HSBC - only accept face-to-face ID?

Dagobert

pin wrote:

is there any desire to bank with HSBC?

I just like to win a battle.

And I certainly don't take anything at face value that I'm told over the phone if it doesn't sound plausible to me. I have encountered numerous occasions where the information given over the phone is just blatently wrong. The people who answer the phone often don't know their own products, never mind the T&Cs.

Dagobert

ejones999 wrote:

could you please explain to me when you send in certified copies of id a) How does the bank know whether the solicitor, teacher, minister of religion, doctor etc is real and not made up?

The certified copy requires full name, address, telephone number, and occupation of the person signing it.

ejones999 wrote:

and b) if it is a certified copy how would the bank know whether the documents had been 'doctored' to show what is needed for the purpose of opening the account?

And how would the bank know whether the passport I am presenting face-to-face is a counterfeit or not?
This is not a criminal investigation. The bank just has to show that they have taken reasonable steps to ensure that their customers are who they purport to be. They take photocopies of the documents presented to them just to back themselves up in case of a future investigation. That doesn't mean that the system is fool-proof.
dunstonh, who is one of the few professions that can certify a copy, would probably be able to give you a better explanation than I.

ejones999 wrote:

This is why some banks insist on seeing original documents and why some banks insist on you taking them personally to a branch.

You mean same banks take the belts and braces approach and the other ones are taking the Money Laundering Regulations more lightly? You mean all these banks who are accepting postal proof of identification are taking undue risks? I don't think so.

Since the introduction of the Money Laundering Regulations 1993, all providers of financial products must have procedures in place to prevent money laundering. And they can be liable if they do not have appropriate procedures in place.

What puzzles me though is the fact that the banks accepting postal id all provide slightly different lists of suitable documents. I can only presume that the Money Laundering Regulations are not that specific.

For instance, Abbey will accept a bank statement and a utility bill to prove name and address. A&L require a certified copy of passport or driving licence for proof of name.

zar

I think the money laundering regulations are crazy - e.g. about 6 months ago I wanted to open a yorkshire building society e-ISA in my married name. There was a branch near me so it wasn't posting things that was the problem - but I didn't have sufficient proof of name to open the account as my passport was still in my maiden name and apparantly they don't accept passport plus marriage certificate more than 3 months after the wedding. I couldn't open it in my maiden name as then I wouldnt have had proof of address. I didn't see why I should have to change my passport just to open an account, especially since you are not required to have a passport anyway - they may as well call them id cards now otherwise! I'm a student so I didn't have a tax code letter and I don't drive. I gave up and stuck with my current savings accounts.

The strictness of some of the banks is leaving some people with the inability to open decent savings accounts or switch banks - which I think is pretty unfair. I caved in in the end and have changed my passport - not exactly top money-saving :money: at £70! ( I don't tend to travel abroad so didn't need it for that). When you're in a couple you now have to make sure some of the utilities are in one person's name and some the other so you can prove your address. Glad that some banks are trialling electronic id although it won't help if you've recently moved house.

I've just opened a joint account with smile that involved sending in 4 pieces of id for the two of us, including a certified copy of my brand new passport. Then they said that one of the proof of address was unacceptable because the address had one line different to the one on our form, so we had to send another one. :mad: Finally got the ok yesterday that we are who we say we are! :rolleyes:

jonesMUFCforever

Dagobert wrote:

The certified copy requires full name, address, telephone number, and occupation of the person signing it.



And how would the bank know whether the passport I am presenting face-to-face is a counterfeit or not?
This is not a criminal investigation. The bank just has to show that they have taken reasonable steps to ensure that their customers are who they purport to be. They take photocopies of the documents presented to them just to back themselves up in case of a future investigation. That doesn't mean that the system is fool-proof.
dunstonh, who is one of the few professions that can certify a copy, would probably be able to give you a better explanation than I.


You mean same banks take the belts and braces approach and the other ones are taking the Money Laundering Regulations more lightly? You mean all these banks who are accepting postal proof of identification are taking undue risks? I don't think so.

Since the introduction of the Money Laundering Regulations 1993, all providers of financial products must have procedures in place to prevent money laundering. And they can be liable if they do not have appropriate procedures in place.

