NatWest holding my cash to ransom

KJSmith

colsten wrote: »

What law empowers a bank employee to deny me access to my funds?

colsten wrote: »

You must be seriously joking. One, nothing is black and white, and two, a bank clerk has no right whatsoever to make a decision based on their personal opinion.

Yes they can. It will be governed by the bank's terms and conditions and the Payment Services Regulations do permit this.

FYI, a decision would be made on that individual's professional judgement taking into account the full circumstances of the transaction in question.

ChiefGrasscutter

colsten wrote: »

What law empowers a bank employee to deny me access to my funds?

When you put money into a bank you are technically making a loan to them - it is no longer "your" money.

Anyway look up Iraj Parvizi vs Barclays Bank 2014
This confirmed the right of a Bank to freeze an account and deny the customer access to "their" money.
In particular the suspicion that something is amiss needs only to be "more than fanciful".
For an article on the case see
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9bf2ce45-df05-4c3b-a932-3f07fcf1f111

and for the link to the decision and text of the Judgement see
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/B2.html

Note@Poppyoscar that this was indeed a gambling case

colsten

POPPYOSCAR wrote: »

What next.
refusing a gambler his money in case he gambles it away!!

American banks are already doing that. You can shoot your neighbour dead in the US but you can place a bet online.

UK banks have been known to decline loans and mortgages to people whose statements included lots of gambling transactions. The way round this is if you are a gambler is that you do all your gambling on an account that you don't show to the jobsworth who assesses your loan/mortgage application.

colsten

KJSmith wrote: »

Yes they can. It will be governed by the bank's terms and conditions and the Payment Services Regulations do permit this.

FYI, a decision would be made on that individual's professional judgement taking into account the full circumstances of the transaction in question.

A bank employee does not have the right to determine that I am a terrorist or other criminal. Last time I checked we were living in a democracy where people get tried in Court, not by bank clerks.

colsten

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

When you put money into a bank you are technically making a loan to them - it is no longer "your" money.

Anyway look up Iraj Parvizi vs Barclays Bank 2014
This confirmed the right of a Bank to freeze an account and deny the customer access to "their" money.
In particular the suspicion that something is amiss needs only to be "more than fanciful".
For an article on the case see
http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=9bf2ce45-df05-4c3b-a932-3f07fcf1f111

and for the link to the decision and text of the Judgement see
http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/B2.html

Note@Poppyoscar that this was indeed a gambling case

You are proving the point I made. It is not down to bank clerks to determine whether someone is a criminal. It's the Courts that do.

ollylee

... it's all about patterns and trends though poppy. if it looks wrong it'll likely flag somewhere, they will catch. a call from the bank is often times enough but sometimes it isn't.

again, OP went to a branch. human vs computer - imho are different.

ollylee

interesting post this one.

mgdavid

colsten wrote: »

You must be seriously joking. One, nothing is black and white, and two, a bank clerk has no right whatsoever to make a decision based on their personal opinion.

they don't; did you read post 70?

henm2

I notice in HSBC's personal banking terms and conditions there is this

in clause 20 page 44. "Actions we take to prevent financial crime
Members of the HSBC Group may carry out Financial Crime Risk Management
Activity. Exceptionally, this may result in members of the HSBC Group delaying or
refusing either to process a payment or your instructions, or to provide all or part of
any Services to you.
No member of the HSBC Group shall be responsible to you or any third party for any loss incurred as a result of any member of the HSBC Group carrying out Financial Crime Risk Management Activity"

I presume other banks have similar clauses in their terms and conditions.

Ballard

colsten wrote: »

A bank employee does not have the right to determine that I am a terrorist or other criminal. Last time I checked we were living in a democracy where people get tried in Court, not by bank clerks.

All bank employees have a duty to report anything that in their judgement may be illegal to their MLRO (money laundering reporting officer). The MLRO will in turn consider the evidence and take the decision on what the next course of action will be.

This does not mean that the bank are acting as a court. If we move on from cash transactions to the electronic version and I am suspicious about a transfer of £20m do you think that the bank should report it and then pay the funds because they aren't a court? I imagine that you'd think not. It's the same law as it doesn't differentiate amounts. If something is thought to be illegal then the bank is not permitted BY LAW to process it.