the number you sent to. A short, polite and clear message stating the date, the amount, that it was sent in error, and asking for it to be returned through the bank or by a reverse transfer to the originating account can work well. Avoid threats or insults: your message may end up before a court, and abusive messages can create problems for you. Keep copies and any proof of delivery or reading.

Step 4: Complain to the bank, then to the Central Bank of Kuwait

If the recall stalls, submit a formal written complaint to your bank's customer complaints unit asking what steps were taken, and recording any shortcoming such as delay in forwarding the recall. If the bank does not reply within the applicable period, or its reply is unsatisfactory, you can complain to the Central Bank of Kuwait through the channels it publishes for bank customers.

The Central Bank's role is supervisory: it checks whether the bank complied with the instructions and handled the complaint properly, and its involvement can speed things up. It does not replace the court in ordering the recipient to pay, and it does not rule against the recipient. Do not treat the complaint as a substitute for legal action where the recipient is refusing, and do not let it consume time during which the money might be withdrawn.

Step 5: Formal notice

A formal notice to the recipient establishes that they know the money is not theirs, removes any claim of good faith, and prepares the ground for a lawsuit. The practical obstacle is that you may not know their name and address because of banking secrecy. A lawyer can choose the most suitable route to obtain those details through the court or the investigating authorities, depending on the case.

Step 6: Payment order or civil lawsuit

The payment-order procedure under the Procedure Code is a summary route for recovering a debt that is established in writing, due, and of a fixed amount. Does it fit a mistaken transfer? That depends on your documents. The amount is fixed and due, but "established in writing" in principle requires a document issued by, or attributable to, the debtor showing the debt. If the recipient has acknowledged in writing that the money arrived by mistake and promised to return it, by message or signed undertaking, a payment order may become a fast option. If all you have is your own statement, an ordinary recovery claim before the court competent for the amount is usually the safer route. See our article on payment orders under Kuwaiti law for the conditions and how they are challenged.

In the lawsuit, the court can be asked to order the receiving bank to provide the account holder's details or account movements to the extent necessary to decide the dispute, and a precautionary attachment or garnishment of the funds in the recipient's account can be considered where the conditions are met, to prevent the money being moved until judgment. Enforcement after judgment is covered in our article on debt collection in Kuwait.

Step 7: A criminal complaint where justified

Where the facts suggest deliberate appropriation, or the transfer was induced by deception, a report to the competent authority may be appropriate. A lawyer can assess whether that route fits, draft the report accurately without exaggeration or omission of key facts, and coordinate it with the civil track so that neither undermines the other.

Documents you will need

The transfer receipt or a screenshot of the confirmation, showing date, time, amount and reference number.
An account statement showing the debit.
Proof of the intended correct number: a contract, invoice, chat with the real beneficiary, or previous transfers to them.
The recall request reference and any written messages or letters from the bank.
Your complaint to the bank and its reply, and any complaint to the Central Bank of Kuwait.
All correspondence with the recipient, complete rather than cropped.
Your civil ID, and a power of attorney for your lawyer if court action is taken.

When It Is Not a Mistake: Transfers Induced by Fraud

Ask yourself honestly: did I mistype the number, or did someone lead me to make the transfer? If you paid because a caller impersonated a bank employee or a government body, because a text asked you to "update your details" or "pay a fine", or because you paid a fake shop on social media, you are dealing with fraud, not a mistake. The difference matters:

With a mistake, the recipient is usually an ordinary person who received the money by chance, and an amicable return is very possible.
With fraud, the recipient is part of a network or a rented "mule" account, the money moves on within minutes or is withdrawn in cash, and waiting for consent is pointless.

With fraud, you must move faster: tell the bank at once that the transaction was fraudulent rather than a simple error, ask it to freeze whatever can be frozen, and report to the authorities responsible for cybercrime. We have covered these steps, and the bank's liability and customer rights, in our article on bank fraud and card theft in Kuwait; the criminal elements in our article on fraud and deception under Kuwaiti law; and the electronic framework in our article on cybercrime in Kuwaiti law. We do not repeat them here.

The reverse scam: "I sent you money by mistake"

There is also a reverse pattern worth a warning. You get a message or call from someone saying they sent you money by mistake and asking you to return it. A real transfer may have arrived, or you may simply have received a fake message that looks like a bank alert while nothing entered your account. You are then asked to send the money to a different number or account from the one it came from, or through a link. This is a known fraud pattern. It can make you an unwitting link in moving stolen money, or cost you your own money if the "alert" was fake.

The golden rules if you receive money by mistake:

Check your actual balance and transactions in your bank's app, not just the text message.
Do not spend it; it is not yours, and using it once you know may expose you to civil and possibly criminal liability.
Do not send it to any number or account dictated by a stranger.
Inform your bank and ask for the return to be made through it to the original source, and keep proof.

Three Hypothetical Cases

Case 1: One wrong digit in a phone number

Hypothetical facts: A woman paid her tailor using a phone-number transfer but got one digit wrong, and the money went to a stranger. She realised within fifteen minutes when the tailor said nothing had arrived, called her bank and raised a recall. Days later the bank told her the recipient had not responded.

Legal analysis: A classic undue payment: no relationship between the parties, and the mistake is evident from the number, her chat with the tailor and her prompt report. The recipient's silence does not defeat her right. Next steps: a written complaint asking the bank for a formal statement of the recall outcome, then a recovery claim asking the court to order the receiving bank to disclose the account holder's details, with an attachment over the funds if the conditions are met. If the sum is small, her lawyer will weigh the cost of action against its value.

Case 2: A recipient who admits receipt but refuses

Hypothetical facts: An employee sent a relatively large sum to what he thought was his landlord's account; it went to someone else. He later reached the recipient, who admitted in writing that he had received the money and did not know the sender, but refused to pay it back, saying "the bank is responsible" and "I've spent it".

Legal analysis: The written admission greatly strengthens the sender's position: it establishes both the absence of cause and the recipient's knowledge. "I've spent it" is no defence, particularly given his insistence on keeping the money after learning the truth. With that written admission, a payment order may be feasible if the lawyer considers the conditions met; otherwise an ordinary lawsuit. The recipient's persistence in appropriating the funds after being told may also warrant examining the criminal angle, depending on the facts.

Case 3: The "bank employee" who asked for a transfer

Hypothetical facts: A young man received a call from someone claiming to be from his bank, reporting "suspicious activity" and asking him to move his balance to a temporary "safe account" using a phone number the caller supplied. He did, then realised it was a scam. At the bank he was told "you transferred it yourself to a number you chose".

Legal analysis: This is not a mistaken transfer but a transfer induced by deception. The steps: tell the bank immediately that it was fraud and ask for the funds to be traced and frozen, then file an urgent criminal report. The bank's potential liability in this scenario turns on different considerations, discussed in our bank fraud article. Regardless of the criminal outcome, the victim retains a civil claim against the holder of the receiving account, who was enriched without cause.

At a Glance: The Right Route for Each Situation

Recipient agrees to return the money: recall through your bank, ensuring the return goes bank-to-bank, not in cash or to another account.
Recipient silent, funds still in the account: written complaint to the bank, then swift legal action with an attachment request where the conditions are met, before the money is withdrawn.
Recipient admits receipt in writing but refuses: a payment order if its conditions are met, otherwise a recovery claim, and consider the criminal angle if intent to appropriate is evident.
Recipient withdrew the money and says it is spent: the duty to repay remains; civil claim, then enforcement against their assets.
Your bank delayed the recall or ignored your complaint: complaint to the Central Bank of Kuwait, and consider the bank's liability if its failure caused loss.
The transfer was induced by deception: immediate fraud report to the bank, a criminal complaint, and a separate civil claim.
You received money by mistake: do not touch it; return it through your bank to its source only.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the bank cancel the transfer after it is executed?

Usually not unilaterally once the funds have reached the recipient's account, especially with instant transfers. It can request a recall from the receiving bank, which needs its customer's consent or a legal basis. Suspected fraud may be handled differently, as banks may take precautionary steps under the applicable instructions.

Why won't the bank tell me the recipient's name?

Because banks are bound by banking secrecy and disclose customer data only where the law allows, including at the request of a court or investigating authority. That is why legal proceedings are the usual way to obtain it.

Have I lost my right because I typed the wrong number?

No. Your mistake does not transfer ownership of the money, and the rule on recovering undue payments exists precisely for mistakes. It may affect the bank's liability, but not the recipient's duty to repay.

How long does a recall take?

There is no single guaranteed timeframe; it depends on both banks and on the recipient's response. The key is to follow up, obtain a written outcome, and move to the next step once it is clear the recipient is not cooperating.

Can the money in the recipient's account be attached?

The Procedure Code provides for precautionary attachment and garnishment of funds held by third parties, subject to conditions, and this may be available depending on the facts and documents. Speed and precision in applying make the difference, so involve a lawyer.

Should I go straight to the police?

Not always. If it is a simple mistake and the recipient has not yet responded, the civil route may be more suitable. If there are signs of deliberate appropriation or the transfer resulted from deception, a report may be appropriate. Take legal advice first.

What will the Central Bank of Kuwait do with my complaint?

It oversees whether your bank complied with the instructions and handled your complaint properly. It does not order the recipient to repay or rule against them; that is for the courts.

The amount is small. Is a lawsuit worth it?

That is a practical decision balancing the amount against cost and time. Sometimes a well-drafted notice or a formal complaint is enough to move the recipient. A lawyer can help you assess this before you incur costs.

The recipient offers to repay in instalments. Should I accept?

You can, but obtain a written acknowledgment of the amount, the instalments and their dates. That acknowledgment greatly strengthens your position if they default and may open the payment-order route.

Money I don't recognise arrived in my account. What do I do?

Check your actual transactions, do not spend it, and ask your bank to return it to its source. Never send it to another number at a stranger's request; it may be a scam.

Is it different if the money went to a bank outside Kuwait?

The substantive duty to return undue payments still applies, but the process is more complex because the recipient and their bank are subject to another legal system, and questions of international jurisdiction and enforcement may arise. Reporting quickly to your bank matters even more.

Can I claim compensation from my own bank?

If the bank executed your instruction as given, it has not, in principle, erred. But if it was at fault, for example by unjustifiably delaying the recall so that the funds were lost, its liability may be examined on the facts.

Conclusion

Money that reaches someone by mistake does not become theirs. That is a clear rule of the Kuwaiti Civil Code under the provisions on payment of what is not due and unjust enrichment, and it does not change because the sender made the error, because the transfer went to a phone number rather than an account, or because the recipient "spent it".

But having the right is not enough; what matters is how you pursue it. The bank is bound by secrecy and cannot take money out of someone else's account on its own initiative, so its role ends at the recall and outreach. When the recipient refuses or ignores the request, the path is a formal complaint and then the courts, which can order disclosure, attach the funds and compel repayment.

The decisive factor throughout is speed: reporting within minutes or hours, putting the request in writing, preserving documents, and acting in court before the money is withdrawn. And if the transfer turns out to have been induced by deception rather than a slip, urgency matters even more and the process is different.

Legal Disclaimer

This article provides general legal information for awareness purposes only. It is not legal advice and does not create a lawyer-client relationship. Outcomes vary with the facts, the documents, bank instructions and the legislation in force at the time of the dispute, and this article is no substitute for a review of your case by a qualified lawyer.

If you transferred money by mistake and the recipient refuses to return it, or your bank's recall has stalled, the team at Yumnaak Law Firm can review your documents, follow up with the bank and the complaint process, choose the fastest legal route to recover your money, and represent you before the Kuwaiti courts. You can contact us or book a consultation.