What puzzles me though is the fact that the banks accepting postal id all provide slightly different lists of suitable documents. I can only presume that the Money Laundering Regulations are not that specific.

For instance, Abbey will accept a bank statement and a utility bill to prove name and address. A&L require a certified copy of passport or driving licence for proof of name.

What you are saying sorry is complete !!!!!!!!!
A certified copy is just that, a stamp next to a signature and date, there is no obligation to put full names and addresses. ( I do open a/c's for a bank as a living). We certify for our own purposes and no way would I accept something coming in the post that I would have no way of verifing.My head is on the block not only as an individual (worst case scenario is a heavy fine or jail if I !!!! up!) but the bank I work for stand to be fined millions (as a few have for having incomplete records) if we do not do the right thing.
I have been trained to spot counterfeit documents and know what to look for but for obvious reasons I will not elaborate here!
Any suspicious customer gets reported whether an account is opened or not and Head Office also have ways of monitoring customer accounts without alerting the branch.

Dagobert

ejones999 wrote:

What you are saying sorry is complete !!!!!!!!!

Nonsense? Which part?

ejones999 wrote:

A certified copy is just that, a stamp next to a signature and date, there is no obligation to put full names and addresses.

And what good is that? How can the recipient of the certified copy verify the validity of the document then?

The Norwich & Peterborough Building Society request the following for postal applications: All copies sent through the post must be certified as being a true likeness of the original by a lawyer, ... Each certified copy must be signed by that person, whose full name, qualification, job title, adress, and telephone number must appear on it with the date of certification.

ejones999 wrote:

and no way would I accept something coming in the post that I would have no way of verifing.

Absolutely.

By the way, does your bank have a procedure for postal applications?

ejones999 wrote:

the bank I work for stand to be fined millions ... if we do not do the right thing.

And what exactly is the right thing? What my experience with 20 different financial institutions' id verification procedure goes to prove is that the procedures differ as do the lists of acceptable documents. And this is probably due to the fact that their legal departments' interpretations of the Money Laundering Regulations differ. I can only presume that this is the case because the Money Laundering Regulations do not actually specify which forms of identification are appropriate.

You professional colleague, Ian, sums this up quite nicely in this thread on uk.finance.

ejones999 wrote:

I have been trained to spot counterfeit documents and know what to look for

No disrespect, but you don't believe that you have a 0% failure rate?
And your bank's training is 100% foolproof?
You are kept up-to-date about the latest passport fraud technology?
You can spot a counterfeit foreign passport - any nationality?
You can spot a forged utility bill or bank statement? Presumably you know the billing formats of several dozen of utilities and the statement format of several dozen banks?
I dare say that the ready accessibility of high resolution scanners and printers is going to make it incredibly difficult to distinguish an original from a copy.

And what about stolen documents? You are definitely going to recognize someone who is using a stolen passport?

You said in another posting

ejones999 wrote:

how would the bank know whether the documents had been 'doctored' ... This is why some banks insist on seeing original documents and why some banks insist on you taking them personally to a branch.

It is a given that there are an increasing number of institutions offering financial products which are postal or online by design.
That means that it is possible to comply with the Money Laundering Regulations without face-to-face customer contact, either via electronic checks or sending documents though the post. What these documents should be is another question.

From that point of view I can't see a logical argument for a bank only accepting face-to-face id, particularly not if it's HSBC, whose online division FirstDirect does accept postal proof of id.

This argument in combination with the fact that I have a FirstDirect savings a/c eventually caused HSBC to accept certified copies through the post.

dunstonh

What you are saying sorry is complete !!!!!!!!!
A certified copy is just that, a stamp next to a signature and date, there is no obligation to put full names and addresses. ( I do open a/c's for a bank as a living). We certify for our own purposes and no way would I accept something coming in the post that I would have no way of verifing.My head is on the block not only as an individual (worst case scenario is a heavy fine or jail if I !!!! up!) but the bank I work for stand to be fined millions (as a few have for having incomplete records) if we do not do the right thing.

Interesting stance.

Money laundering guidelines are just that..guidelines. Different companies will have different approaches. Some will take shortcuts to save money and risk a fine which will probably be less than the amount of money they have saved by taking that shortcut.

