Barclays Took £2 Million from me

robatwork

4th page and still no proof?

If I were the OP I would be walking around Canary Wharf with a placard stating that Barclays stole £2m and they won't talk to me.

And not leaving their offices until they had done something or explained it.

But he seems happy on the phone trying to save his livelihood.

DCFC79

OP I can't see mention of it but have you complained to Barclays ?

antrobus

slink85 wrote: »

if the OP were to take it to court, Barclays would have to show evidence of what suspicions they had for the relevant law to kick in.

if a court deemed these to be not sufficient or far fetched, the op would get all expenses and costs and a good whack of compensation to boot.

A bank cant just say we think you're laundering money, and that's the end of it.

Id be sending a letter before action and filing a claim and would count the days on one hand until they backtrack on any false accusations and offer an out of court settlement.

Sort of.

You would need to refer to Iraj Parvizi v Barclays Bank Plc [2014] EWHC B2 (QB). The suspicion does not need to be "clear", or "firmly grounded and targeted on specific facts", or even based on "reasonable grounds"; is simply needs to be "more than fanciful". Which is quite a low standard of proof, really.

It doesn't matter one little bit whether or not the accusation of money laundering is true or false; what matters is that the bank genuinely had a suspicion and weren't completely bats**t crazy in forming that suspicion.

ChiefGrasscutter

Link to case - for those interested
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/markup.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/B2.html&query=Iraj+and+Parvizi&method=boolean

Robin9

What did your solicitor have to say ??

Sunflower1227

Has this been sorted?

Ben8282

What appears to have actually happened here is not that Barclays has stolen £2 Million of the OP's money but that 4 of his accounts have each gone overdrawn by £500,000. How much money was actually in the accounts at the time has never been stated.
It has also been suggested that overdrawing accounts by £500,000 is Barclays normal method of blocking accounts with suspected fraudulent activity.
I would suggest that, if true, Barclays action in deliberately overdrawing somebody's accounts by £500,000 per account is in itself a fraudulent activity. I would also suggest that such an action would compromise evidence and any subsequent criminal prosecution. Imagine you are a member of a jury. Obviously bank statements are being produced in evidence. I believe that Barclays action in doing this would, in itself, cast a reasonable doubt in my mind that they may have tampered with something else on the statements.

meer53

Ben8282 wrote: »

What appears to have actually happened here is not that Barclays has stolen £2 Million of the OP's money but that 4 of his accounts have each gone overdrawn by £500,000. How much money was actually in the accounts at the time has never been stated.
It has also been suggested that overdrawing accounts by £500,000 is Barclays normal method of blocking accounts with suspected fraudulent activity.
I would suggest that, if true, Barclays action in deliberately overdrawing somebody's accounts by £500,000 per account is in itself a fraudulent activity. I would also suggest that such an action would compromise evidence and any subsequent criminal prosecution. Imagine you are a member of a jury. Obviously bank statements are being produced in evidence. I believe that Barclays action in doing this would, in itself, cast a reasonable doubt in my mind that they may have tampered with something else on the statements.

Bit of a silly comment really.

By making accounts overdrawn, Barclays are debitng themselves. All banks have the facility to debit or credit accounts with any amount they feel is needed. Personally, i wouldn't want to argue that point with anyone, i'm sure Barclays have their reasons, whether we agree with them or not.

As no-one here knows both sides of this story and the OP hasn't been back to update us, i would assume it's been sorted.

colsten

Barclays seem to be in the habit of settling big account issues under gagging orders. I have seen various Press reports to that effect over the years, the latest one just this week: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/bank-accounts/11927100/Barclays-made-me-sign-a-gag-order-before-it-would-return-2000-of-my-own-money.html

This might be one explanation for why we haven't heard further from the OP. Another one might be that he is in jail, or that he is on the run. Who knows.

Robin9

It would be nice to know even if only to put my doubtful mind at ease - I suspect a troll.