NatWest holding my cash to ransom

POPPYOSCAR

GingerBob wrote: »

MLP at its best, yet again. If you have money available in your account it is absolutely no business of the bank what you might use it for. Now the Establishment thinks differently, basically because it is stuffed full of buffoons who would really like to see the end of cash completely. So what happens when you tell the nosey clerk that you want the money to pay gambling debts, or maybe just to stuff under the mattress? Any one tried such answers?


OP, I hope you close your account with these bounders and tell them why you're doing so. Or better still, just don't use it anymore, about from 1p going in and out on an annual basis. That way it costs them to maintain it.


This MLP makes my blood boil, especially when you consider how the banking industry operates on the wider scale; they are criminals themselves - proven.


As for this tripe about the clerk possibly ending up in jail if he doesn't poke his stinking great conk into your business; bullsh1t big time! Show me where that's ever happened. Struth! Even Fred Goodwin never went to jail, so I doubt a clerk would.

Santander did tell us that every bank has different procedures so what with the fee increase and the terrible admin we have experienced we will be closing our accounts with them soon.


Latest was someone "pushing the wrong button" at head office and putting my ISA into the wrong account!

ollylee

... and those invisible pressures.

Ballard

robatwork wrote: »

Now I'm almost tempted to go to my bank to do a large cash transaction to see just what answers are accepted. Are there any bank counter staff in here who would care to share what they are told to look for as (in)valid answers?

I will start with "I intend to spend it on myself". Will move to "intend to spend it on my wife".

After wooly answers I may move to sarcy ones. "Gummi bears, lots and lots of gummi bears". "Change it to 2p pieces and going for a loooong weekend at skegness pier slot machines". "Buying a sandwich and want the £19,997 for personal reasons". "Good reasons"

Then maybe the truth "To test what reasons you accept for cash withdrawal"

Half truths "My architect wants to be paid in cash" "The border guards in Turkmenistan don't accept faster payments"

Likelies: "Buying a car from Fast Ray Car Emporium and avoiding the cheque admin fee" "Changing money to take abroad and it's commission free for cash rather than debit card" "Dog needs operation and vet wants to see money up front"

Feel free to pick one and try it.

It's a nonsense whatever the banks try to dress it up as.

Bully for you.

Bogof_Babe

I have banked with NatWest for 37 years. I'd have thought they might accept by now that I am unlikely to be into money laundering.

I'll be withdrawing around £1K in cash before the end of the month. I'll see how it goes. Or maybe I'll start withdrawing £100 every couple of days from an ATM, which I prefer not to do as I don't like carrying much cash around, especially if someone has seen me get it out.

Ironic if circumventing their ridiculous procedures resulted in my being mugged .

POPPYOSCAR

Ballard wrote: »

Bully for you.

Oh come on...


You have to accept it is ridiculous.


What next.. I need the money to buy a yacht.


What yacht it that sir?, do you have a picture? We will be coming with you to make sure you actually buy it.


You have to accept that asking what the money is for is nonsensical.


Anyone doing dodgy dealings will simply lie.

jonesMUFCforever

colsten wrote: »

It is not the job of any bank to make a judgement on whether a builder will avoid tax. End of.

If they suspect it they have to report it - the bank will not do the investigating - other agencies do that.

pmduk

Why blame bank staff for for following the law? If you don't like it blame your MP

GingerBob_3

pmduk wrote: »

Why blame bank staff for for following the law? If you don't like it blame your MP

The law is stupid, as is their interpretation of it. MPs have nothing to do with it. It's those hollow heads in the Civil Service to blame for MLP.

Westie983

When I ask the question at work, I couldnt care less what you say it is for, I just have to prove I have asked the question and written it down on the withdrawal voucher.

You could tell me it was to buy a holiday, pay for a dog funeral, pay for a car, home improvements, or to throw away in a online casino.

I will just annotate what you say this includes (customer didn't want to disclose) and this point the withdrawal gets escalated to higher management to authorise or deny.

Although if I had any suspicions I would raise a SARS case and let them do the investigations, this is part of my ongoing training, but this is rare and tends to be when lots of withdrawals, or credits over lots of branches or behaviour that is out of character.

POPPYOSCAR

pmduk wrote: »

Why blame bank staff for for following the law? If you don't like it blame your MP

Not all banks follow the same procedures though so not the law as such.


It does seem a bit like 'computer says no' syndrome.


Even one of the staff said they feel silly when they have to read out the bit of blurb on the little bit of paper as they have been told to do. And to read it out twice because they were doing two transactions is plain stupid in my book, just ticking boxes.


We did not get the same treatment at another bank.