NatWest holding my cash to ransom

agrinnall

lulu999 wrote: »

She then cited that I may have been under duress to withdraw the money. I assured that I wasn't (and if you knew or saw me would realise how bloody ridiculous that approach was).

Not ridiculous at all, your family could have been held at gunpoint at home.

https://supportcentre.natwest.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/1586/~/what-is-the-maximum-amount-i-can-withdraw-from-branch%3F

Did you notify the branch in advance?

lulu999

They have the perfect right to ask the source of the funds if I'm paying in cash.
These were cleared funds that had been remitted into my account electronically and for my own reasons wanted some of that drawn out in cash.
They should have objected to the funds arriving into my account if money laundering was their concern.
What I spend my money on is none of their business.

robatwork

agrinnall wrote: »

Not ridiculous at all, your family could have been held at gunpoint at home.

And if that's the case the OP wouldn't have said "My family are being held at gunpoint and I need £20,000 in used fivers" because that wouldn't have elicited the cash.

They could say "I am buying a car".

Then it's up to the bank employee to....
a) see if the customer is looking shifty
b) see if the customer is sweating
c) pursue further questions such as "What model and year of car?" "What's the seller's name?"
d) Ask if the customer's family is, perhaps, being held at gunpoint
e) give the money

It's a pointless rule, as someone ^^^^ said a box ticking exercise.

When paying money in I accept that some auditing can be done as to its origins.

The banks should be focusing on their lax procedures in scammers being able to open accounts, go on "Vishing" expeditions, then transferring between these scam accounts so often that the money can't be traced.

Ballard

Money laundering by definition is the act of putting dirty money into the banking system and taking it out as clean money. Just because dirty money has entered an account doesn't mean that the bank can forget about it.

It could easily be that dirty money is drip fed into an account over a period of time and is only now being retrieved. Likewise it could be that the account holder is planning to pay a builder cash in order to avoid VAT or perhaps it's a bung to get a contract. The bank don't know and have to ask by law.

Note that this is by way of an explanation and I'm not suggesting that any of this is related to whatever you're doing.

shortcrust

Same thing happened to me. They asked so I told them and off I went with my cash. Quite a day.

mgdavid

lulu999 wrote: »

......
What I spend my money on is none of their business.

Yes it is.
As explained already in posts 8 & 9.

ChiefGrasscutter

bengal-stripe wrote: »

Cash still holds a unique position for illegal transactions; you might have want to use the money to buy drugs or stolen goods.

Or for another example help evade taxes - as in I need to pay my builder in cash...yeah right.

Ballard

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

Or for another example help evade taxes - as in I need to pay my builder in cash...yeah right.

It's heartening to know that even people who don't work in the financial sector understand how AML legislation works.

POPPYOSCAR

We had to make transfers the other day in Santander and had to jump through hoops in order to do it.


We were in there for about an hour. Absolutely ridiculous.


Easy enough to put your money in but bloomin hard to get it out again!

societys_child

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

Or for another example help evade taxes - as in I need to pay my builder in cash...yeah right.

All grass cutters where I live want paying in cash . . .