A certified copy by a regulated financial services company needs a stamp from the company (or written name and address) and the name and position of the individual needs to be included. Where applicable, the FSA reference number should be given as well. However, that wouldnt apply to banks. With photo ID, you have to state that the photo is a true likeness.

I used to work for a bank and know that certifiying documents (in those days) would only be done with assistant manager grade or higher and they did follow the correct proceedure then. The fact they shortcut it now does not surprise me. If i was to get a copy from a bank with just a stamp and a signature, I would reject it as not being a certified copy as it clearly isnt. Its just a copy with a stamp and signature and no way of identifying the person that certified it.

Personally, I moved my firm over to experian money laundering checks. It costs a bit more but the financial services companies are fine with it and the scoring system has a direct result to what should and shouldn't be reported for money laundering purposes. Sometimes the old way is still required but we have never looked back.

Dagobert

dunstonh wrote:

I moved my firm over to experian money laundering checks.

Do you know what exactly it is they check?

I remember having been told on occasions that a cheque (included for an initial deposit) can be used for id checks. Is this correct?

dunstonh

Dagobert wrote:

Do you know what exactly it is they check?

I remember having been told on occasions that a cheque (included for an initial deposit) can be used for id checks. Is this correct?

No, that is not correct. I would assume that the person saying that has guessed that because you input the class of business you are doing, the premium (where applicable) and you can enter bank details.

Its a risk based check. It looks up credit agreements, verifies telephone number, personal information, electoral roll and a range of other things which get registered against the address. This is then compared with the information you have input. It is then scored on what information is available and how it matches. It will also tell you how many matches against personal id and address id are available

I had one case recently that scored 20 and I referred it for potential money laundering. it turned out that the application had the wrong date of birth and wrong telephone number (client was dyslexic and reversed some of the numbers). The differences were enough to score it low and highlighted it as potential identity fraud.

ffs

When I opened a Coop Cashminder account about a year ago, my council tax bill was not accepted as proof of address because the address was not in precisely the same format as the address held on PAF. Because my driving licence address also didn't conform to PAF it wasn't accepted as proof of ID, despite the photocard.

Getting prior confirmation from the call centre of what would be accepted and what would not made no difference, nor did checking with the branch staff, because when the documents were sent by the branch staff to the proccessing centre they were rejected. After several attempts I nearly gave up completely. Now I'm going to have to go through it all again to change bank.

Dagobert

dunstonh wrote:

Dagobert wrote:

dunstonh wrote:

I moved my firm over to experian money laundering checks.

Do you know what exactly it is they check?

It looks up credit agreements, verifies telephone number, personal information, electoral roll and a range of other things which get registered against the address.

Presumably the bank gets to see exactly the same information as shown in the credit report?

dunstonh wrote:

I had one case recently that scored 20 and I referred it for potential money laundering. it turned out that the application had the wrong date of birth and wrong telephone number (client was dyslexic and reversed some of the numbers). The differences were enough to score it low and highlighted it as potential identity fraud.

Frightening.
Whilst I appreciate that id checks and scoring provided by the CRAs is useful and efficient in 95% of applications, I can see a number of situations where the whole system falls down - to the detriment of the applicant.

• The telephone number check is a whole lot of nonsense. application forms are not consistent: some ask for home and work number, some for daytime and evening contact number (which is the home phone for someone working shifts then?). What if you have more than one number? - I have 2 landlines and I normally specify an 08xx number as contact number, which I switch between home, office, or mobile so I can be contacted anytime.
• Different banks utilize different CRAs and therefore don't get the full picture.
• The address checks are fraught with problems if the postcode checker (PAF) is not used with care. I dread telephone applications because my postcode shows nearly 10 houses with a similar but not identical name; the number of times people pick the wrong one ...
• It's actually possible to be a law-abiding citizen without an entry in any CRA.
  • if you have money and don't need to lend
  • if your bank doesn't use CRAs, e.g. Bank of Scotland. I've been banking with them and only them for goodness knows how long, never been overdrawn, always paid the VISA off in full and I've got no bloody history of it. Meanwhile I've used a few other CC providers but they don't use Experian. Applied for an account with Abbey, who use Experian, and got rejected.