electronic identification

Newly_retired

In the past few years since I started internet banking I have had no trouble getting my ID verified electronically - very useful in setting up new accounts. I have tried to open a couple more recently and both times I have been told it has not been possible to verify electronically so I must send documents through the post.
Anyone have any idea why this is happening? I have not moved house, am still on the electoral roll, have no debts, and am not aware of anything which could make a difference. Maybe the rules have changed?

Stompa

Newly_retired wrote: »

Maybe the rules have changed?

I hope not, as I'm in the same position as you, and sending documents would be a real nuisance.

dunstonh

No rule changes on the verification front. Only "recent" change is the financial sanctions list check but that's incremental to the existing money laundering rules check.

One thing that can happen is bad data can appear and create a fail. Also, too many checks in a short period can reduce the score.

Whilst IFAs can see the information and know what to do to get it sorted. Banks tend to just give a yes/no response to the clerk or wont let the clerk give a reason.

Newly_retired

So is there anything I can do to improve my situation?

dunstonh

Newly_retired wrote: »

So is there anything I can do to improve my situation?

Not without knowing where you have failed. You dont know if its a data error, an internal bank system problem (may have reverted back to old method for a particular reason) or a staff error.

You cant money laundering check yourself. You would need someone to do a check on you where you can see the details given back to see what score you have and what reason codes are given. i.e. if experian, then a score of 19 typically means data failure.

dwsjarcmcd

It's probably more likely that the provider in the background i.e. Experian, Equifax etc is different and while they source data from the same places in the main, there are differences which may mean you fail one and pass another.

Another factor can be things like phone numbers and postcodes. If you put in a mobile rather than your landline, or format your postcode wrongly (or just put in the first part of your postcode) these things can make a difference.

opinions4u

Some providers may not electronically verify.

Newly_retired

Thanks for the suggestions. I've seen evidence from other posters that they have been verified electronically by these providers. I don't think I made any mistakes.

juicyjude

I am finding more and more that I need to provide extra ID through the post which I agree is a real pain. If the rate is OK I much prefer to deal with branch, all done and dusted then!

property.advert

dunstonh wrote: »

No rule changes on the verification front. Only "recent" change is the financial sanctions list check but that's incremental to the existing money laundering rules check.

One thing that can happen is bad data can appear and create a fail. Also, too many checks in a short period can reduce the score.

Whilst IFAs can see the information and know what to do to get it sorted. Banks tend to just give a yes/no response to the clerk or wont let the clerk give a reason.

I understood that a very specific point about identity check as opposed to any form of credit referencing was that it did not create a negative mark.

Perhaps you can clarify this point. Thanks.

dunstonh

I understood that a very specific point about identity check as opposed to any form of credit referencing was that it did not create a negative mark.

It doesnt on your credit file but it could on the identity check. A warning does come up when a recent search has been done (on the experian service)