REFUSED by HSBC/Firstdirect a deposit of cash

Ballard

dangermouse2 wrote: »

It's easy to do things electronically yes. However, most people know that when selling a car privately, the safest option is cash. And as we all know, accepting a payment for a car via PayPal/BACS/Cheque/Bankers Draft is asking for trouble.

I often see people being protective of laws/rules by governments and cooperations etc. Trust me, the more people allow themselves to be the subject of this, the less freedom and privacy you will have.

No one is stopping anyone legitimately transacting in cash. It remains as useful as it ever was with the only difference being that you need to provide evidence as to where the cash came from.

You do make a valid point about privacy but I'm afraid that it's the way that the world works nowadays. It is felt globally that financial snooping (for want of a better expression) is a key tool in combatting crime. It does sometimes worry me that things could get out of hand and Winston Smith's nightmare could become reality but I'm fairly comfortable with the way things are at present. I see it as a trade off between privacy and security. I do see why others have greater concerns though.

Ballard

dangermouse2 wrote: »

Not sure if it is the law as the bank I eventually paid it into asked no questions. So does that mean they are breaking the law? I think you are talking about the HSBC law.

Can you show me some evidence that this is the law?

The law is fairly vague, leading to different interpretations from the various financial institutions. I can't speak about cash as I haven't worked for a bank with a cash desk since 1993 and don't know that side particularly well.

HSBC may well have a limit of £5,000 cash but they're not going to broadcast it as they'd be inundated with crooks turning up with £4,500.

For other transactions there are certain patterns to look out for and a lot of it is about suspicion that something is amiss. All employees have a legal obligation to look for irregularities and for something that doesn't look quite right. A baker suddenly paying invoices to companies in Panama. The turnover of a restaurant increasing 30% in a short period. These aren't terrific examples but it's the sort of thing to be wary of.

grumbler

ChiefGrasscutter wrote: »

...
Or for a more common example: if your car is snapped by a speed camera, you either provide the name of the driver of accept that it was you and take the penalty - again up to you to prove your innocence or else you are guilty by default.

Unlike ML, this isn't crime. And, IMO, is perfectly reasonable: the owner pays either for speeding or for failing to name the actual driver that he is supposed to know if the car wasn't reported stolen.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-35472617

Police say there is not enough evidence to prosecute a hit-and-run driver who accelerated into a cyclist - despite the incident being captured on video.
The video clearly shows the car number plate, but it was a hire vehicle and Nottinghamshire Police said it cannot prove who was driving.
Instead, a man who was eligible to drive the car has been fined £150 for failing to provide driver details.

GingerBob_3

Ballard wrote: »

The law is fairly vague, leading to different interpretations from the various financial institutions. I can't speak about cash as I haven't worked for a bank with a cash desk since 1993 and don't know that side particularly well.

HSBC may well have a limit of £5,000 cash but they're not going to broadcast it as they'd be inundated with crooks turning up with £4,500.

For other transactions there are certain patterns to look out for and a lot of it is about suspicion that something is amiss. All employees have a legal obligation to look for irregularities and for something that doesn't look quite right. A ba[n]ker suddenly paying invoices to companies in Panama. The turnover of a restaurant increasing 30% in a short period. These aren't terrific examples but it's the sort of thing to be wary of.

:rotfl:Was this just a random example, or did you have a certain CEO of one of our biggest banks in mind?

xylophone

The law is fairly vague, leading to different interpretations from the various financial institutions. I can't speak about cash as I haven't worked for a bank with a cash desk since 1993 and don't know that side particularly well.

HSBC may well have a limit of £5,000 cash but they're not going to broadcast it as they'd be inundated with crooks turning up with £4,500.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/saving/article-2551823/Why-banks-wont-let-pay-cash-account.html

From the above published Feb 2014

"A spokesman for HSBC says Mr Harrison should not have had his deposit blocked - and apologised for the way he was treated. ‘Cash presents more risk of financial crime than other payment methods,’ he adds.
‘Since last November, we may have asked customers to show us evidence of where the cash originated from or what it is required for.
‘However, it is not obligatory to provide documentary evidence - and failure to show evidence, as in Mr Harrison’s case, is not a reason to refuse a withdrawal or deposit.’
He said all staff have been sent updated details of the new rules to ensure this doesn’t happen again. Eric Leenders, executive director in charge of retail banking at the British Bankers Association, says: ‘It can be frustrating for a customer to be asked questions. But there are risks associated with handling large amounts of cash, and banks must be sure they understand where cash is coming from.
‘There’s a clear tension between giving customers easy access to their accounts and making sure banks exercise caution when it comes to the threat of criminality.’"

takman

I would say the best way to sell and £8000 car is to receive payment by bank transfer. First get them to send 1p to check all the details are correct. Then send the full amount for payment.
You have the money instantly in your account and don't have to risk carrying around large sums of money.

Hasbeen

dangermouse2 wrote: »

Not sure if it is the law as the bank I eventually paid it into asked no questions. So does that mean they are breaking the law? I think you are talking about the HSBC law.

Can you show me some evidence that this is the law?

Some details on checks amounts here
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/money-laundering-regulations-risk-assessments

Ballard

takman wrote: »

I would say the best way to sell and £8000 car is to receive payment by bank transfer. First get them to send 1p to check all the details are correct. Then send the full amount for payment.
You have the money instantly in your account and don't have to risk carrying around large sums of money.

I would agree. There might be an issue with the main payment being delayed for a fraud check but that's still the route I'd take. ID the purchaser via their driving licence so that you know that the money is theirs and get an agreement in writing in case they try to claim that the transfer was fraudulent. No chance of getting mugged or ending up with a few forgeries within the banknotes.

grumbler

takman wrote: »

I would say the best way to sell and £8000 car is to receive payment by bank transfer. First get them to send 1p to check all the details are correct. Then send the full amount for payment.
You have the money instantly in your account and don't have to risk carrying around large sums of money.

>> Banned from banking in the UK? Help!

Ballard wrote: »

...ID the purchaser via their driving licence so that you know that the money is theirs

AFAIK, many banks don't show the sender's name for incoming transfers.

System

Good for you - I'd still take cash over your 'idea'
Fifties & hundreds worked fine last time I bought a car.

takman wrote: »

I would say the best way to sell and £8000 car is to receive payment by bank transfer. First get them to send 1p to check all the details are correct. Then send the full amount for payment.
You have the money instantly in your account and don't have to risk carrying around large sums of money.