This is the conclusion of the news published on August 15. This case illustrates the driver "Loss rate" used in the Wire Transfer Error scenario, and the assumption considering that this loss rate is very rarely equal to 100%. In this particular event, this was the case, as NY judge Jesse Furman ruled, citing a precedent from a 1991 case in which New York's highest court ruled that when a third party mistakenly sends money from a debtor to a creditor, the creditor can keep the payment if it didn’t realize it was sent in error and didn’t make any misrepresentations — a principle called discharge for value.