What happened to the FD ID request thread?

GingerBob_3

ColinB wrote: »

I too have had one of these letters, or at least my wife has. We've had joint accounts (2 x Current Accounts, 1 x Savings, 1 x mortgage) with FD for nearly 15 years (living in the same house and on the electoral roll all that time), and now they've decided that they can't verify one of our identities. Apparently they've been able to verify me "from other sources" (whatever that means) but they need something for my wife. There are 3 ways you can do the verification (1) certified copies of docs (2) videolink (3) in person at a HSBC branch (this isn't mentioned in the letter, but I was told on the phone we could do this). The threat if we decide not to play is "restrictions on banking services", which means a cap on debit card use, unable to use internet banking, and similar. The only reason I've been given for this is that there's been a change in the rules, which they have decided to apply retrospectively.

The thing that hurts here is the breakdown of trust in the banking relationship. I can quite understand that a new customer, unknown to the provider, has to jump through lots of hoops that didn't use to exist. But FD have been intimate with our financial details for a long time, and should be capable of working out from our records that we're running our lives in a legal and respectable way. Apparently that history counts for nothing. I object to the implication that they can suddenly no longer trust us unless we wave a couple of pieces of paper in front of a webcam.

We'll probably knuckle under and do it, but frankly FD have just blotted their copy-book in a really annoying way.

Sounds like they are making the rules up as they go along. Video link??? I've never heard such balderdash in all my life!

Archi_Bald

GingerBob wrote: »

Video link??? I've never heard such balderdash in all my life!

Not sure how you managed to avoid hearing about it for so long.

Video linking / video conferencing technology has been in commercial use for at least 2 decades to great benefit of the companies and their customers who used it. With the advent of high speed broadband, things like Skype video calls are easily accessible to vast numbers of people. It is therefore only logical that companies offer their customers virtual meetings rather than dragging them into a physical meeting. Saves time and money for both parties.

But I am sure you'll find some childish reason to rubbish this, too.

grumbler

Archi_Bald wrote: »

They are not applying anything retrospectively.

They are. The checks that were sufficient 10-15-20 years ago seem to be insufficient now, thanks to our American friends.

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Not sure how you managed to avoid hearing about it for so long.

Video linking / video conferencing technology has been in commercial use for at least 2 decades to great benefit of the companies and their customers who used it. With the advent of high speed broadband, things like Skype video calls are easily accessible to vast numbers of people. It is therefore only logical that companies offer their customers virtual meetings rather than dragging them into a physical meeting. Saves time and money for both parties.

But I am sure you'll find some childish reason to rubbish this, too.

[STRIKE]Why is it necessary to drag their customers to a branch then? If they don't trust the commonly available software, they can offer to download the one they prefer from their website. Even better, they can built it into their online banking. They are an internet bank after all.[/STRIKE]

EDIT: I seem to have misread this as if it was possible in a branch only. My apologies.

Archi_Bald

grumbler wrote: »

They are. The checks that were sufficient 10-15-20 years ago seem to be insufficient now, thanks to our American friends.

Nothing about this is retrospective. It is all about going forward, and 100% in line with the T&Cs.

grumbler wrote: »

Why is it necessary to drag their customers to a branch then?

Jeee. Who are FD "dragging to a branch"? Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

GingerBob_3

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Not sure how you managed to avoid hearing about it for so long.

Video linking / video conferencing technology has been in commercial use for at least 2 decades to great benefit of the companies and their customers who used it. With the advent of high speed broadband, things like Skype video calls are easily accessible to vast numbers of people. It is therefore only logical that companies offer their customers virtual meetings rather than dragging them into a physical meeting. Saves time and money for both parties.

But I am sure you'll find some childish reason to rubbish this, too.

Stop commenting on the contributors and keep your opinions to the matter in hand. This is the sort of behaviour that drives people away from this forum (it won't drive me away, you'll be happy to know). It's probably why the OP of the first thread had it deleted; constantly being rubbished as an individual.

grumbler

Archi_Bald wrote: »

Nothing about this is retrospective.

How come? New verification rules/procedures get applied retrospectively to the customers joined in the past.

100% in line with the T&Cs.

Have I said anything about the T&C?

Jeee. Who are FD "dragging to a branch"?

ColinB wrote: »

...videolink (3) in person at a HSBC branch

I seem to have misread this as if it was possible in a branch only. My apologies.

Are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?

No. I genuinely find their procedures paranoid and unreasonable. And don't tell me that they are necessary as other banks, including online ones, manage to do this in a simpler way while not breaking any rules imposed by regulators.

masonic

GingerBob wrote: »

Sounds like they are making the rules up as they go along. Video link??? I've never heard such balderdash in all my life!

I actually find this concept quite intriguing. It's a no cost option (presuming you have an internet-enabled device with a camera) and it might allow them to offer the service outside of normal banking hours, which would appeal to many.

Archi_Bald

grumbler wrote: »

How come? New verification rules/procedures get applied retrospectively to the customers joined in the past.

