NatWest holding my cash to ransom

patanne

Over the last couple of months I have deposited over £250,000 into my 2 current accounts. I warned another person involved that she should go into her bank with documentation to say where the money was coming from. They may have been able to ASSUME (and we know what assume does don't we) where the money into my accounts came from. Her bank could have had no idea other than it came from my account & they have no idea who I am - she didn't warn them! Not one of the 3 banks asked for the source of the money. I was actually quite shocked.

Just in case anyone is wondering - amounts like this have never been dealt with in my accounts and will never be (unless I win the lottery!)

Just to add that some into my account were cheques for large 5 figure amounts and some were direct into the banks.

They didn't even query the HMRC one with 2 names on!

I even sent out initial payments for £10 each to their accounts to make sure I got them right and didn't send more until I was told it had been received & I thought that was supposed to be a classic sign of money laundering.

adindas

lulu999 wrote: »

...
I asked her if she would have asked me what is was for if I requested £100 to which she replied, 'of course not'. I asked again about £1,000 and she replied, 'possibly'. (Just wait for the ATM where you have to type in your reason!)

Money laundry Check for £1,000, and presumably just for one off occasion???? This is ridiculous. This is the first time I hear people are asked to provide a reason for cash withdrawal with such insignificant amount.

If I were the OP I would definitely file a formal complaint and demanded an explanation why they needed to know the reason behind the cash withdrawal for suc a tiny amount. And also I needed to know whether they did the same check to other people with similar amount of cash or I were not singled out.

Doing this you might be able to find out the reason whether the policy of the bank or just unprofessional behaviour of the cashier such as you are singled out, personal dislike, etc. I will definitely not rule out this possibility.

If it was due to unprofessional behaviour, it would bring the cashier who were asking you to the centre of attention to her boss.

Goldiegirl wrote: »

But you don't know what happens after you've left the branch

But not for insignificant amount e.g. around £1,000 such as the OP case.

Supposed I wanted to spend cash to pay a prostitute did I need to declare it? If so, I would be facing a dilemma between to lie or to embarrass myself in front of other people.

Assuming that asking people the reason to withdraw cash because the cashier were afraid the OP was forced did not make sense at all. A person who were forced to withdraw cash would defenitely prompt other people in the very fisrt opportunity with hope that they will inform the police. It would take the most stupid crimals on earth to do such action.

Also people could easily make it up (e.g lie) and will still sound natural / rational if it is just to spend £1,000.

Ballard

As far as I'm aware the OP Hasn't disclosed the sum that they were withdrawing. They mentioned speaking to the manager about £100 & £1,000 but the inference is that it was a larger amount.

To my knowledge most, if not all, high street banks will have a private area where you could discuss anything confidential.

bumpercars99

Why on earth would bank staff have money laundering concerns over cheques received from HMRC of all things....

They're also much more suspicious of cash paid in/out. If you think about it, if all the banks check the source of cash as it's paid in then electronic transfers are low risk as the original funds must already have been queried if significant. That's how the system is supposed to operate.

jonesMUFCforever

bumpercars99 wrote: »

Why on earth would bank staff have money laundering concerns over cheques received from HMRC of all things....

They're also much more suspicious of cash paid in/out. If you think about it, if all the banks check the source of cash as it's paid in then electronic transfers are low risk as the original funds must already have been queried if significant. That's how the system is supposed to operate.

A lot of people get HMRC cheques out of the blue - so if one gets intercepted and amended into a forger's name and paid in it could take a long time before the fraud is discovered.

duchy

Ballard wrote: »

As far as I'm aware the OP Hasn't disclosed the sum that they were withdrawing. They mentioned speaking to the manager about £100 & £1,000 but the inference is that it was a larger amount.

To my knowledge most, if not all, high street banks will have a private area where you could discuss anything confidential.

I don't want to quote figures but I do know that the banks have a certain level of transaction amount that triggers the question as well as certain other criteria - one thousand is nowhere near the figure - and the cashier clearly didn't want to get into a conversation of "If not a thousand then what about five thousand?" and so on - Far easier to just say "Possibly "-and close that avenue off as they aren't allowed to disclose the figure anyway.

KNJ_2

Whilst I understand the need to prevent ML, last year, whilst working in the middle East a colleague in a remote part of the country had an accident. Whilst without insurance and being a friend I called HSBC and agreed with my local bank the need to access 7000 GBP to assist with his situation. There being a local branch here I went to them and despite their effort to help, HSBC refused to send the funds. direct payment was not possible. In the end colleagues assisted and the money was raised. We were able to help. I am glad it was not myself in trouble. If accessing your own money for an emergency is not justifiable then I have no idea what is.

mgdavid

KNJ wrote: »

Whilst I understand the need to prevent ML, last year, whilst working in the middle East a colleague in a remote part of the country had an accident. Whilst without insurance and being a friend I called HSBC and agreed with my local bank the need to access 7000 GBP to assist with his situation. There being a local branch here I went to them and despite their effort to help, HSBC refused to send the funds. direct payment was not possible. In the end colleagues assisted and the money was raised. We were able to help. I am glad it was not myself in trouble. If accessing your own money for an emergency is not justifiable then I have no idea what is.

For that small a sum why did you ask? Why not just do an online transfer to a currency broker, convert to local currency and again online transfer to your local bank?
I bought a motorhome abroad last year and did exactly this for two much larger sums.

C_Mababejive

This is the new way of robbing the public. It all began when the Thatcher Government repealed your right to be paid in cash. From that point on your pay was no longer yours. It belongs to the state via their agents, the banks. They have ultimate ownership and control of it and they can monitor how/what/where you spent. Soon we will have a fully cashless society. People are sleepwalking into it.

Witness what happened in cyprus when they simply stole peoples money from their bank accounts and there was hardly a whimper about it.

Watch and learn..

Eco_Miser

Goldiegirl wrote: »

Also, as drugs are illegal,

Please don't say that, as it's not true.
Illegal drugs are illegal, but many others, such as those keeping me alive, are not.

The assumption by so many people that any reference to drugs means illegal drugs gets really annoying to those of us who need to take drugs on a regular basis to stay alive.