First Direct want proof of identity years after account opened: anyone else affected?

Archi_Bald

Doc_N wrote: »

Not my mum - an elderly aunt.

Sorry, aunt, not mum.

Still, I find it nothing short of staggering that people have tens of thousands lingering in a bank without having the first idea of whether they get interest on it and how much. To blame a bank for not knowing is equally staggering. What's wrong with asking? What's wrong with checking statements for interest payments? So many things people can do to look after their own money. And it's not as if anyone ever, over the last several decades, told people that it is ok to just put their money into a bank and leave it there to look after itself, is it.

Rant over.

peter999

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

Well you seemed to have no problem in using your passport to return to the UK through Stansted in this thread, so clearly you have had a passport.
Post no 9 on the page.....
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/576809

And guess what, my passport has expired, and as DocN has politely pointed out, that post was 8 years ago !!! :money: :eek:

I was horrified at passport renewal cost prob 2 years previous to that post around 2005, as passports I think last 10 years.

God knows what it will be now !!

Archi_Bald

peter999 wrote: »

God knows what it will be now !!

Actually, you don't need to ask God. https://www.gov.uk/renew-adult-passport

The cost of around £8 a year, or 2p a day, is a bargain for those who travel regularly (incl. domestic air travel), and not exactly unaffordable to those who don't travel.

masonic

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Still, I find it nothing short of staggering that people have tens of thousands lingering in a bank without having the first idea of whether they get interest on it and how much. To blame a bank for not knowing is equally staggering. What's wrong with asking? What's wrong with checking statements for interest payments? So many things people can do to look after their own money. And it's not as if anyone ever, over the last several decades, told people that it is ok to just put their money into a bank and leave it there to look after itself, is it.

It is of course the customer's prerogative to choose what to do with their money. In my experience, FD do their bit to make customers aware of what accounts and interest rates they have on offer - I periodically get a brochure of accounts and rates in the post. And of course, one bank is never going to point out a better deal is available at a different bank.

Patr100 wrote: »

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2015/oct/03/hsbc-derisking-account-frozen-marie-shaun-langley

Yes, having your accounts frozen for suspected money laundering or fraud is a risk. This would tend to be the result of a pattern of transactions or the customer having links to high risk countries rather than the bank realising it doesn't have any ID on file for the customer. It's always sensible to have accounts with more than just one bank as it is extremely difficult to fight an unwarranted freeze for AML reasons.

masonic

Archi_Bald wrote: »

The cost of around £8 a year, or 2p a day, is a bargain for those who travel regularly (incl. domestic air travel), and not exactly unaffordable to those who don't travel.

I'd imagine many of those who don't travel outside the UK do drive, so a passport may not be required.

Doc_N

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Sorry, aunt, not mum.

Still, I find it nothing short of staggering that people have tens of thousands lingering in a bank without having the first idea of whether they get interest on it and how much. To blame a bank for not knowing is equally staggering. What's wrong with asking? What's wrong with checking statements for interest payments? So many things people can do to look after their own money. And it's not as if anyone ever, over the last several decades, told people that it is ok to just put their money into a bank and leave it there to look after itself, is it.

Rant over.

Nobody's blaming the bank - I'm just refuting your odd suggestion that this woman "should really be grateful to FD that they shook her up and thereby helped her to find a place where her money doesn't lose value to inflation".

Though having said that, a bank has a duty of care to its customers, and it would never surprise me if inaction by a bank in circumstances like this were to give rise to a new mis-selling scandal [cue entrance by Martin Lewis.......).

I don't disagree with your sentiments, and obviously it makes no sense to leave 30K in most current accounts, objectively speaking, but have you any idea how confused some people can get when they're in their 90s?

masonic

Doc_N wrote: »

Though having said that, a bank has a duty of care to its customers, and it would never surprise me if inaction by a bank in circumstances like this were to give rise to a new mis-selling scandal [cue entrance by Martin Lewis.......).

I don't disagree with your sentiments, and obviously it makes no sense to leave 30K in most current accounts, objectively speaking, but have you any idea how confused some people can get when they're in their 90s?

There is an interesting discussion of whether banks have a duty of care over their customers here. The conclusion seems to be that they don't.

Doc_N

masonic wrote: »

There is an interesting discussion of whether banks have a duty of care over their customers here. The conclusion seems to be that they don't.

Crestsign Ltd v Natwest Bank is an interesting (and seminal) case, certainly. And as things stand banks seem to be able to exclude a general duty of case by specific terms and conditions, which will vary of course from case to case.

Only a High Court decision, so far, but leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal has been given, and the case looks like being heard in the Spring of 2016. I'll be amazed if it doesn't eventually go to the Supreme Court.

masonic

Doc_N wrote: »

Crestsign Ltd v Natwest Bank is an interesting (and seminal) case, certainly. And as things stand banks seem to be able to exclude a general duty of case by specific terms and conditions, which will vary of course from case to case.

I don't think they would even need to do so in the T&Cs on the non-advised sale of a current account. If the customer could demonstrate that a bank employee discussed their intention to hold a large sum of cash in the account with them and then neglected to mention the lack of interest, then that would probably be a failure in duty of care. However, I don't believe banks are under any obligation to keep the circumstances of their customers under review after the sale of a bank account, so £30k sitting in the account 20 years later would be a different situation entirely, especially if the bank regularly sent the customer a brochure of interest rates with details of alternative interest paying accounts.

I'm not sure I'd even want to be in the situation where a bank had to pro-actively contact any customer who moved a large sum of money into their current account to discuss alternative options. Maybe there is a gap in the market for some sort of packaged bank account that offers the customer regular reviews and help choosing appropriate products for their needs, but I don't think it would be in the customer's best interest to rely on the products and services of a single bank - as demonstrated by your aunt's move to Santander, which is a better outcome than anything FD could offer.

Patr100

masonic wrote: »

I'd imagine many of those who don't travel outside the UK do drive, so a passport may not be required.

Not necessarily. This passport or Driving licence fetish for the banks really makes me angry. Because any document, including a passport can be faked and often are. How do they know the person presenting as the account holder is the original opening account holder or the account holder is definitely not using a false identity? They don't.
If like me , and many others you live in London, never needed to learn to drive to get to work etc . Haven't been abroad for many years and are not on benefits recently then your other options are very limited. The only other document I can provide is a HMRC letter informing me of my tax code which luckily I have just received due to particular circumstances but other than that, ironically if you are on certain benefits you can use those for proof of ID but if you haven't needed to have direct dealing with the tax office, do not drive or travel abroad, you are a non-person in the eyes of most of the banks. It really gets my goat. I am a FD customer of about 20 years (never requiring a loan or overdraft in that time) who has just received the "we need to check you out" letter. Hopefully the video call option will be Ok and not require me to incure cost but I haven't yet followed it up.
Whether the legal requirement to provide a basic bank account which comes into force next year, I believe , will make any difference remains to be seen.