HSBC want to know what I am doing with my money

henm2

grumbler wrote: »

What on earth does credit rating has to do with this?!

A customer with a poor track record with the bank is more likely to need to need documentation before a large personal cash transaction in or out is accepted.

sulphate

When we had to hand over our house deposit in time for exchange I went to the building society to ask them to do a transfer, the guy quizzed me on what it was for so I told him, he told me I'd have to pay a fee as I hadn't given notice and asked if I still wanted to go ahead with the withdrawal :rotfl:

grumbler

henm2 wrote: »

A customer with a poor track record with the bank is more likely to need to need documentation before a large personal cash transaction in or out is accepted.

Do you really not realise that this doesn't answer the question asked?
Why on earth?
The customer isn't asking for a credit...

BMN

henm2 wrote: »

HSBC is a large international bank and depends on the ability to trade using US$. Following the fine and agreement with the US authorities in 2012 their AML compliance standards worldwide are now higher than that required by the FCA in the UK
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/hsbc-s-1-9b-money-laundering-settlement-approved-by-judge-1.1377272 Note the deferred prosecution agreement.

HSBC will do whatever is needed to keep their US banking licence and this also affects their AML compliance procedures in the UK. That is why they ask so much more questions than they used to. The implementation of FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) from July as imposed by the US will mean even more questions for some customers.

This makes sense to me.

henm2 wrote: »

A customer with a poor track record with the bank is more likely to need to need documentation before a large personal cash transaction in or out is accepted.

But I can't see this as being true. That's simply not the use of credit scoring.

grumbler

BMN wrote: »

This makes sense to me.

Not to me.
What I see is:

...take measures to address the "systemic failures" that led to lapses in oversight and compliance with U.S. money laundering laws and international sanctions.
...
....laundered at least $881 million through HSBC Bank USA and its Mexican subsidiary

What I fail to see is what cash withdrawals in UK from accounts not involved in international transactions have to do with "U.S. money laundering laws and international sanctions".

Consumerist

Do I remember correctly - was it HSBC who were recently found to be complicit in money-laundering activities?

These enquiries are probably over-kill to demonstrate it takes its anti-money-laundering obligations seriously. :rotfl:

Archi_Bald

henm2 wrote: »

HSBC is a large international bank and depends on the ability to trade using US$. Following the fine and agreement with the US authorities in 2012 their AML compliance standards worldwide are now higher than that required by the FCA in the UK
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/hsbc-s-1-9b-money-laundering-settlement-approved-by-judge-1.1377272 Note the deferred prosecution agreement.

HSBC will do whatever is needed to keep their US banking licence and this also affects their AML compliance procedures in the UK. That is why they ask so much more questions than they used to. The implementation of FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) from July as imposed by the US will mean even more questions for some customers.

This is a sensible explanation for HSBC's odd behaviour.

However, I see no reason why we should let some american judgement interfere with our lives. HSBC UK customers should vote with their feet. It's not like they don't have plenty of alternative choice.

Pinkypants

MPH80 wrote: »

While there isn't a condition about you having to give the information - this is the T&C entry that allows HSBC to make the enquiry:



Now - if you don't comply with the investigation - they can simply refuse to make the payment as they are not satisfied with it.

http://techland.time.com/2012/03/06/youd-need-76-work-days-to-read-all-your-privacy-policies-each-year/

Chjaka

BingBong wrote: »

Also, I didn't say I wouldn't show them - I just don't see why I should have to. I am indeed happy to tell the world about my impending loft conversion at great length if anyone's really interested.....

:T Common sense and humor on an internet forum, whatever will they think of next?

MPH80

grumbler wrote: »

So, if I simply want to keep my money at home under mattress, they can deem this 'unlawful' without any reasons/proofs whatsoever and refuse a withdrawal?

They wouldn't deem your activity as unlawful. They would simply say they aren't satisfied it is lawful.

You then have 3 resolution routes:
1) ombudsman
2) the courts
3) width drawl through another means - cashpoint, faster payment to another bank etc.

I'm not saying they are right at all, just pointing out how they operate and how you can resolve it as the key point for our op here is to get their cash!