We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Yorkshire Bank disaster.
Comments
-
What would that do ?
The investigations are being done elsewhere, not in branch. You need to be patient.
I echo the previous posters in suggestions you offer this proof you have about the funds.
And who would you have me offer proof to if not in branch ?
The bank have yet to correspond with me in any way. Every person I have spoken to refuses to discuss the matter.
The money was paid into the account 5 months ago. The last transaction on the account was 3 months ago.
I tried to do a transaction 1 week ago and have been seeking answers ever since.
It amuses me that the collective wisdom here is that a) it is my fault for transfering money from a pesky foreign country, b) banks by default freeze accounts when they receive incoming funds from foreign banks, c) I should pop down to the branch with an invoice and everything will be rosy, and d) the actual terms that use to describe how I feel about The Yorkshire Bank on this forum have any bearing on the matter whatsoever.
KYC / money laundering regs are in place to prevent wrong doing. The great unwashed may have voted to leave the EU, but, and forgive me if I missed the news, it is not yet a criminal offence to conduct business is in Europe, nor is it illegal to receive payment for ones efforts.0 -
Jurgen_Cheese wrote: »Indeed they do have considerable obligations. However evidence of wrong doing is generally required in order to flag up an account.
I would also point out that it is utter hogwash to suggest that a £20k transfer from Holland to the UK would resulted in having "most banks frozen the accounts".
If you believe this then you really have no concept of the sheer volume of international money transfers that happen every single day.
You are wrong - the bank has statutory obligations to report transactions over certain limits or those which are unusual for the customer.
No evidence of 'wrong doing' is required - if your transaction meets the reporting requirements then the bank is simply fulfilling its legal obligations.
As to the Netherlands, there are known and long standing links to the drug trade - which may also add to the risk scoring.
http://www.nationalcrimeagency.gov.uk/crime-threats/drugs
The NCA website also has extensive guidance regarding anti-money laundering trade requirements.
Stop being a drama queen and get 'educated' on the legal requirements - then you'll understand it isn't personal.:hello:0 -
No, you are wrong and are completely missing the point.Tiddlywinks wrote: »You are wrong
The banks have a legal obligation to investigate; absolutely. What is intolerable is how the bank have gone about this and how they are managing the process.
It is unacceptable how they are 'managing' it, not that they need to undertake it.
Seriously, that's what you have to offer?Tiddlywinks wrote: »Stop being a drama queen and get 'educated' on the legal requirements - then you'll understand it isn't personal.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
I'm going to back away form this thread as the majority of posters on here are in serious need of some common sense and appreciation of the situation for the OP.
It's not about the requirement on the bank it's about the process and how they are undertaking it.
Good luck OP.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
No, you are wrong and are completely missing the point.
The banks have a legal obligation to investigate; absolutely. What is intolerable is how the bank have gone about this and how they are managing the process.
It is unacceptable how they are 'managing' it, not that they need to undertake it.
Seriously, that's what you have to offer?
Just because you don't like the answer does not make it 'wrong'.
Now consider that the delay may be due to outside agencies.
Then Google "tipping off" - the bank may not be able to enter into discussions.:hello:0 -
Oh !!!!!!.....
But they already have. Surely you (they) understand that (if this is a fraudulent / money laundering situation).
Assuming the OP is an innocent party I feel for them. The process is flawed, not in the activity which must be undertaken but in the communications.
'Tipping off' is irrelevant (as I've said before), if the OP were a bad person then they would already have figured that out.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0 -
I'm going to back away form this thread as the majority of posters on here are in serious need of some common sense and appreciation of the situation for the OP.
Best to take a neutral stance. Until all the facts are known. There's normally far more to the tale than ever gets told.0 -
Jurgen_Cheese wrote: »I would also point out that it is utter hogwash to suggest that a £20k transfer from Holland to the UK would resulted in having "most banks frozen the accounts".
If you believe this then you really have no concept of the sheer volume of international money transfers that happen every single day.
I went to france last month and halifax stole my money too. Wouldnt let me buy something all the stupid french cashier kept saying was 'Je ne comprends pas' Same stupid sentence.
All that was for a transaction that cost 13 euros.
Fortunately im fairly bright and realised that they where probably trying to protect my account from fraudulent activity so i gave them a ring and they made it all good.
You transferred £20k from the worlds cannabis factory to an account that is rarely used. I would think youre a drug dealer. If there where rules i had to follow about investigating such circumstances then i would definitely be investigating.
Alternatively if you genuinely believe that your bank has stolen your money, you should report it to the police.0 -
-
I did.Tiddlywinks wrote: »No, it isn't - Google it.
5.8.3 Making enquiries of a client
You should make preliminary enquiries of your client, or a third party, to obtain further information to help you to decide whether you have a suspicion. You may also need to raise questions during a retainer to clarify such issues .
There is nothing in POCA which prevents you making normal enquiries about your client's instructions, and the proposed retainer, in order to remove, if possible, any concerns and enable the firm to decide whether to take on or continue the retainer.
These enquiries will only be tipping off if you disclose that a SAR has been made to the NCA or a nominated officer or that a money laundering investigation is being carried out or contemplated. The offence of tipping off only applies to the regulated sector.
It is not tipping-off to include a paragraph about your obligations under the money laundering legislation in your firm's standard client care letter.
Sooo, even the law says that (according to the OP) they haven't sufficiently communicated.Personal Responsibility - Sad but True
Sometimes.... I am like a dog with a bone0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.7K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.4K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards