Chinese (Simplified) 
Chinese (Traditional) 
English 
French 
Alemão 
Italian 
Japanese 
Norwegian 
Spanish 
4 min read
63 comments
As reported by Record Goiás, a businessman from Goiás found himself at the center of a legal battle after the financial institution refused to negotiate and demanded the amount with increases.
A businessman from Goiânia was surprised with a deposit of R$18.666.000,00 in your checking account after a bank error in a massive operation. The case, which initially seemed like a stroke of luck, quickly turned into a legal imbroglio when the financial institution, in addition to recovering the amount, refused to make an agreement and began demanding the return of the amount with interest, according to the client's defense.
The episode, detailed in a report by Record Goiás, exposes the complex situation of a customer who used part of the money before being notified. The bank's reaction included filing a police report and an action that led to the seizure of assets, while the businessman claims to have tried to negotiate the return from the first moment, being now a defendant in a criminal case and author of a action for damages against the institution.
The million-dollar mistake and immediate transfers
The starting point of the case was a systemic failure in a large bank, which occurred on the day December 26th last year. The operational error affected approximately 400 customers throughout Brazil, who received unexpected million-dollar deposits. Among them was Guilherme Moreira, owner of a luxury restaurant in Goiânia, who saw his bill jump to more than R$18,6 million overnight.
-
Bill 1.409/2025 promises to shake up the automotive market: the proposal authorizes individuals to import used cars.
-
Brazilian Chamber approves bill that limits land expropriation and changes agrarian reform rules three decades after the original law.
-
With the new law signed by Lula, banks are required to disclose all costs, allow automatic salary portability, and create credit options with lower interest rates.
-
'CPF for Real Estate' starts in 2026 and could change how your property tax is calculated, but the tax authorities deny a tax increase.
The day after the deposit, before a formal communication from the bank, Guilherme made five transfers that, together, totaled more than R$ 1,1 million. Documents obtained exclusively by Record Goiás show that he transferred R $ 150 thousand to his father, others R $ 150 thousand to your company account, R $ 502 thousand to a supplier and purchased a vehicle Porsche, year 2014, worth R$280 thousandThese movements became the focus of the financial institution's accusation.
The bank's response and the police action
Faced with the transfers, the financial institution opted for a harsh approach. Instead of focusing solely on administrative recovery of the funds, the bank filed a police report against Guilherme. The police action resulted in a court order for search and seizure of the luxury vehicle, which was later handed over to the institution as part of the refund.
According to the police chief in charge of the case, there is evidence that the businessman tried to take advantage of the situation. The investigation revealed that, the day before the deposit, Guilherme's account balance was approximately R$ 27 thousand, a value drastically lower than the million he moved. Based on this, the businessman was indicted for crimes that, combined, can result in up to 11 years in prison.
The defense's version: failed agreement attempt
Guilherme Moreira's lawyer vehemently disputes the narrative of bad faith, stating that your client contacted the bank as soon as he realized the errorThe defense presented text messages exchanged with the account manager, in which the businessman offered to negotiate the return of the funds. The main twist in the case, according to the lawyer, was the institution's unyielding stance.
The big impasse arose because, according to the defense, the bank makes a mistake but refused to accept a return agreement, demanding the full amount corrected with interest. “My client, in addition to having a negative account to this day, receiving a series of charges, has now had an asset seized in the police operation and all the embarrassment of facing a criminal investigation,” the lawyer told Record Goiás. In response, the businessman filed a action for compensation for moral and material damages against the bank.
Legal consequences: “finders keepers”?
Although the situation was caused by an internal failure, Brazilian law is clear about the appropriation of undue amountsThe popular saying that “finders keepers” does not apply to the legal system. Taking money that entered the account by mistake, even if the bank error be the cause, constitutes a criminal offense. The legal guideline is always to seek immediate return to the rightful owner.
The bank's error, at the time, was reported on several websites, and many of the customers who received the funds returned them on their own, avoiding legal complications. Guilherme Moreira's case, however, serves as a warning about how an operational failure can escalate into a complex legal dispute, with serious financial and criminal consequences for the client involved.
What would you do in this situation? Do you believe the bank's decision to charge interest for its own error was correct? Leave your opinion in the comments; we'd love to hear your take on this impasse.
The bank's mistake involved four hundred customers, others took the initiative to return it as provided for in the Penal Code in its article 169, which proclaims, "Anyone who appropriates another person's property that came into their possession by mistake, fortuitous event or force of nature." Penalty of detention of 1 month to 1 year, or fine.
In human and contractual relationships, good faith is fundamental.
The guy was a jerk, he just had to file a police report, then file a lawsuit against the bank for embarrassment and moral damages, and then contact the bank to try to return the money, always doing so with a witness. There wouldn't be any headaches, lol.
I would never use the money. I'll never have that kind of money in my life, and if it ends up in my account, something's clearly wrong. I'd give it back. It's not worth the stress, the strain, and the embarrassment of trying to prove I wasn't a bad character when, clearly, I was.
You'd be spot on! Article 169 of the Penal Code defines as criminal conduct: appropriating another's property that came into your possession by mistake, fortuitous event, or force of nature, and provides for a penalty of imprisonment of one month to one year, or a fine.