Identification for opening BS accounts (re 'carpetbagging')

Milarky

Does anyone maintain a list of the current practices of societies re. identity verification ('money laundering regulations')?

There seem to be two kinds: Documentation and Electronic

(In fact it doesn't just apply to building society accounts, of course, but carpetbagging -opening as many accounts as there are societies- is the context for this) It would be useful to know which ones offer the least painful option of electronic I.D. verification, so allowing these to be applied for through the post without the need to send documents - the same ones being used needing to be returned each time of course.

So far I have:

Electronic:
Cheshire (I think)
Ispwich
Kent Reliance
Scarborough
West Brom
Yorkshire (moved)

Documentation:
Bath
Britannia

..but it's early days yet.

It would be helpful if anyone could post their own additions to this list (and correct where necessary too)

HTH.

Liz_the_Whizz

I copied a list off Rpoints some time back which said the following were electronic (at least I think that's what this list is!):

National Counties
Manchester
Bath
Barnsley
Hinckley & Rugby
Loughborough
Mansfield
Shepshed
Tipton & Coseley

Promptly did nothing with it as a lot of these are pretty tiddly, have rubbish accounts or high mobs.

I was checking out Stroud & Swindon yesterday as they have a new 5.54% account for over 50s (not me!) and they are now trialling electronic checks.

And I note that Coventry is still in the dark ages with paper docs.

djohn2002uk

I thought it was a waste of time now, as when/if any BSs merge or get swallowed up they usually have a clause to outlaw carpetbagging written into the rules for paying out their windfalls.

steady__eddie

I have come across this electronic verification in the past but I am still in the dark as to what it means ? Is it checking against the electoral register to verify that the address that is on the application form tallys ?

Milarky

djohn2002uk wrote:

I thought it was a waste of time now, as when/if any BSs merge or get swallowed up they usually have a clause to outlaw carpetbagging written into the rules for paying out their windfalls.

Not so. 'Windfalls' can also refer to payments (out of 'reserves') when a smaller society opts to merge with a larger one. 'Signaway' clauses only attach to 'conversion' proceeds - demutualisation (or 'DM') and the issue of free shares. Mergers don't change the 'mutual' status and ownership simply transfers to the enlarged society. The smaller society is giving up its independence - but to get to that stage the Board still needs (IIRC) 75 percent support. All members (including those affected by DM signaway clauses) are treated equally and all stand to receive the same bonus.

Having held a Lambeth account for two years until Nov '05 I (foolishly) closed it and took my money out. Had I left even £100 in there I would have received two payouts - once from the Lambeth itself in merging with the (larger) Portman - and existing Portman members got nothing there! And very shortly afterwards I would have gained a second small 'windfall' from the Portman (existing members did gain here) when it, in turn, opted to merge with the (larger) Nationwide. And of course I had Nationwide accounts but the larger society doesn't pay out. (Dooooo!)

In the event that Nationwide does eventually demutulise, they are saying at the moment that the signaway is still in effect. But that's hokum. Standard Life first opposed DM in 2000, won the vote using the Bliarite strategy of scaring the members into backing it, brought in an anti-carpetbagging clause - but four years later (when they needed those votes) promptly gave windfall rights (as 285 free shares - kerching!) back to those members that never had them! The same thing would happen at Nationwide. The irony is they already have nearly three times as many members as back in 1998 (when -sue me if this is untrue- they tipped the vote from back from defeat to win by a wafer margin) so that my windfall would be a third of what it could have been but that means that the two-thirds of technically disenfrachised members will stop me getting it unless I share it with them - which I will gladly do, and go off after tit bits from mergers.

Chrismaths

I have come across this electronic verification in the past but I am still in the dark as to what it means ? Is it checking against the electoral register to verify that the address that is on the application form tallys ?

That's one way. Usually they use credit check agencies to check your details against the details the credit agency holds, one part of which will be the electoral roll.

dwsjarcmcd

Milarky wrote:

There seem to be two kinds: Documentation and Electronic


Documentation:
Bath
Britannia
Yorkshire (I think)

..but it's early days yet.

It would be helpful is anyone could post their own additions to this list (and correct where necessary too)

HTH.

Yorkshire does electronic verification, both in branch and on-line

the_commander

Does the electronic verification mean that you will have a report left on your credit check history? As that would adversly effect your credit score each time it is checked.

steady__eddie

"That's one way. Usually they use credit check agencies to check your details against the details the credit agency holds, one part of which will be the electoral roll."

Thanks Chrismaths, I'm a sofa surfer but this hasn't prevented me from opening an account or three in the past few months,

Chrismaths

It does leave a record on you credit file, but this does NOT affect your credit score. There are different types of entries in your credit file - credit searches are different to identity verification.

Get a copy of your credit file, and the bumpf that comes with it usually explains it. It's also interesting to see what's in there sometimes...

Robert_Sterling

djohn2002uk wrote:

I thought it was a waste of time now, as when/if any BSs merge or get swallowed up they usually have a clause to outlaw carpetbagging written into the rules for paying out their windfalls.

You thought wrongly.
The Charity Clause applies only to demutualisations.
It does not apply to mergers.
That is why we now have merger mania.
One "Merger Maniac" at "themoneybag" website has 204 accounts for his family four 150 of which weere opened in december 2006.