Lloyds blocked my account

grumbler

colsten wrote: »

... and you shouldn't hold back any longer from taking control of all the idiots (as you like to call anyone who doesn't agree with you, and particularly those who work in banks in any capacity)

No, it's the people, typically incompetent/arrogant/illiterate... that I don't agree with. They can work in banks, mobile companies, online retailing, bookies' CS, etc. I normally refrain from offending people arguing and disagreeing with me.

... and you shouldn't hold back any longer from ...making the world free of all money launderers.

Is it just me?
What you say makes no sense to me.
I can't care less about money launderers and it's not my business to free the world from them.
What I don't like is when ordinary innocent people suffer from arrogant people whose business is to to make the world free from MLers.

colsten

grumbler wrote: »

What I don't like is when ordinary innocent people suffer from arrogant people whose business is to to make the world free from MLers.

We (you and I and the other posters) rarely ever have all the facts of any particular complaint/report (or whatever you call an internet post).

The people, or "arrogant people", as you call them (when you don't call them "idiots", as you normally do) who put blocks on cards and accounts are just individuals like you and me. What might divide them from us is that they are trained for and in charge of spotting and preventing money laundering.

grumbler

colsten wrote: »

The people, or "arrogant people", as you call them (when you don't call them "idiots", as you normally do) who put blocks on cards and accounts are just individuals like you and me.

Well, I never make any generalisations that all they are idiots. Are you saying that they all are intelligent, perfect and blameless?

What might divide them from us is that they are trained for and in charge of spotting and preventing money laundering.

Come on... You know well what this 'training' is worth very often. Regardless, my theory is that most people are 'depraved' by nature and slip into arrogance when given virtually unlimited powers and left without proper control and legal restrictions.

colsten

grumbler wrote: »

No, it's the people, typically incompetent/arrogant/illiterate... that I don't agree with. They can work in banks, mobile companies, online retailing, bookies' CS, etc. I normally refrain from offending people arguing and disagreeing with me.

You normally offend people who you disagree with (same as I do, lol!)

grumbler wrote: »

I can't care less about money launderers and it's not my business to free the world from them.

going by your posts, you are doing you best to protect money launderers as you almost always object to measures banks take against them. Apart from to the uninitiated, you are certainly not giving the impression you'd want to free the world from money launderers -and it is very strange you wouldn't support those that do.

grumbler wrote: »

What I don't like is when ordinary innocent people suffer from arrogant people whose business is to to make the world free from MLers.

I'd like to have a universally agreed definition of "ordinary innocent people" and "arrogant people" to start with. Secondly, I'd like a definition of what makes the first group suffer from the second.

colsten

grumbler wrote: »

Well, I never make any generalisations that all they are idiots.

Anybody can go over your previous posts and see where you called people 'idiots'.

grumbler wrote: »

Come on... You know well what this 'training' is worth very often. Regardless, my theory is that all people are 'depraved' by nature and slip into arrogance when given virtually unlimited powers and left without proper control and legal restrictions.

Neither you nor I have training and qualifications in money laundering. What makes you qualified to criticise those that are and have?

grumbler

colsten wrote: »

You normally offend people who you disagree with (same as I do, lol!)

Yes, but these people don't disagree with me. They do something wrong that I disagree with.

going by your posts, you are doing you best to protect money launderers as you almost always object to measures banks take against them.

First you said that I had to make the world free from them. Now you say that I protect them...
It's like saying that I protect a criminal when I say that the police shouldn't have injured/killed some innocent strangers when catching this crimial. Unlike in notorious AML every such case gets closely investigated by an independent commission.

Apart from to the uninitiated, you are certainly not giving the impression you'd want to free the world from money launderers -and it is very strange you wouldn't support those that do.

For everything there are different way of doing it. You seem to be a fan of Machiavelli's "il fine giustifica i mezzi" (the end justifies the means).

And yes, I think more efforts have to be put to prevent/stop crime rather than making it difficult to launder the proceeds. The latter has never stopped any criminals from committing crime and hardly ever results in catching the criminal.

I'd like to have a universally agreed definition of "ordinary innocent people" and "arrogant people" to start with. Secondly, I'd like a definition of what makes the first group suffer from the second.

You want too much from me. Try using your common sense, although it seems to differ from mine.

colsten wrote: »

Anybody can go over your previous posts and see where you called people 'idiots'.

Yes, but only some abstract people on the other side of the telephone/broadband line that actions I disagreed with and that never argued/disagreed with me. Yes, if I think someone's actions are idiotic then the person is IMO idiot. I don't try to present my opinion like a fact, but usually there are facts supporting my opinion.

Neither you nor I have training and qualifications in money laundering. What makes you qualified to criticise those that are and have?

The results of their arrogant actions. And you know well that I criticise the laws and the lawmakers too. And it's obvious that in practice how the law is implemented depends in high degree on the person and on the notorious 'training'. I don't criticise all people working in AML.

duchy

I called the US to book a flight with miles as if I did it that way the airport taxes were about £10 versus over £100 if I booked through the UK site - shortly after I popped to my corner shop to buy a pint of milk. Two transactions within an hour 3000 miles apart automtically blocked my account.

I called the bank - went to the branch and it was instantly unblocked- I didn't need to imagine they might never let me have my account again and take my money. It was a simple security process.

Molehills and mountains come to mind