Blacklisted by Revolut

alphabravocharli

Apparently my crime was i was doing international transfer of around 3000 Pound per month using transferwise. The reason of doing the transfer was i relocated to UK almost 1 year ago and before that i was living in UAE and i had a loan back in UAE which i was paying off. The source of income which was coming in my account is from my company account in term of dividend and salary or my wife account. There was no other transfers from anyone else. Also my account was never blocked or CIFAS marker. They just gave me 65 days notice of account closure. If i had done anything wrong they must have blocked my account.

worried_jim wrote: »

So what did you do to have your account closed? Banks don't shut them for sh1ts and giggles.

EssexExile

There's no need to shout.

EachPenny

alphabravocharli wrote: »

Apparently my crime was i was doing international transfer of around 3000 Pound per month using transferwise. The reason of doing the transfer was i relocated to UK almost 1 year ago and before that i was living in UAE and i had a loan back in UAE which i was paying off. The source of income which was coming in my account is from my company account in term of dividend and salary or my wife account. There was no other transfers from anyone else. Also my account was never blocked or CIFAS marker. They just gave me 65 days notice of account closure. If i had done anything wrong they must have blocked my account.

So you chose to use a low-cost company to transfer a large amount of money overseas each month on a regular basis, thus depriving your bank from getting the fees for the service.... and then you complain that the same bank doesn't put time and effort into chasing round to make sure your transactions were legitimate?

Why should they, when you weren't willing to pay them for providing the service?

alphabravocharli

And this is the point where i say UK banking system and practice are fundamentally wrong. This is nearsightedness, Yes i am doing regular transfer but at this time i have completely paid off my loan. So if they had not closed my account i will be saving same amount of money in my bank account which they would have been using to earn money. Apart from this i might have transferred my business account with them which is having healthy turn over. By saying all this i am not saying i am a big shot or they don't have right to stop doing business with me. I am merely pointing how banks are failing themselves and their customer by just avoiding to go into details and get rid of their customers.

EachPenny wrote: »

So you chose to use a low-cost company to transfer a large amount of money overseas each month on a regular basis, thus depriving your bank from getting the fees for the service.... and then you complain that the same bank doesn't put time and effort into chasing round to make sure your transactions were legitimate?

Why should they, when you weren't willing to pay them for providing the service?

EachPenny

alphabravocharli wrote: »

And this is the point where i say UK banking system and practice are fundamentally wrong. This is nearsightedness, Yes i am doing regular transfer but at this time i have completely paid off my loan. So if they had not closed my account i will be saving same amount of money in my bank account which they would have been using to earn money. Apart from this i might have transferred my business account with them which is having healthy turn over. By saying all this i am not saying i am a big shot or they don't have right to stop doing business with me. I am merely pointing how banks are failing themselves and their customer by just avoiding to go into details and get rid of their customers.

As someone who is never in debt and rarely makes unusual transactions, I completely disagree with you. The ability to carry out day-to-day banking without charges enables me to operate a collection of different accounts so I can benefit from the advantages of all of them, plus have personal financial resilience in case one (or more) of the banks has 'technical' problems.

I think you also misunderstand the UK banking system. Your retail bank is not going to get very rich on the profit from any money you deposit in your current (or savings) account(s). This is why savings interest rates are so low at the present time. They generate far more of their income from using your banking relationship to sell you additional products and services (e.g. international transfers, insurance, credit cards).

Although the lure of providing you with business banking services might be attractive, in the grand scheme of things it is still small money. Also there is no guarantee you will take your business to them, and no guarantee you will stick around.

Your comments are also limited in relevance to the part of the UK banking system which operates free retail banking. You aren't taking into account the sector which provides paid-for banking - some if it very expensive - in which you would get the more personalised service you are looking for, and if you wanted to start making large regular overseas payments there would be a personal banker you could phone in order to make them aware of what you were planning to do.

In effect you are doing the banking equivalent of booking a flight on Ryanair and then complaining you weren't served champagne with your evening meal on the flight. Very few people would claim that Ryanair's core business model is "fundamentally wrong" or "failing themselves and their customers".

jonnygee2

Apparently my crime was i was doing international transfer of around 3000 Pound per month using transferwise. The reason of doing the transfer was i relocated to UK almost 1 year ago and before that i was living in UAE and i had a loan back in UAE which i was paying off. The source of income which was coming in my account is from my company account in term of dividend and salary or my wife account.