None of the transactions people have carried out in the past will be invalidated. So there is nothing retrospective. It is all about going forward, and it is totally normal that terms and processes change to keep with the times. As it happens, no T&C change is involved here, it is a simple request to the account holders to provide proof of ID, in line with T&Cs that have been in existence for some considerable time - probably since account opening - and that, obviously, the account holders have accepted, including all updates to the T&Cs.

grumbler wrote: »

Have I said anything about the T&C?

no you didn't but I did, as those who are moaning seem to forget that the T&Cs they agreed to state that they would provide the requested information.

grumbler wrote: »

I genuinely find their procedures paranoid and unreasonable.

By way of background: I have little time for FD because there's now only one of their products I like - their Regular Saver. Years ago I used their current account for day-to-day banking and had a cash ISA with them, but they have been well and truly overtaken by their competitors on those. I mention this just to give what I say about them some credence based on experience.

I find nothing about FD paranoid or unreasonable. Based on the letter someone kindly scanned, the FD request for ID is completely reasonable, and so is their offer that the required documents can be provided via videolink.

If you or other account holders do find anything about FD paranoid and unreasonable, the great news is that you / they can go to any number of other banks. If you find all those also paranoid and unreasonable, you might need a holiday.

grumbler wrote: »

And don't tell me that they are necessary as other banks, including online ones, manage to do this in a simpler way while not breaking any rules imposed by regulators.

Literally all other banks have branches. There are countless posts on here from people who have been asked to pop into branches for the purpose of confirming ID.

As it happens, FD apparently also offer this option, via HSBC branches. They may not have done so in the past but they seem to be doing it now.

I can't believe anyone gets flustered over a simple request to present proof of their ID to their bank.

grumbler

Archi_Bald wrote: »

...they have been well and truly overtaken by their competitors on those.

Not really. Their cash ISA is still the best around for big amount and instant access, although many people prefer current accounts now.

If you or other account holders do find anything about FD paranoid and unreasonable, the great news is that you / they can go to any number of other banks.

Luckily, I wasn't affected by their paranoia yet, but I will seriously think if they send me to a solicitor with my IDs to certify.
Regardless, being able to leave doesn't mean that I cannot have my opinion on their state of mind and express it publicly.

If you find all those also paranoid and unreasonable, you might need a holiday.

Thank you, I have just returned two weeks ago. I do think that certification by a solicitor is unreasonable. Re HSBC branches, it's some top secret that reportedly wasn't mentioned in the letter and is disclosed to the most persistent and annoyed (hardly a surprise) customers only.

Literally all other banks have branches. There are countless posts on here from people who have been asked to pop into branches for the purpose of confirming ID.

Yes, but FD don't have branches, and, as mentioned many times, for some reasons either cannot or don't want to get help from HSBC branches.

As it happens, FD apparently also offer this option, via HSBC branches. They may not have done so in the past but they seem to be doing it now.

Yes, "seem" and "apparently".

I can't believe anyone gets flustered over a simple request to present proof of their ID to their bank.

This thread is a continuation of the deleted thread that OP was frustrated by the request to get the copies certified by a solicitor, not to go to a branch (this option wasn't offered - see meer's post #34).

Jakg

I applied for a FD account and had a similar experience

Dear {NAME}

Thank you for applying for our 1st Account.

To help us process your application, please send us by post one of the following forms of identification. Any document you send needs to be valid, not expired and include name and address details matching your application:

- a certified copy* of a full and valid Passport

- a certified copy* of a full or provisional current UK Driving Licence (both photocard and paper copy required)

- a certified copy* of a National Identity Card (for European Economic Area or Swiss Nationals only)

- an original of a HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) tax notification dated within last 4 months and showing your full name eg PAYE Coding Notice, Working Family Tax Credit, Children's Tax Credit, Disabled Persons Tax Credit or Tax Calculation

- a Northern Ireland voters card

- an original of a Benefits Agency or Local Authority letter dated within last 4 months, showing your full name and, confirming your right to benefits from the Benefits Agency, Department of Work and Pensions (including Jobcentre Plus), Child Benefit Office or the Veterans Agency.

Please quote the reference number at the top of this message on your document and send it to first direct, 40 Wakefield Road, Leeds, LS98 1FD. We'll make sure we return it as soon as we're done.

In the meantime, if you have any questions please give us a call on 0800 917 24 24 and we'll be happy to help. Lines are open 8am to 9pm Monday to Friday, 8am to 5:30pm Saturday and 9am to 5:30pm Sunday.

*Where we've asked you for a certified document, please ensure it:

- is certified, signed and dated by a Solicitor, Licenced Conveyancer, Barrister, Commissioner For Oaths, Chartered Legal Executive, Notary, Chartered Accountant, Member of Parliament, Member of the Judiciary, approved person in a financial institution or a Medical Doctor

- includes their printed name so we can verify this with the relevant directories eg The Law Society

- has a company stamp

- includes written confirmation that it is a true likeness and a true copy of the original.

The professional certifying the document should include their professional registration reference (if applicable), their full name, postal address, email address and contact business telephone number.

We can not accept documents certified by a family member, friend or any person living at the same address as yourself.

Regards

{NAME}
Account Opening Team

Excluding a doctor, I think pretty much all would charge for such a service. I decided the £125 incentive just wasn't worth it.

Never been asked for before (well except for Santander*)

*I had an account, I closed it. I moved. I opened a new Santander account. They demanded I completed a "change of details" form (which required providing ID), despite not being a customer.