HELP!!!! Bank Account Frozen / No-ops

meer53

grumbler wrote: »

It's because of the customers like you and the OP the banks get used to get away with arrogant misbehaving like in this case.

If they suspect money laundering, it's not arrogant misbehaving. It's called obeying the law.

grumbler

Many bank servants like hiding behind the 'law' or 'DPA' while having no understanding of either.

The law doesn't say that they have to spend more than two weeks on this so called 'investigation'. It's 21 century nowadays after all. Are you saying that if the (stupid) law doesn't set any time limits, it's perfectly fine and not arrogant to drag their feet for as long as they want?

Even murder investigations often take less time.

meer53

How do you know they're dragging their feet ? How do you know what they're investigating ?

It's been 8 working days since the OP's account was frozen.

grumbler

meer53 wrote: »

How do you know they're dragging their feet ?

I thought it was obvious.

How do you know what they're investigating ?

Does this matter?

LurkerTurnedPoster

Oh well Benog, you may be waiting in limbo, but we wait with you.
If you did anything wrong, you will learn from it (like we all do in life) and if you didn't do anything that can be considered serious, it will all get put right.
They cant cut your limbs off, or use thumb screws.
At worst there will be a financial penalty or something, you can eat beans on toast for a while and Tesco bargain biscuits.
I hope this makes you feel better, it is my intention to be kind.

pmduk

grumbler wrote: »

Many bank servants like hiding behind the 'law' or 'DPA' while having no understanding of either.

Banks employ staff, not servants. But it's not just the DPA, companies also use the "elfen safety act". Staff use these excuses for anything that's anything that's embarrassing/difficult/expensive for a company to deal with.

I can't begin to tell you the number of times I've successfully challenged a company declining to deal with matters behind the excuse "it's the law."

It rarely is the law and even more rarely can anyone justify or even name the "law" the co instructs the staff to hide behind.

dalesrider

grumbler wrote: »

The law doesn't say that they have to spend more than two weeks on this so called 'investigation'. It's 21 century nowadays after all. Are you saying that if the (stupid) law doesn't set any time limits, it's perfectly fine and not arrogant to drag their feet for as long as they want?

I suggest that you have a read through This

As to hiding behind anything. the people the OP is talking too, cannot say anything (tipping off) and the people dealing will not talk to the OP till they have fully compleated the case. Remember you can be looking at the bank having to deal with paypal on this matter and possibly other parties.
Not something that can be done in a few working day.

Perhaps you would like to take a job in a bank and see just how many learning tests we have to pass, each year just to be able to get through the doors to do your job.
I have over 20 to pass each year. Many of which can take at least a hour. Get it wrong and its a serious issue.... Even if its something not really related to your job. Some of these you can have to do 2 or 3 times a year if something changes.

grumbler wrote: »

Even murder investigations often take less time.

And often take years to solve :rotfl:

artbaron

dalesrider wrote: »

As to hiding behind anything. the people the OP is talking too, cannot say anything (tipping off) and the people dealing will not talk to the OP till they have fully compleated the case.

I'll defer to your knowledge in so far as those are the rules, but does anybody seriously think these rules are sensible? A fraudster would know the instant their account was frozen what was going on so the idea of a "tip-off" would be moot. It's only innocent people who are inconvenienced and stressed (for want of stronger words) when they are left without finances for an unlimited period of time. A person would never be turfed out of their house without being told of allegations against them, or have their car confiscated, or have their travel restricted (at least one of those would be outright illegal, possibly all of them), so why does it happen with banking?

grumbler

dalesrider wrote: »

I suggest that you have a read through This

I don't want to waste my time. You show me where it says that they can lock an account because of some suspicion and then take as mach time as they want to 'investigate' whether the suspicion was justified or not while keeping the customer in ignorance.
That's what meer53 implied.

As to hiding behind anything. the people the OP is talking too, cannot say anything (tipping off) and the people dealing will not talk to the OP till they have fully compleated the case.

My comment was addressed to meer53 only, who was hiding behind "obeying the law" without quoting any relevant part of the law.

Remember you can be looking at the bank having to deal with paypal on this matter and possibly other parties.
Not something that can be done in a few working day.

And? It takes two days to fly to USA and back, but you don't need to fly anywhere to 'deal' with PP and 'other parties'. Of course, the 'investigators' can use a snail mail instead of a phone or e-mail. This is what I call arrogance and dragging their feet.

Perhaps you would like to take a job in a bank and see just how many learning tests we have to pass, each year just to be able to get through the doors to do your job.
I have over 20 to pass each year. Many of which can take at least a hour. Get it wrong and its a serious issue.... Even if its something not really related to your job. Some of these you can have to do 2 or 3 times a year if something changes.

And what does this prove? That every time I hear 'DPA' and 'law' on the other side of the line it always really is the case? In 90% of cases they just repeat the words that they were taught to use to fob a customer off.

dalesrider

artbaron wrote: »

I'll defer to your knowledge in so far as those are the rules, but does anybody seriously think these rules are sensible? A fraudster would know the instant their account was frozen what was going on so the idea of a "tip-off" would be moot.

why does it happen with banking?

You will have to ask the FSA and other legal bodies as to why they consider banking diffrent.

There are also other options as to why the account has been blocked. But the OP does not seem to have explored these routes. Or at least never posted that they have.

I agree that having the account frozen is tipping off. So feel that this may not have anything to do with ML. And maybe more tax or standard banking issues.

TBH. The only ones who do are in the bank and clearly the branch staff do not know.