It's not hard to see why someone getting paid from a UK business and sending money to the UAE regularly might be seen as risky.

Banks only have access to limited information. From that they need to decide whether behaviour on account poses a risk of money laundering, terrorist financing or other . If they get the assessment wrong they could be criminally liable for allowing money laundering.

Other things they probably looked at are your company accounts and, if she banks with them, your wife's finances. Say, for example, your UK company accounts show very low revenues but you are being paid large amounts - they'd almost certainly close.

So they take a risk-adverse approach and generally close any account that may be a risk.

I am merely pointing how banks are failing themselves and their customer by just avoiding to go into details and get rid of their customers.

The fines they risk of keeping high risk accounts open far outweigh the amount of money they are likely to earn from a customer. Their approach is sensible.

alphabravocharli

jonnygee2 wrote: »

It's not hard to see why someone getting paid from a UK business and sending money to the UAE regularly might be seen as risky.

Banks only have access to limited information. From that they need to decide whether behaviour on account poses a risk of money laundering, terrorist financing or other . If they get the assessment wrong they could be criminally liable for allowing money laundering.

Other things they probably looked at are your company accounts and, if she banks with them, your wife's finances. Say, for example, your UK company accounts show very low revenues but you are being paid large amounts - they'd almost certainly close.

So they take a risk-adverse approach and generally close any account that may be a risk.



The fines they risk of keeping high risk accounts open far outweigh the amount of money they are likely to earn from a customer. Their approach is sensible.

Regarding limited information, they can ask the information. when they sent the letter for account closure, i went to Branch with detail banking record of my UAE account where money was going and every month loan was getting paid from that account but the lady in the bank didn't bother to look at the document and said nothing can be done and i cant do any appeal without checking anything on my account.

My wife account was also with same bank and she had held her account with them for last 8 years. She is also doing job and earning above average income. My business account is with different bank but my revenue verses Dividend and salary are in no way disproportionate for which if they had asked i would have submitted the statement.

alphabravocharli

hmm, well my understanding of UK banking system might be limited but one thing i know for sure is every bank need liquidity to operate and bank liquidity mostly come form their customer money in the bank.

EachPenny wrote: »

As someone who is never in debt and rarely makes unusual transactions, I completely disagree with you. The ability to carry out day-to-day banking without charges enables me to operate a collection of different accounts so I can benefit from the advantages of all of them, plus have personal financial resilience in case one (or more) of the banks has 'technical' problems.

I think you also misunderstand the UK banking system. Your retail bank is not going to get very rich on the profit from any money you deposit in your current (or savings) account(s). This is why savings interest rates are so low at the present time. They generate far more of their income from using your banking relationship to sell you additional products and services (e.g. international transfers, insurance, credit cards).

Although the lure of providing you with business banking services might be attractive, in the grand scheme of things it is still small money. Also there is no guarantee you will take your business to them, and no guarantee you will stick around.

Your comments are also limited in relevance to the part of the UK banking system which operates free retail banking. You aren't taking into account the sector which provides paid-for banking - some if it very expensive - in which you would get the more personalised service you are looking for, and if you wanted to start making large regular overseas payments there would be a personal banker you could phone in order to make them aware of what you were planning to do.

In effect you are doing the banking equivalent of booking a flight on Ryanair and then complaining you weren't served champagne with your evening meal on the flight. Very few people would claim that Ryanair's core business model is "fundamentally wrong" or "failing themselves and their customers".

EachPenny

alphabravocharli wrote: »

hmm, well my understanding of UK banking system might be limited but one thing i know for sure is every bank need liquidity to operate and bank liquidity mostly come form their customer money in the bank.

I don't have figures to back up my assertion, but I'd be reasonably confident that the liquidity provided by standard retail customers who regularly send 4-figure sums to 'interesting' countries would in total make up a very small fraction of one percent.

Personally it is very tough on you (and I can appreciate the frustration) but from the bank's perspective it simply isn't worth the hassle and risk to do business with customers who might cause them problems down the line.

[Deleted User]

“I was hard done by so now the entire UK banking system is shot”

Erm. No...