I'm perfectly happy to have a serious debate about this. But before I do so you really do need to do some proper research. Until then, I think we're back to "ask your dad".
Stop playing hide&seek games and cite some case law.
I've already provided a resource which says
nemo dat quod non habet applies in tracing into mixed funds.
Now it is your turn to cite something that refutes that. Otherwise you are just playing games.
" the original payer will have an equitable proprietary interest in the monies so long as they are traceable into whomsoever's hands they come other than a purchaser for value of the legal interest without notice."
Westdeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale v Islington LBC [1996] UKHL 12 (22 May 1996) at p. 26 per Lord Browne Wilkinson