Family go on spending spree after they’re handed $10.4 million instead of $100 refund

One of their purchases was a mansion with a home cinema

An Australian woman and her family went on a multi-million dollar spending spree after they were accidentally given $10.4 million (£6.1m) instead of a $100 (£60) refund.

Melbourne resident Thevamanogari Manivel had been set to receive the $100 refund from cryptocurrency exchange platform Crypto.com in May last year. But in a massive misstep, the website handed her more than $10m. Manivel was in no doubt about what to do next, and it wasn't hand the money back. She decided to call up her family, including her daughter and her sister, Thilagavathy Gangadory, and dished the money out between them. For seven months, they lived like millionaires, with Manivel even purchasing a $1.35 million (£800k) mansion for her sister, featuring four bedrooms, four bathrooms and a home gym and cinema. It all came crashing down in December last year though, when a routine audit led to  Crypto.com realising what had happened. [caption id="attachment_356537" align="alignnone" width="782"] Manivel purchased a $1.35 million mansion [pictured] for her sister (Barry Plant/Gladstone Park)[/caption]Manivel and Gangadory are now facing legal action and have been ordered to pay a significant sum of the money back – with interest. Manivel's accounts were frozen in February, but she had already transferred most of the money to a different joint account and handed a large sum to her daughter. Gangadory also was subjected to freezing orders on her accounts after it was revealed that she had become the registered owner of the mansion in Craigieburn, Daily Mail Australia reports. Last Friday, her and her legal team failed to show up to court for the legal case against them, resulting in the Victorian Supreme Court ruling in favour of Crypto.com. He said: "It is established that the Craigieburn property was acquired with funds traceable to the wrongful payment and would never have been in Gangadory’s hands if the wrongful payment had not been made.