Providing identification

nilrem_2

Broadback wrote: »

I suspect that many people have neither passport nor driving licence either. So where does that leave them?

Yes we are indeed in this position, neither my wife nor myself have passports haveing never been out of the UK, my wife does not have a Driving licence and it is very difficult to open accounts for her, in fact I went to the trouble of getting her a Photocard provisional driving licence just for ID purposes only to be told when we tried to use it for ID purposes that they would only accept a full licence! It even had her Photo on it, why does she have to have passed her driving test to open a blasted bank account?

As you say con men and scammers have no trouble with obtaining ID stuff, all these rules do is make it difficult for honest people to open genuine accounts.

savetilibleed

juicyjude wrote: »

I also have a problem in that all utility bills are in my husbands name and I would be very reluctant to send original passport/driving licence/birth cert and current account statements through the post. Have just opened A & L account and B & B and both have been successfully validated electronically (I hope)

I was OK with A&L and B&B too. Saga asked for ID up front. I'm wondering if it has to do with the fact we are not on the edited electoral register. I opened (actually it still hasn't been opened yet) an account with the Cheshire BS. Their procedure is to send in forms without ID and apparently in about 85% of cases electronic ID works - but mine didn't. So I had to send in ID which I got back securely. I was a bit worried as I chased it up - apprently they scan ID documents then forward the scans to whoever needs to check it there, and send the originals back straight away. What do they do with the scans?? I ought to ask. I don't like the thought of copies of my bank statement and benefit letters knocking about there. If they shred after verification - fair enough.

Broadback

I also had this problem with Cheshire, though others were happy with no documents. Luckily there is a branch near me so I was able to pop in. The minus of that was the very pleasant and helpful assistant said that a photocopy of my Icesave certificate was ok, so she copied that and sent it. A while later I got a letter from head office saying that they must have the original, so my money was in limbo for a further 2 weeks gaining no interest. Makes me wonder if banks collude to keep money out of interest bearing accounts!

dunstonh

As you say con men and scammers have no trouble with obtaining ID stuff, all these rules do is make it difficult for honest people to open genuine accounts.

Con men and scammers do have trouble finding ID stuff and doing transactions. The money laundering requirements dont just stop at providing ID. They cover deposits and withdrawals and there are certain transactions that carry a higher risk than others which will get reported internally even if they are genuine.

Without these rules money laundering would be far more widespread and there would be no consequences for a lot of the people involved. With these rules it makes it harder. The hardest hit are not going to necessarily be the odd big million pound frauds but more likely the small, more frequent hundred thousand pound ones.

I have reported a number of cases over the years and two of those have been confirmed as falling under the money laundering regs. One actually involved police being in the office pretending to be staff.

You may not see it happen when you pay your £50 in or draw £100 out the cashpoint but those on the other side do.

The only one of these that my wife does not have is a CC, yet she is not on the electronic verification system.

For her not to have any entries on the electronic system that would mean you dont have a BT phone (as only surname is verified) and she isnt on the electoral roll. Also, things like car insurance paid monthly can end up on the system as well or mortgages and current accounts. It isnt just short term credit.

savetilibleed

Broadback wrote: »

I also had this problem with Cheshire, though others were happy with no documents. Luckily there is a branch near me so I was able to pop in. The minus of that was the very pleasant and helpful assistant said that a photocopy of my Icesave certificate was ok, so she copied that and sent it. A while later I got a letter from head office saying that they must have the original, so my money was in limbo for a further 2 weeks gaining no interest. Makes me wonder if banks collude to keep money out of interest bearing accounts!

:rotfl: yes these situations do tend to make one cynical!:rolleyes: Wish I could have popped into a local Cheshire branch, but I live in the "sarf"

You do tend to get diferent answers from different people on the customer service lines in these places too - such as when will be account be opened - on reciept of the original forms or on receipt of ID. I asked 4 different people and got the same answer from 2 - that the account is backdated to the date of receipt of original documents, as it was not my fault I failed the electronic ID checks. Seems fair and reasonable.

Broadback

dunstonh wrote: »

Snip

For her not to have any entries on the electronic system that would mean you dont have a BT phone (as only surname is verified) and she isnt on the electoral roll. Also, things like car insurance paid monthly can end up on the system as well or mortgages and current accounts. It isnt just short term credit.

Not true actually, she is on the electoral role and the BT telephone is in her name. As an aside I asked BT if we could change it to my name but they said only by discontinuing then re-instating the line, at their prices, I should cocoa!

dunstonh

Not true actually, she is on the electoral role and the BT telephone is in her name. As an aside I asked BT if we could change it to my name but they said only by discontinuing then re-instating the line, at their prices, I should cocoa!

I have used the electronic money laundering check system for 5 years. Right from the early days. I was an early adopter of it. So, I am pretty much up to speed on what it does and does not check.

If your wife is on the electoral roll and the BT phone has her surname then that is at least two things that will appear in her favour on the electronic money laundering check. Two isnt enough to score enough points to pass but she would appear and she would get some some score. The electoral roll would also qualify as evidence of address as one of the requirements leaving just the identify check a requirement.

Broadback

From your posts it is evident that the banks/BS do not have standard requirements, which makes nonsense of the system. Looking back over my records I see that is indeed the case. I have applied for accounts and been nodded through, others have variously asked for identity and or address proof. Though my wife has never been nodded through

savetilibleed

dunstonh wrote: »

I have used the electronic money laundering check system for 5 years. Right from the early days. I was an early adopter of it. So, I am pretty much up to speed on what it does and does not check.

If your wife is on the electoral roll and the BT phone has her surname then that is at least two things that will appear in her favour on the electronic money laundering check. Two isnt enough to score enough points to pass but she would appear and she would get some some score. The electoral roll would also qualify as evidence of address as one of the requirements leaving just the identify check a requirement.

Are you able to say which electoral roll list is used for electronic anti-money laundering checks - whether it is the full list or the edited list? I'm unclear about who/which organisations the full list is available to.

autopetfeeder

dunstonh wrote: »

If your wife is on the electoral roll and the BT phone has her surname then that is at least two things that will appear in her favour on the electronic money laundering check. Two isnt enough to score enough points to pass but she would appear and she would get some some score. The electoral roll would also qualify as evidence of address as one of the requirements leaving just the identify check a requirement.

Dunstonh makes some good points but I detect a veneer of general enthusiasm for the current ID system. Here are a list of issues that I see make it less than adequate (some already mentioned):

1/ Passing a driving test to open a bank account is frankly ridiculous. Catagory of vehcle licence entitltement on one's licence should be irrelevant as far as ID checks are concerned.
2/ Reliance on the electoral roll. My wife as a UK resident for the past several years but not a UK or EU citizen it not entitled to listed on the said roll.
In addition, a criminal could (and do I believe) obtain identities simply by renting a UK address for a short while. Adding an identiy to the electoral roll is simply a matter of calling up the council and filling out a form they send you. (Same applies for utility bills).
3/ Photo-ID. How does the bank/FI that I send the copy of my photo ID know that it is mine and genuine? It is not difficult (its actually trivial) in a package like Photoshop to modify the name of a jpeg or pdf copy of a passport - particularly if it is already a grainy b/w copy.

Guess I'm gonna get flamed for this but I think the solution really is to have a government database of every person living liegally in the UK. Checks would be done electronically against that. (ID cards as well? I don't know...)